Fiscal Cons, still think the death penalty is worth it??

Parachute

Godfather. wrote:

Parachute wrote:

kill 'em all.

Metallica said so.

does that come with a happy meal ?
just kidding Parachute,looking at your avatar I just couldn't resist.

Godfather.

I AM the Happy Meal!!

Godfather.

Parachute wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

Parachute wrote:

kill 'em all.

Metallica said so.

does that come with a happy meal ?
just kidding Parachute,looking at your avatar I just couldn't resist.

Godfather.

I AM the Happy Meal!!

go get em kid ! youth is not wasted on the young.
life is a cool adventure,18 to 80 blind crippled or crazy leave no prisoners in yer wake.

Godfather.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

what I find hilarious is that in the previous death penalty thread, so many pro-DPers tried to claim that it was much cheaper to execute someone rather than have them live a life sentence. I guess they thought all that goes into executing someone is a fork in an outlet?

gimmesometruth27

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

what I find hilarious is that in the previous death penalty thread, so many pro-DPers tried to claim that it was much cheaper to execute someone rather than have them live a life sentence. I guess they thought all that goes into executing someone is a fork in an outlet?

and so many people like me presented study after study after study, just like my OP here, showing that it is more expensive to execute someone than to let them serve a life term. people will believe what they want to believe, even in the face of facts...

Hugh Freaking Dillon

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

what I find hilarious is that in the previous death penalty thread, so many pro-DPers tried to claim that it was much cheaper to execute someone rather than have them live a life sentence. I guess they thought all that goes into executing someone is a fork in an outlet?

and so many people like me presented study after study after study, just like my OP here, showing that it is more expensive to execute someone than to let them serve a life term. people will believe what they want to believe, even in the face of facts...

I know. I've been arguing that for a long time too. they say it's cheaper. I PROVE to them that's wrong. they say "well price doesn't matter". yeah, all of a sudden it doesn't when it doesn't support their position.

Go Jets Go!

Jason P

To me, the bigger issue affecting cost is the inefficiency of the California court and legal system. Not only is it the death penalty, but all cases going through the court system are being hindered with unnecessary cost.

A lot more money could be saved and used for education if the root cause is first addressed.

OnTheEdge

Still kill the animals.....just find a cheaper way to do it.

gimmesometruth27

OnTheEdge wrote:

Still kill the animals.....just find a cheaper way to do it.

you didn't answer the question. is paying that price for the death penalty worth it to you? you are a conservative, and from what i recall a fiscal one at that. is it worth it? think with your head and not your heart on this one.

JonnyPistachio

Interesting stuff going on here in FLA:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state ... 56022.html

""It is the law in this country that not everyone who commits murder is eligible for the death penalty," Matthewman said. "It's only the worst of the worst."

That's why it is so important that a jury agree on why a person deserves the ultimate punishment.

"The worst that could happen is that we could convict innocent people," said West Palm Beach defense attorney Richard Lubin. "To play fast and loose with the rules makes no sense."

The decision shouldn't spark a pro- or anti-death penalty debate, he said. "The issue is that before we give a person the ultimate penalty, unless you're absolutely certain beyond a reasonable doubt that they deserve it, we shouldn't be doing it."

Further, Florida is an outlier. Alabama is the only other state that doesn't require jurors to agree on the aggravating factors that prompted their death penalty recommendation, said retired 18th Judicial Circuit Judge O.H. "Bill" Eaton, a capital punishment expert. But even Alabama requires a jury to reach a decision by a super majority vote. In Florida, if six of the 12 jurors agree, they may recommend death. A judge uses the recommendation to make the final decision.

"Right now, all we get is a number," said West Palm Beach attorney Gregg Lerman. "There's something wrong with the fact that they don't even have to tell us why they are choosing death.""

NO, its NOT worth it..anywhere!

Godfather.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

what I find hilarious is that in the previous death penalty thread, so many pro-DPers tried to claim that it was much cheaper to execute someone rather than have them live a life sentence. I guess they thought all that goes into executing someone is a fork in an outlet?

