The Law 'D.C. Sniper' to be executed today

[DeanoT]

It may be a 'weak emotional plea' to you just as to many of us who agree with BP on this, your position is emotional and bloodthirsty. It is a matter of perspective.

I am neither bloodthirsty or emotional when it comes to the capital punishment debate. I believe the punishment should fit the crime. Execution for the Washington sniper sounds like a fair deal to me.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

It's pointless keeping him in jail for the rest of his life.

Imprisoning someone for life is cheaper (financially) than the death penalty.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Obviously the financial aspect is only one factor, but it is still worth considering.

 

[KUNG FU]

Imprisoning someone for life is cheaper (financially) than the death penalty.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Obviously the financial aspect is only one factor, but it is still worth considering.

I'm glad someone mentioned this.

There have been countless cases of people put to death who have been later proven innocent.

 

[bit_pattern]

Meh, good riddance to another Islamist fundie.

John Allen Muhammad has now split Hell wide open. You would have to still feel some compassion for a killer to want him to live.

How very Christian of you... I thought Jesus had compassion for all of god's creatures?

 

[Thrawn]

Have some of you considered that death just simply might be a release for him? To be honest, I think that the death penalty is the easy way out in some circumstances.

 

[TheBloods]

Imprisoning someone for life is cheaper (financially) than the death penalty.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Obviously the financial aspect is only one factor, but it is still worth considering.

This analysis is frequently raised, but is wrong. It compares cost of normal prison rather than maximum security.

 

[TheBloods]

I'm glad someone mentioned this.

There have been countless cases of people put to death who have been later proven innocent.

Name some, excluding old cases utilising modern DNA evidence.

 

[TheBloods]

In theory, I'm OK with the idea of the death penalty for those who have commited crimes so vile they should never be allowed to reenter society.

I do however believe that it's better to leave 100 guilty people alive rather than risk one innocent person to be killed, so I think for any execution the burden should not be 'beyond reasonable doubt' but rather 'beyond *ANY* doubt'.

How do you do that? The prosecutor who calls for the punishment, and Judge who decrees that is to happen are considered to be guilty of manslaughter if evidence later appears that leads to an executed person should have been aquitted.

Somehow I doubt there would be many capital cases if those were the consequences.

Is there any doubt in this case as to his guilt?

 

[bit_pattern]

Is there any doubt in this case as to his guilt?

From this year, the state went out of itsw way to prevent DNA evidence that could have potentially cleared the condemned man from being used in his trial

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/10/22-3

Here's a bunch more cases were the guilt of the condemned was very much in question

There is no way to tell how many of the over 1,000 people executed since 1976 may also have been innocent. Courts do not generally entertain claims of innocence when the defendant is dead. Defense attorneys move on to other cases where clients' lives can still be saved. Some cases with strong evidence of innocence include: Carlos DeLuna Texas Conviction: 1983, Executed: 1989
Ruben Cantu Texas Convicted: 1985, Executed: 1993
Larry Griffin Missouri Conviction: 1981, Executed: 1995
Joseph O'Dell Virginia Conviction: 1986, Executed: 1997
David Spence Texas Conviction: 1984, Executed: 1997
Leo Jones Florida Convicted: 1981, Executed: 1998
Gary Graham Texas Convicted: 1981, Executed: 2000
Cameron Willingham Texas Convicted: 1992, Executed: 2004

And even more examples

http://www.justicedenied.org/executed.htm

 

[bit_pattern]

This analysis is frequently raised, but is wrong. It compares cost of normal prison rather than maximum security.

Rubbish. Most of the cost of executing a prisoner comes from the exorbitant but entirely necessary appeals process.

 

[TheBloods]

From this year, the state went out of itsw way to prevent DNA evidence that could have potentially cleared the condemned man from being used in his trial

This is a fault with US law, not with the use of capital punishment. How many innocent people have been convicted when modern use of DNA is available at trial?

 

[TheBloods]

Rubbish. Most of the cost of executing a prisoner comes from the exorbitant but entirely necessary appeals process.

