eligal said:

dude, read my thread, it is much mroe expensive to execute someone do to all the legal barriers... if you want to save tax payers some money, you will keep him with a life sentence.

---

kilroy69 said:

I remember when that happened to Geoghan. I know it sounds evil but I actually laughed when I heard about it. He got just what he deserved.

---

Prisoner#1 said:

eligal said:

dude, read my thread, it is much mroe expensive to execute someone do to all the legal barriers... if you want to save tax payers some money, you will keep him with a life sentence.

---

wrong.

---

RandalFlagg said:

I say throw this guy in with the general population at any prison that is notorious for violence. Pedophiles and child killers are always targeted by fellow inmates. This guy would last about five minutes out on the yard.

---

eligal said:

basically before we can execute someone in america, we need to prove them guilty, by all means. and this means several court appeals n such. which is payed by the state.
basically going through all the safe guards to try and stop from executing someone who is actually innocent (or whos crime was not at the extent of what was previously thought).

---

PLUR, LOL said:

eligal said:

basically before we can execute someone in america, we need to prove them guilty, by all means. and this means several court appeals n such. which is payed by the state.
basically going through all the safe guards to try and stop from executing someone who is actually innocent (or whos crime was not at the extent of what was previously thought).

---

This is a bogus argument. Before someone can be locked away for life there needs to be a trial proving them guilty. And just because they didn't get the death penalty doesn't mean they can't appeal.

---

rockytop83 said:

How come we cant still do things like our founding fathers would have?  When we sentence someone to life all we are doing is putting them in an early retirement home, with A/C, Heat, square meals, television, etc.  Granted the food might not be the best, and you dont ever get to see the sunrise.  Back in the day we would have hung this same person in the streets of downtown to SET AN EXAMPLE.  People hear about the death penalty now a days but its not quite broadcasted on cable TV.  I think there would be a lot less crime if the general public had a chance to watch the death of every convicted felon.  I bet Washington, Franklin, and the rest of the boys are just rolling in their graves about now.

---

reminds me of, china was it?, where they had a channel on tv where you could see criminals get killed and/or tortured....

PLUR, LOL said:

No, it isn't.  You said those things like they only apply to executions, thus making life sentencing cheaper.  Are you forgetting which side of the argument you're on?

---

im leaning towards getting rid of the death penalty, purely for the economics of it. i think what youre refering to is a regular apeal. where as the perpetrator that is to be executed will get more than just one trial.
i read a few studies on this this week (gotta do a class paper on it) and so far i have yet to find a study which disagrees with what i have just said...

if you can find suitable data showing the contrare, then please post. otherwise your argument has no support.
you need the data boi!!

Quote:

Prosecuting a death penalty case is extremely expensive for a state and drains money that could be used for education and social programs. It costs more than sentencing a prisoner to life without parole.

The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment (Duke University, May 1993). In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases.

---