I still think it would be cheaper...depending on the age of the inmate and if they speeded up the process and not let these guys sit on death row for 5 to 20 years.

Godfather.

JonnyPistachio

Godfather. wrote:

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

what I find hilarious is that in the previous death penalty thread, so many pro-DPers tried to claim that it was much cheaper to execute someone rather than have them live a life sentence. I guess they thought all that goes into executing someone is a fork in an outlet?

I dtill think it would be cheaper...depending on the age of the inmate and if they speeded up the process and not let these guys sit on death row for 5 to 20 years.

Godfather.

It might save money, but it could also result in more innocent people being put to death.

Godfather.

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

what I find hilarious is that in the previous death penalty thread, so many pro-DPers tried to claim that it was much cheaper to execute someone rather than have them live a life sentence. I guess they thought all that goes into executing someone is a fork in an outlet?

I dtill think it would be cheaper...depending on the age of the inmate and if they speeded up the process and not let these guys sit on death row for 5 to 20 years.

Godfather.

It might save money, but it could also result in more innocent people being put to death.

I talking about people that have been convicted and used all their options up and still waited on death row for 5 to 20 years.

Godfather.

OnTheEdge

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Interesting stuff going on here in FLA:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state ... 56022.html

""It is the law in this country that not everyone who commits murder is eligible for the death penalty," Matthewman said. "It's only the worst of the worst."

That's why it is so important that a jury agree on why a person deserves the ultimate punishment.

"The worst that could happen is that we could convict innocent people," said West Palm Beach defense attorney Richard Lubin. "To play fast and loose with the rules makes no sense."

The decision shouldn't spark a pro- or anti-death penalty debate, he said. "The issue is that before we give a person the ultimate penalty, unless you're absolutely certain beyond a reasonable doubt that they deserve it, we shouldn't be doing it."

Further, Florida is an outlier. Alabama is the only other state that doesn't require jurors to agree on the aggravating factors that prompted their death penalty recommendation, said retired 18th Judicial Circuit Judge O.H. "Bill" Eaton, a capital punishment expert. But even Alabama requires a jury to reach a decision by a super majority vote. In Florida, if six of the 12 jurors agree, they may recommend death. A judge uses the recommendation to make the final decision.

"Right now, all we get is a number," said West Palm Beach attorney Gregg Lerman. "There's something wrong with the fact that they don't even have to tell us why they are choosing death.""

NO, its NOT worth it..anywhere!

Sometimes it's worth it. But in certain cases, no. Casey Anthony, as much as I believe she is guilty.....should not be facing the death penalty.

JonnyPistachio

Godfather. wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

I dtill think it would be cheaper...depending on the age of the inmate and if they speeded up the process and not let these guys sit on death row for 5 to 20 years.

Godfather.

It might save money, but it could also result in more innocent people being put to death.

I talking about people that have been convicted and used all their options up and still waited on death row for 5 to 20 years.

Godfather.

I know.. thats the thing.. its likely all their options werent used up within 5-20 yrs. Thats why the DP is so expensive.. they want to make sure they don't execute innocents, so they give them a bazillion appeals options and lobster dinners with yoo-fuckin-hoo, and carrot cake. Most of them are making appeals up until the day they get murdered. Shorter appeals and less time would result in many more innocents dying.. simple as that.

OnTheEdge

So the death penalty cost money and abortions make money. I guess it all balances out in the end. :roll:

JonnyPistachio

OnTheEdge wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Interesting stuff going on here in FLA:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state ... 56022.html

""It is the law in this country that not everyone who commits murder is eligible for the death penalty," Matthewman said. "It's only the worst of the worst."

That's why it is so important that a jury agree on why a person deserves the ultimate punishment.

"The worst that could happen is that we could convict innocent people," said West Palm Beach defense attorney Richard Lubin. "To play fast and loose with the rules makes no sense."

The decision shouldn't spark a pro- or anti-death penalty debate, he said. "The issue is that before we give a person the ultimate penalty, unless you're absolutely certain beyond a reasonable doubt that they deserve it, we shouldn't be doing it."

