16
Contributors
76
Replies
77
Views
10 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by jbennet
Featured Replies
  • 1

    i think the death penalty is bad Read More

  • 1

    Racism sucks. I get picked on all the time because i am scottish and ginger and live in england, probably worse than if i was black, but the problem is that you can get away with being racist to a scotsman whereas if you said the same sort of things … Read More

0

I didn't read all of it, but I found some interesting ones... they get very detailed!

Four fried eggs sunny side up, four sausage patties, one chicken fried steak patty, one bowl of white country gravy, five pieces of white toast, five tacos with meat and cheese only, four Dr. Peppers with ice one the side & five mint sticks.

Fifteen slices of cheese, three fried eggs, three buttered toasts, two hamburger patties with cheese, 2 tomato sliced, one sliced onion, french fries with salad dressing, 2 lb. of crispy fried bacon, one quart chocolate milk and one pint of fresh strawberries

0

last meal for condemned criminals, waste of food...
In fact any expense on their behalf is wasted.

Arrest them at dawn, convict them at noon, deny their appeal at dusk, and hang them next dawn.

0

last meal for condemned criminals, waste of food...
In fact any expense on their behalf is wasted.

Arrest them at dawn, convict them at noon, deny their appeal at dusk, and hang them next dawn.

If only we could actually do that...

0

last meal for condemned criminals, waste of food...
In fact any expense on their behalf is wasted.

Arrest them at dawn, convict them at noon, deny their appeal at dusk, and hang them next dawn.

Are you sure you're not American? I though we were the only ones who thought like that.:)

But more seriously, I think we should abolish the death penalty because (1) its cheaper to keep them alive, (2) the punishment lasts longer, and (3) too many innocent people have been put to death. We can always let someone out of prison who was innocent of the crime, but we can't bring him back to life.

Votes + Comments
I agreed with you
0

> its cheaper to keep them alive,

I really wonder how this thing is true.

"Statistically" it is true, but even Mark Twain recognized the problem with statistics..."Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable".

The problem with the death sentence is that it is final once applied, and sometimes the judicial system gets it wrong. If we could guarantee that the person was guilty then I would say hang em, and do it right now. The death sentence as it stands right now is of little or no use as a deterrent, in California there is the argument that the lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment...excuse me?!?

As for the last meal...chefs surprise, want to guess what it is???

0

Are you sure you're not American? I though we were the only ones who thought like that.:)

But more seriously, I think we should abolish the death penalty because (1) its cheaper to keep them alive, (2) the punishment lasts longer, and (3) too many innocent people have been put to death. We can always let someone out of prison who was innocent of the crime, but we can't bring him back to life.

While I certainly can't argue against number 3, I think number 1 is flat out wrong. I'll even supply 50 feet of rope if they need it, and it's reusable. Beats putting 'em in a government sponsored building for 20+ years.

However, your third point is very important. It's extremely difficult to actually execute someone when the chance does exists that they are innocent. What do you think of a system where the death penalty would be carried out after a fairly long time period? For example, if they haven't proven their innocence after 15 years, then they will face the penalty for their crimes.

0

The reason I said its cheaper to keep them alive is because of all the legal fees required to appeal the death sentence -- automatic appeal I might add. The lawyers can be haggling for 20 years or more, costing tax payers millions of $$$. Here is a study done in the USA about 10 years ago.

From this; the cost of keeping a 25-year-old inmate for 50 years at present amounts to $805,000. Assuming 75 years as an average life span, the $805,000 figure would be the cost of life in prison. So roughly it's costing us $2 million more to execute someone than it would cost to keep them in jail for life

0

> its cheaper to keep them alive,

I really wonder how this thing is true.

In the practice of the US system it is. Of course if you use my proposed system it's far cheaper to execute them.

0

of course a far more profitable way to do it (and at the same time helping society a LOT) is to dismantle the convict and use the organs and limbs for transplants.
There's an eternal shortage of transplants, and a lot of (mostly) healthy people in prisons sitting around costing money.
Those prisoners could very effectively help solve the problem of people dying in hospital for lack of organ donors.

In fact in several countries that's what convicts are used for, China for example.

0

>In fact in several countries that's what convicts are used for, China for example.

Where did you learn that fact?.

0

In the practice of the US system it is. Of course if you use my proposed system it's far cheaper to execute them.

The US system is pretty screwed up at this point though, IMHO.

of course a far more profitable way to do it (and at the same time helping society a LOT) is to dismantle the convict and use the organs and limbs for transplants.
There's an eternal shortage of transplants, and a lot of (mostly) healthy people in prisons sitting around costing money.
Those prisoners could very effectively help solve the problem of people dying in hospital for lack of organ donors.

