+47
The "death penalty" doesn't make sense. amirite?
by Maleficent_Page2 days ago
How is the death penalty more expensive than providing shelter and nutrition to someone for decades?
by Damien802 days ago
Court costs, extra jail costs for segregation, the actual costs of execution. Also, shelter and nutrition and that expensive, relatively, when you don't care about someone's comfort or happiness and can do everything in bulk. You have to remember you're also still housing the person for, in all likelihood, a decade or more while their case clears the legal process. So really you're only getting the marginal benefit of a decade or two's reduced housing costs via execution. It's possible the PLRA changed the balance as the studies finding that execution was more expensive than life imprisonment that I'm familiar with came out before that legislation made appeals harder, but either way, it's pretty close.
by Anonymous2 days ago
Death penalty cases involve more extensive pre-trial investigations, a more costly trial process, and a significantly longer and more complex appeals process, including state and federal habeas corpus appeals. It's more expensive and it's not even close.
by Anonymous2 days ago
It does in the US. I imagine in other places in the world justice might not be so careful.
by Aylinberge2 days ago
Bwahahahaha you really think the US has a impartial and fair court system? Lol share why school shooters get prison sentences and Luigi is gonna get the chair.
by Constant-Nature2 days ago
No one said it's fair, but in comparison to other countries with the death penalty... It's quite a bit better...
by Opening_Mobile2 days ago
Several school shooters have been sentenced to death in the United States. Luigi has not been sentenced to death.
by Anonymous2 days ago
In the United States, at least, it's the appeals process. As messed up as our legal system is, that's an essential part of it.
by Anonymous2 days ago
Curious on this
by jakemraz2 days ago
The State of Indiana recently paid over $900,000 for one injection
by Demetrisschoen2 days ago
Look it up. It's like Criminal Justice 101.
by Dockwest2 days ago
Receiving life imprisonment is in my opinion a WORSE punishment than death. I agree with this completely. I've never understood why people consider being executed to be a worse punishment than life in prison. If anything were to ever happen that left me facing either life in prison or the death penalty I'd plead for death. It's not even close, in my opinion. Either decades of misery in prison, or nothing. Why choose misery?
by Anonymous2 days ago
Take out the costs, it doesn't have an impact on crime rates, so general deterrence isn't an issue, and is no more effective than life imprisonment for specific deterrence. But the number of people that have been convicted of crimes they did not commit and the fallibility of the justice system is the best reason to get rid of capital punishment.
by bradtkefleta2 days ago
How exactly is feeding and housing someone for the next 40 years cheaper than a quick injection? What am I missing?
by Anonymous2 days ago
Due process. You are taking someone's life, so you have to make damn well sure you are right about the decision. A 1 hour court case is hardly sufficient for a final judgement.
by Anonymous2 days ago
🤷♂️ life in prison should be no less rigorous than the death penalty
by Background-Aide2 days ago
Yes, but it isn't, and that drives most of the increased time and expense of DP cases.
by Anonymous2 days ago
Lawyers cost a lot. Its something like 3-5x more expensive to do death penalty over life in prison
by Anonymous2 days ago
Probably because in death penalty cases, it is usually a legal team, not just one lawyer.
by Downtown-Cicada2 days ago
Injection? Bullets exist
by Fun_Acanthaceae2 days ago
The cost of the legal appeals, plus the fact that death row inmates are housed in separate, special facilities, which drives up the cost. Now, I'll say that I'm with John Oliver on this. I'm not opposed to the death penalty because of cost or the potential of executing an innocent person (which happens). I think it's just plain wrong.
by Adventurous-Law-61372 days ago
Disagree completely. Not only is it not "just plain wrong," it's the most morally correct course of action. Nothing is more demented than forcing society to fund the existence of its most diabolical members. It's best understood from a very granular perspective. Imagine someone committing a heinous act and then killing someone's daughter. Forcing the mother (through taxes) to feed, clothe and home that killer for the rest of his life is morally outragous and "just plain wrong."
by Anonymous2 days ago
That's not civilized at all though. I think the size of our society/government makes people miss the point here. Again, imagine your neighborhood/ small town as the only community and the government is just composed of the wisest people in that town. Now imagine someone going insane and slaughtering a dozen children at school. The civilized thing would be for the community to get together and kill this monster. The uncivilized and morally deranged course of action would be setting him up in some house in the community and forcing the parents of those children to provide him food and clothes for the rest of his life
by Anonymous2 days ago
What if you get it wrong and they didn't actually do it?
by bradtkefleta2 days ago
The whole system is built around the possibility of mistakes... that's why we allow for appeals.
by bradtkefleta2 days ago
So would your stance change if we can guarantee zero mistakes?
by Anonymous2 days ago
Hard to say, as that's not something I can imagine. It's almost impossible to rule out the possibility of mistakes as there have even plenty of false confessions or cases of undiagnosed intellectual disability or mental health impairments.