Yes, but you have completely misunderstood the concept of 'comparison'. When comparing the cost of execution to the cost of life imprisonment to see which is higher, you need to look at the cost of maximum security, which from memory is about four or five times the cost of normal prison, rather than the using the cost of normal prison which is the cost normally used in those comparisons.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Rubbish. Most of the cost of executing a prisoner comes from the exorbitant but entirely necessary appeals process.

Spot on bp.

 

[bit_pattern]

This is a fault with US law, not with the use of capital punishment. How many innocent people have been convicted when modern use of DNA is available at trial?

Well, if there is a problem with the law then there is a problem with the death penalty, that's th whole point. I there is even the slightest chance of convicting an innocent person then capital punishment is wrong and shouldn't be practiced.

Yes, but you have completely misunderstood the concept of 'comparison'. When comparing the cost of execution to the cost of life imprisonment to see which is higher, you need to look at the cost of maximum security, which from memory is about four or five times the cost of normal prison, rather than the using the cost of normal prison which is the cost normally used in those comparisons.

Source? Because everything I am seeing suggest that the average cost of incarcerating someone for a year is roughly $20,000, whereas the figures I'm seeing relation to LWOP vs. execution is around the $50,000 mark, which fits nicely with you 2-3 times more cost of maximum security over regular incarceration.

 

[bit_pattern]

I also wonder if the gung-ho proponents of CP would have the balls to stand up and do the deed themselves? If you couldn't bring yourself to kill a man then you have a serious ethical issue with supporting CP.

 

[TheBloods]

Well, if there is a problem with the law then there is a problem with the death penalty, that's th whole point. I there is even the slightest chance of convicting an innocent person then capital punishment is wrong and shouldn't be practiced.

No, if there is a problem with US law there is not necessarily a problem with capital punishment as a concept.

Source? Because everything I am seeing suggest that the average cost of incarcerating someone for a year is roughly $20,000, whereas the figures I'm seeing relation to LWOP vs. execution is around the $50,000 mark, which fits nicely with you 2-3 times more cost of maximum security over regular incarceration.

I will check later.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Another problem with capital punishment.

Another botched execution, this one in Ohio. They tried for two hours to find a vein and finally gave up. They want to try again next week. The man’s lawyers argue that this would be “cruel and unusual punishment” and is therefore unconstitutional.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/hendrikhertzberg/2009/09/never-say-die.html

 

[TheBloods]

I also wonder if the gung-ho proponents of CP would have the balls to stand up and do the deed themselves? If you couldn't bring yourself to kill a man then you have a serious ethical issue with supporting CP.

I wouldn't have a problem if it affected my life, but that is a strawman argument when people already choose to do it.

 

[Big Blow Hard]

Free the west memphis 3!

 

[MightyFighting]

[youtube]rflqWQLPqZs[/youtube]

 

[Lance Uppercut]

the US justice system says do not kill, it is fundamentally wrong.

The US state kill people to prove how bad it is kill.

Who cannot see the hypocrisy?

 

[shurg123]

There is a widespread assumption that being put to death is somehow a worse fate than having to spend the rest of your life behind bars with no freedom. I believe this assumption is hugely flawed.

 

[DeanoT]

There is a widespread assumption that being put to death is somehow a worse fate than having to spend the rest of your life behind bars with no freedom. I believe this assumption is hugely flawed.

How would you know what the two are like ?

In any case, it is nothing to do with capital punishment being a worse fate, it is about the severity of the punishment matching the severity of the crime.

You take 10 lives, you lose yours, is a better form of justice than allowing someone to keep their life, despite their obvious lack of respect for it.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

How would you know what the two are like ?

In any case, it is nothing to do with capital punishment being a worse fate, it is about the severity of the punishment matching the severity of the crime.

You take 10 lives, you lose yours, is a better form of justice than allowing someone to keep their life, despite their obvious lack of respect for it.

so to demonstrate how intrinsically bad it is to kill, the State kills. That makes sense. Not.

 

[DeanoT]

so to demonstrate how intrinsically bad it is to kill, the State kills. That makes sense. Not.

An eye for an eye makes a tremendous amount of sense to me.