In fact in several countries that's what convicts are used for, China for example.

I do like that idea. Forced labor isn't a bad one either, they might even offset a bit of the cost of keeping 'em around.

0

Yes, that would be goodl. Why not make all the prisoners build roads or something useful

Again, that's the current US system. Some would turn that into "cruel and unusual punishment".

0

Again, that's the current US system. Some would turn that into "cruel and unusual punishment".

You hit the nail in the head. Over here, (USA) every thing has to be
so politically correct, that we are handicapping ourselves to the point
of paralisis.

0

Again, that's the current US system. Some would turn that into "cruel and unusual punishment".

the key word there is AND.
If enough people do it it's not unusual therefore doesn't fall under the definition...

0

the key word there is AND.
If enough people do it it's not unusual therefore doesn't fall under the definition...

Man, I wish you were a lawmaker over here. On this issue at least.... :P

0

the key word there is AND.
If enough people do it it's not unusual therefore doesn't fall under the definition...

There is no common sense in the US anymore.

0

There is no common sense in the US anymore.

Foolish me. I still have hope. I know..., I know....

1

You hit the nail in the head. Over here, (USA) every thing has to be
so politically correct, that we are handicapping ourselves to the point
of paralisis.

This is a very difficult issue because we can not be absolutely sure we are right every time we convict and sentence a person to death. Until this issue is resolved there are going to be people who will want the death sentence suspended or abolished. I have to admit that I see the practical aspect of this, but do believe that we need to have some means of imposing some form of deterrence. Unfortunately the same laws that we have passed to protect us also protect the convicts.

Personally I would like to see sentences that would make others think twice about trying it. For example...take a child molester, there should be a sentence where this person is taken out into the desert where a six by six foot cabin has been built. The prisoner will have his pecker nailed to the floor and a knife left within the prisoner's reach, the cabin will then be set on fire leaving the prisoner to make a choice. Would this be cruel and unusual punishment? You bet! Would it deter the next person thinking about committing the same crime, if the person had a healthy mental state yes...and that's where the problems begin. Most of the heinous crimes are committed by people that we recognize as having mental disorders. Cho Seung-Hui is a good example of this, here's a person that was recognized by his peers and counselors to be mentally imbalanced, and because of the same laws that protect us from being unfairly incarcerated in similar situations he was not stopped. It will be interesting to see what comes from the legislation recently passed in Virginia making it a disqualification for purchase of a fire arm to be diagnosed with certain mental disorders.

There are no easy answers, perhaps with the advancement of our forensic sciences we one day will be able to say without question that a person is guilty. And perhaps in the future our understanding of the brain will allow us to evaluate individuals who are at risk to themselves and others and be able to act on that without the the legal ramifications of our civil rights.

Votes + Comments
I think that your thoughts are worth it of at leat a good rep.
0

>Would it deter the next person thinking about committing the same crime, if the person had a healthy mental state yes...

Funny that you mention that. Not long ago I learned that the Romans used to crucified, very cruelly, to many offenders of their laws. And the reason that they choose to crucified people was that the death was slow, and every citizen had many opportunities of watching what happens when you break the law, and not because they (the romans) were extra insensitive or prompt to more cruelty that the ancients.

I not for death penalty for the reason that we are so ready to make mistakes. However, since we have it, in many States of USA, I don't understand why they don't show publicly what's the way these people died for their crimes. Yes, you hear, here and there that is done, but I think it would work miracles to deter futures offenders.

0

Apparently the crucifictions was not much of a deterrent because people still, after 2,000 years, commit the same crimes. And even today people still commit the same crimes over-and-over knowing full well what the penalty is. As much as I'd like to agree with Dcc's punishment, that would make us not any better then the sex offender. Preventing cruel and inhuman punishment is not meant for the criminal but to prevent society from degrading to lawlessness. We as society need to respect each other instead of treating everyone like a bunch of thugs. The movie Escape From New York comes to mind.

0

I not for death penalty for the reason that we are so ready to make mistakes. However, since we have it, in many States of USA, I don't understand why they don't show publicly what's the way these people died for their crimes. Yes, you hear, here and there that is done, but I think it would work miracles to deter futures offenders.

It might also help if it wasn't a nice peaceful death. Putting them to sleep like dogs may be a little insulting, but making it a little gruesome and publicizing it would likely have a very deterring effect.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.