Capital Punishment with assigned sides
#31
Posted 26 October 2007 - 05:48 PM
I've looked at the deterrence angle, and proved my point beyond scope, so consider your ass whooped there. Now let's get on to economic: the biggest economic argument against the death penalty is that the appeals process is very expensive and that court cases drag on for years (see OJ Simpson for an example of a trial that was rushed through the system due to its notoriety). So: a properly run criminal justice system would not allow a murder one charge to be pursued with the intent of allowing the death penalty unless overwhelming evidence were supplied in preliminary hearings. That's simply a matter of administration. Since evidence gathering and crime scene investigation is become more and more advanced, we can look forward to very speedy and accurate Capital proceedings. So, since lethal injection is obviously way cheaper than 20 years of incarceration, then economically too the Death Penalty is an appropriate response to cruel first degree murder, serial killing, ritualistic cult torture, and treason such as burning the flag or spitting on a McDonald's drive through employee.
Kill em all! Let Jesus sort them out!
#32
Posted 26 October 2007 - 09:03 PM
I think the amount of time might be even longer using up more money as other methods could be invented for framing people through pictures as well as them denominating new appearances.
This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 26 October 2007 - 09:09 PM
#33
Posted 26 October 2007 - 09:48 PM
#35
Posted 26 October 2007 - 11:52 PM
False positives: this is a tactic used too often. "What if you're wrong?" The fact is the burden of proof is greater in a Capital case, as OJ proved. I mean, come on; he did it, but he got off because the prosecution couldn't sell it. A life sentence would have been easier to procure. Of course there are historic cases, but we're talking about a preponderence oc coincidence or conspiracy. It's far more likely that an innocent will be incarcerated than executed. The burden of proof shall be greater even before a Captal case goes t trial.
Possibility of reform: we're not suggesting that we execute everybody. Again, the use of the death penalty is quite limited in the US, which I am using as the model nation for this argument, with only about 1100 cases since 1976. There are about 2.2 people in jail in the US. Texas, the state with the majority of the executions and the subsequent reduction in murders, has executed 50 people in the last two years. This high rate has earned it its reputation as a death penalty leader. Texas's prison population tops 160000.
Human rights, the state has no authority, etc: Shut up.
#36
Posted 30 October 2007 - 06:25 PM
Well, yeah. I mean, you had a graph. All I could do is sit and watch while your graph steamrolled all my hopes away.
On the economic angle: As I've said before, you can't put a price tag on human life, or if you could, say, by taking the ratio of dollars spent on the Iraq war to the casualties, then that price would be pretty high and it would probably still be make more "economic" sense to keep people alive. Even without any of that, prisoners can still contribute to the workforce. Where I used to live, prisoners were the recycling program: We'd throw everything away, they'd sort and recycle it. And hey, aren't we all about going green this day and age? The death penalty is trying to kill Mother Earth!
And come on, you don't really think the OJ system case is a textbook example of burden of proof, do you? That was a case of fawning over celebrities and incompetent prosecution and Johnny Cochran. No one can beat Johnny Cochran. That guy could have saved Saddam.
Human rights, the state has no authority, etc: no u
#37
Posted 30 October 2007 - 06:32 PM
Now I have a thought:
Human rights? In certain parts why is that different for children with parents using violence on them instead of intelligent reasoning? Maybe that form of violence is a mild form of capital punishment.
This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 30 October 2007 - 06:34 PM
#38
Posted 30 October 2007 - 06:44 PM
#39
Posted 30 October 2007 - 06:50 PM
#40
Posted 30 October 2007 - 06:55 PM
If no crimes were committed physically or politically people wouldn't be put away and this thread wouldn't have existed.
I don't think it is easily possible because of the temptations that get them there in the first place.
This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 30 October 2007 - 06:56 PM