Further, Florida is an outlier. Alabama is the only other state that doesn't require jurors to agree on the aggravating factors that prompted their death penalty recommendation, said retired 18th Judicial Circuit Judge O.H. "Bill" Eaton, a capital punishment expert. But even Alabama requires a jury to reach a decision by a super majority vote. In Florida, if six of the 12 jurors agree, they may recommend death. A judge uses the recommendation to make the final decision.

"Right now, all we get is a number," said West Palm Beach attorney Gregg Lerman. "There's something wrong with the fact that they don't even have to tell us why they are choosing death.""

NO, its NOT worth it..anywhere!

Sometimes it's worth it. But in certain cases, no. Casey Anthony, as much as I believe she is guilty.....should not be facing the death penalty.

I agree Casey Anthony shouldnt be up for death penalty, but whats the difference really? She researched "break neck" and "chloroform".. its likely a calculated murder on a child, by the one and only person that child is supposed to trust the most tin the whole world. Its the sickest crime I've seen in awhile. I love how people think they can pick and chose who should die and who shouldnt. :?

OnTheEdge

Some cases are hands down. No question about it. Caught in the act, confessions, found with remains, etc.. Caseys case it is 99.9%. As much as i'd like to see her fry.....it's not enough. And in turn, she'll probably walk from this. They should've gone for the life sentence without parole. JMO

gimmesometruth27

OnTheEdge wrote:

Some cases are hands down. No question about it. Caught in the act, confessions, found with remains, etc.. Caseys case it is 99.9%. As much as i'd like to see her fry.....it's not enough. And in turn, she'll probably walk from this. They should've gone for the life sentence without parole. JMO

to get back on topic for once, this thread is not an debate about whether the death penalty should be imposed and carried out or not.

it is strictly my question as to whether or not you "fiscal conservatives" on here can justify spending that kind of money on something so ineffecient and so filled with flaws.

to me it seems you are fine with paying money to make bombs and kill people, but if people need help, screw them.

help me understand that line of thinking.

is it worth a few million to kill one person?

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

OnTheEdge wrote:

Some cases are hands down. No question about it. Caught in the act, confessions, found with remains, etc.. Caseys case it is 99.9%. As much as i'd like to see her fry.....it's not enough. And in turn, she'll probably walk from this. They should've gone for the life sentence without parole. JMO

to get back on topic for once, this thread is not an debate about whether the death penalty should be imposed and carried out or not.

it is strictly my question as to whether or not you "fiscal conservatives" on here can justify spending that kind of money on something so ineffecient and so filled with flaws.

to me it seems you are fine with paying money to make bombs and kill people, but if people need help, screw them.

help me understand that line of thinking.

is it worth a few million to kill one person?

as I said earlier, aren't fiscal conservatives supposed to come in here and complain it is from the huffington post and the study was done by a anti death penalty center?

same answer as I gave before, with a slight change...

who are you trying to get at with your statement "to me it seems you are fine with paying money to make bombs and kill people, but if people need help, screw them."
that isn't going to get a real response most of the time and I don't believe you really want to understand that line of thinking...
The whole justice system is inefficient in california, not simply the death penalty...that would be like picking 11th grade out of k-12 and blaming budget problems on it...Punishment for crimes benefits society, and paying for those in an efficient way should be the goal, but because the incompetent CA government cannot run a dmv efficiently doesn't mean a form of punishment should be thrown out with the bath water...there are plenty of arguments against the death penalty, this just isn't a very sound one. Ultimately i believe that punishments for crimes benefits society, i would like to see it run more efficiently sure, but the benefit to society is almost immeasurable because we don't know the harm a death row inmate may have continued to cause without it...
but that isn't saying there isn't a benefit

catefrances

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Other states have already begun to phase out the death penalty due to budget issues: New Mexico repealed it in 2009, Illinois lawmakers voted to ban it in March of this year, and lawmakers in Maryland and Connecticut are currently considering doing the same. But in California, state law requires a vote by referendum in order to repeal the death penalty.

"We hope that California voters, informed of what the death penalty actually costs them, will cast their informed votes in favor of a system that makes sense," the report concludes.

this is the most obscene reasoning for getting rid of the death penalty ive ever read.