Bit harsh, but once sentenced, take out back of the courthouse and like shoot em?
You can always find people abusing the system. However, the vast majority of inmates never sue the prison system.
Much like “welfare bums” have become the stereotype of those on public assistance, though only a small minority fit that category, these kinds of cases just stick out in our minds because they’re so outrageous. They’re just not as frequent as you may think.
My husband has worked with thousands of inmates over the years. He’s been sued three times, and none of the cases ever made it into a court room.
What about serial killers, like Jeffrey Dahmer? There didn’t seem to be much doubt as to his guilt, what with all the corpses in his apartment, and whatnot.
Hmm… over 30 years… how much money would we have saved if we implemented a 30 day death penalty? Using this money and funneling it into other schemes, how many lives would we have saved? futhermore, its almost certain that the lives saved by the 30 daydeath penalty would have been “worthier” than those who escaped the chop. merely getting on death row indicates that you must have done some fair bad things irregardless of whether you get freed or not.
No. The vast majority of appeals in the DP process are appealing against the death sentence, trying to get it commuted to life imprisonment, or arguing for a stay of execution. Someone sentenced to life inprisonment in the first place doesn’t need these appeals. Appeals based on claims of innocence are only a small proportion of all appeals in the DP. Even those people that were released as innocent had many appeals to delay their executions.
No. Legally speaking, everyone is innocent unless proven guilty. If a conviction is set aside, the individual is innocent, in the eyes of the law.
Are you being serious here? This does not follow at all.
A lot of them are procedural appeals, as well. I’ve seen instances where first the admission of certain evidence is challeneged, then, if that appeal is denied, they appeal another ruling made during the trial.
Not enough to justify the deaths of 100+ innocent people.
probably, the money wouldn’t have been channelled into other schemes, most likely it would have ben used to fund tax cuts. So it would result in zero lives saved.
Oh, so you find it morally acceptable to kill innocent people in inrder to save ‘worthier’ people, do you? :rolleyes: Suppose there are three Nobel prizewinners in hospital, one needing a heart transplant, one needing a liver, and one needing a new kidney. Would you object to being killed to provide the needed organs? I’m sure those three patients are “worthier” than you are.
Irregardless? :eek: I hate that word. Don’t misunderestimate how painful it is.
that’s fried.
Yes, peter, until the “all life is precious” brigade is willing to put their money where there mouth is, I do think its a waste of resources to be searching for the proverbial needle in the haystack that the DP appeals is. 100 “innocent” people would have died but in the ultimate scheme of things, thats peanuts compared to what that money could have done. Arguing that it’s effects are disappated due to tax cuts is absurd. Because of those tax cuts, more Americans would have had more to spend. Because of that, more people would be working and away from life on the street or could afford that surgery they needed. Just because you can’t see a direct benifit to tax cuts doesn’t mean they dont exist.
The point I was trying to make was that they don’t normally put clean-cut, honest people onto Death Row. Even if you were freed, the fact that you were on it in the first place indicates that you had a whole string of priors that were taken into account. And, yes, somehow I do think spending money trying to save the most promising of our generation is more appealing than trying to save the worst. Again, money is a finite resource no matter how much you wish it wern’t. DP appeals are directly taking away from far worthier programs and the cost/benifit analysis just doesn’t work out.
Why, yes indeed. With that saving, every man, woman and child in America could have bought an extra Hershey bar per year. Nice to see where your priorities lie.
Not true. many of those 111 released had no prior criminal record. (some did, but far from all).
So abolish the DP, then, and then you wouldn’t have to pay for those expensive appeals where they try to get the sentence commuted to life.
Entering GD-land in 5…4…3…2…
Okay, lets put some numbers to your assertions. Since 1976, there have been 876 executions and 3697 people are currently on DR (cite). This gives us roughly 4500 people we are talking about. I couldn’t find average figures for cost but amensty puts the cost in florida at $3.2 million (cite). Other figures I’ve seen on the web vary between 2 and 3 million so lets say 2.5 mil. Thus, we get roughly 11 billion dollars that have thus far gone towards the death penalty. Slightly more than a hershy bar, slightly less than a war.
You still fail to grasp the fact that resources are inevitably finite. That 10 billion dollars had to come from somewhere, education, health, defense. At 100 million dollars per live saved, I can think of HUNDREDS of better ways to spend that money. If you wan’t to play the emotional card, fine. When you can walk into a hospital and tell each and every one of it’s inpatients that the govt is pulling all medical funding just to free one presumably innocent man, then you can come back and say it was worth it.
So they don’t even get freed at the end. We’re paying $100 million dollars so that they can sit around for an extra 30 years?
11 billion over 27 years shared amongst 285 million people is $1.43 a year. So it is a Hershey bar, or maybe two, per person per year. Sounds like the original assertion is reasonable.
Hell, Shalmanese–why not eliminate the criminal justice system entirely? The U.S. only has 20,000 murders a year and think of the billions upon billions we spend finding and prosecuting these people. With that money we could easily save millions of people in Africa from AIDS, starvation, and easily curable diseases. Hell, while we’re at it, the U.S. should stop spending a single penny at home and give all our money to helping starving people in poor countries because you get a much better bang for your buck.
The factual question has been answered, so I’ll close this thread. Those wishing to debate are directed to GD.
bibliophage
moderator GQ