by bradtkefleta2 days ago
Well imagine it. Will you be for the death penalty if we rule out all possibility of mistakes?
by Anonymous2 days ago
Geez, calm down. Which crimes are you proposing it would apply?
by bradtkefleta2 days ago
If we could guarantee zero mistakes, we are governed by perfect beings and don't need a complicated legal system at all.
by Anonymous2 days ago
trial/appeal costs Due to long trial/appeal process those prisoners spend also decades in prison those prisoners are not allowed to work im prison but many other are. The cost of execution
by Anonymous2 days ago
Again; this is common knowledge. Look it up.
by Dockwest2 days ago
🤷🏻♂️
by Anonymous2 days ago
I think the other consideration is, it doesn't work. States that have it, don't have a significantly lower homicide rate. States that had it, repealed it, reinstated it didn't see any meaningful change to homicide rate. So it is way more expensive. We have killed innocent people. And it seemingly doesn't deter crime.
by Dockwest2 days ago
It makes sense so long as you understand the mindset of its proponents. It's about revenge. It's about inflicting pain and fear upon the condemned. And in order to achieve that in, they're willing to invest significant amounts of money.
by Anonymous2 days ago
There's obviously the higher costs aspect (death penalty is way more expensive than life, surprisingly) but for me the stronger reason is the moral one. I don't believe it's the job of a government to kill its own citizens. Especially ones detained, who are completely at the mercy of the state. The ones that do follow this policy of killing its own citizens are usually autocratic and use it to keep their people docile.
by Anonymous2 days ago
It makes plenty sense. People dont want to die. Look at people doing life. They could easily off themselves. But they'd rather live
by wilma912 days ago
Expense isn't that great an argument against DP. US ambivalence about it means it is litigated extremely thoroughly, including another layer of review that is essentially meaningless for most criminal defendants (federal habeas). It is that thoroughness that is expensive (and slow), not anything about the punishment. In a world where US DP defendants get the same review as other current defendants, DP would be comparable if not cheaper than LWOP. I don't want to live in that world, but that's because I fundamentally don't trust criminal justice in the US to be proportionate or fair.
by Anonymous2 days ago
the death penalty just prevents that person from commiting anymore crimes. im highly in support of it. rehabilitaition or no, some people deserves to die for their crimes, if only so their victims can rest easy.
by Anonymous2 days ago
Life imprisonment without the possibility of parole also prevents that person from committing any more crimes, but it also allows for the person to be set free if it is later determined that they were innocent.
by bradtkefleta2 days ago
disagree, that person may commit more crimes inside of jail, which is common, or escape jail.
by Anonymous2 days ago
The number of people escaping maximum security prisons is minimal, with their likelihood of committing further crimes even less likely due to their concern with drawing attention to themselves. Of course, it has happened, with tragic consequences, but this would be the same for any escapee, irrespective of whether they were on death row. There are various ways to mitigate risk of future offending in prison, but I don't often hear a concern about prisoners' welfare as a reason for capital punishment.
by bradtkefleta2 days ago
Money aside im all for the death penalty. Especially if they touch children.
by Anonymous2 days ago
Life imprisonment is way more expensive....
by Anonymous2 days ago
id like to see a source for that, and, quite frankly, theres enough lifers in prison that more than a few prison buildings had to be built just to house them.
by Anonymous2 days ago
Shut up dork. The death penalty is only expensive because nerds like you make it so. A bullet doesn't cost much.
by Mayertbraden2 days ago
Typical ignorant internet tough guy response. You going to ride into town and clean up the streets with your Smith and Wesson over there Clint Eastwood?
by Downtown-Cicada2 days ago
Yeah there's plenty of examples of societies where the government go around executing people with guns and no trial. It's very cheap, I'll give you an example if you're interested in moving.
by Anonymous2 days ago
You would have a way different opinion if you were falsely accused.
by Anonymous2 days ago
I doubt that's the reason why. The types of crimes you'd have to commit to even be considered for the death penalty require you to be the type of person who truly doesn't give a F about anything. It typically requires more than just shooting someone in an isolated incident. It is almost always because you killed someone in an especially horrific way, or killed multiple people.
by Damien80 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Aylinberge 2 days ago
by Constant-Nature 2 days ago
by Opening_Mobile 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by jakemraz 2 days ago
by Demetrisschoen 2 days ago
by Dockwest 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by bradtkefleta 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Background-Aide 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Downtown-Cicada 2 days ago
by Fun_Acanthaceae 2 days ago
by Adventurous-Law-6137 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by bradtkefleta 2 days ago
by bradtkefleta 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by bradtkefleta 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by bradtkefleta 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Dockwest 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Dockwest 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by wilma91 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by bradtkefleta 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by bradtkefleta 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Mayertbraden 2 days ago
by Downtown-Cicada 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Anonymous 2 days ago
by Downtown-Cicada 2 days ago