Troy Davis.... your thoughts ?

[dj_ender]

Obviously. Your point?

Inmates are a cash crop, one of the biggest in many states. They routinely get treated like cattle, they are in your words, expendable. If you were to re read the thread you will see I was against this murder, all I did was disagree with deev saying it was cheaper to house them rather than execute them

[Pandemic]

I don't care to read through all of the pissing match so far. From my perspective, the accused and his TEAM of lawyers had 22 years to get this guy off of the death penalty. They couldn't. It had been reviewed by numerous judges and the same result each time. I don't know what evidence there was against the accused but if it stuck, it stuck.

People will die with their secrets, as this man did. We will never know the truth.

I believe in the death penalty. Not every criminal can be rehabilitated and of those, most are a direct threat to innocent lives.

For all those against the death penalty, shouldn't the accused sentenced to death have the same opportunities as those who are sentenced to life +? Is living out the rest of your life in a jail cell really that much better than being dead?

[dj_ender]

I don't care to read through all of the pissing match so far. From my perspective, the accused and his TEAM of lawyers had 22 years to get this guy off of the death penalty. They couldn't. It had been reviewed by numerous judges and the same result each time. I don't know what evidence there was against the accused but if it stuck, it stuck.

People will die with their secrets, as this man did. We will never know the truth.

I believe in the death penalty. Not every criminal can be rehabilitated and of those, most are a direct threat to innocent lives.

For all those against the death penalty, shouldn't the accused sentenced to death have the same opportunities as those who are sentenced to life +? Is living out the rest of your life in a jail cell really that much better than being dead?

Yes but what about 7 of the 9 witnesses recanting their testimonies, stating that they were coerced by the police. And one of the remaing 2 witnesses bragging that he committed the murder and that someone else was taking the fall for it?

[dj_ender]

I know what I wrote. So what are you trying to get at?

[turbomaxx]

[QUOTE=deevergote;2893253]


You're throwing your opinion around just as much.

UOTE]



...That was the point... My statement held NO clout. Just a bunch of opinion, shrouded with the a small fact: It's here, it's real, and it's staying.

I've learned you can't fight opinions with facts, sooo...

[Law Grandeur]

Unemployed people get money from the government, Should they be executed because they cost money too?

an ex-friend was kicked out the house and forced to live on his own because his lazy ass mother is on Section 8 and is too lazy to work. she hasnt worked for the last like 10 years and she is in perfect health AND speaks 2 languages. people like her really piss me off. They just leech off everyone and the government doesnt do shit about it except give them more money, an apartment, a free food

Now this isnt all section 8. My family was on it but we worked our asses off and now have our own home, cars, etc and at least contribute to society now. its just pisses me off how many people just leech!

[quaidum]

I don't care to read through all of the pissing match so far. From my perspective, the accused and his TEAM of lawyers had 22 years to get this guy off of the death penalty. They couldn't....

Joan MacPhail-Harris, the officer's widow, said this week that Davis "has had ample time to prove his innocence" and failed to do so,

both of these people seem to have the system backwards

i thought it was "innocent until proven guilty" not "guilty until proven innocent"

[Tnwagn]

...Im actually surprised more states arent killing more inmates to cut costs...

I hope you were being sarcastic when you said this.

Do you have reliable statistics to back up that claim? Because the only figures you provided so far go against what you just said.

The appeals process for a death penalty case almost ALWAYS ends up being more expensive than simply housing and feeding a single inmate. Also, inmates can provide labor that offsets their cost of living.

Exactly. The figures I presented were complied by major, national studies over many decades. They, time in and time out, show that incarcerating someone for life without chance of parole is cheaper than trying to convict that same person with the death penalty and to eventually follow through with the execution.

Honestly who cares about the money.
Otherwise it means that a persons life is an expendable item, based on cost.
And THAT is "Animal" mentality

I, for one, care about the money quite a bit. Call me callous, but I have a vested interest in the way my state uses the funds that they have received based on the taxes I, and my fellow Tennesseans, pay.

This is not to say that in all circumstances the only proper solution is the one that costs the state the least. In the situation at hand, we are comparing the issue of life without parole and the death penalty.

There are many people who protest against the death penalty, and see it as fundamentally wrong from a moral standpoint. Let's say that you get rid of the death penalty and seek life without parole in those cases that you would have gone for the death penalty from the get-go. I think it is obvious that you would have very few, if any, people outside of the courthouse protesting that the prosecution isn't going far enough and should try and kill the man. This is especially true if the suspect is convicted and put in prison for life. Think about the amount of people out there pushing to get people off death row that are on it right now and then think about the number of people that are pushing to get someone upgraded from life without parole to death row.

If we can keep someone alive for less money than it takes to kill them then I see no way we can keep pushing for the death penalty.

I think that putting someone to death is far more animalistic than putting a price on someone's life (which is more capitalistic than anything else).

yeah, dunno how "reliable" they are, but.
http://www.lao.ca.gov/laoapp/laomenu...t.aspx?catid=3

Now this article is based on a full blown, drawn out scenario.
http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/woodl...21394fa2f.html

The second is the reason for the edit. I know in Idaho the cost to house an inmate is pretty on par with California, in fact, Idaho routinely sends inmates to California, Texas, New Mexico, and continues to fill up the prisons here.

Let's go with your numbers and assume it costs $47,000 to house an inmate for one year. Still keeping with the numbers, let's say that it costs $4 million for an entire capital punishment case. This means that in order for a life sentence to cost California more than a capital punishment case, the inmate would have to live in prison for over 85 years. If they went in at age 20 that would mean they would be 105 years old before it started to cost California more money than if they sentence them to the death penalty.

And how often does that happen? That's right, never.

Is living out the rest of your life in a jail cell really that much better than being dead?

That's something that I feel should be up to the person we are going to lock away. If a guy thinks he's happy with living the rest of his life in jail, then let him do so. If he doesn't want to, then he will probably kill himself, which happens all too often. This is a terrible way to think of it, but that is something that is outside the hands of the justice system.

i thought it was "innocent until proven guilty" not "guilty until proven innocent"

He was proven guilty, so the burden rests on him to prove his innocence. The fact that a team of lawyers couldn't do so over the long course of the court proceedings leads me to believe that there is more to the case than "Everyone recanted and there is no evidence." The mass media likes to present such a case in the worst light possible, because it helps ratings. There is most likely far more to the case than we will ever know.

[deevergote]

[QUOTE=turbomaxx;2893559]

You're throwing your opinion around just as much.

UOTE]



...That was the point... My statement held NO clout. Just a bunch of opinion, shrouded with the a small fact: It's here, it's real, and it's staying.

I've learned you can't fight opinions with facts, sooo...

That is absolutely true (and what I was hoping you were trying to say with your previous statement.) An opinion is just that... an opinion. There is no real right or wrong... just agreeing and disagreeing.

Joan MacPhail-Harris, the officer's widow, said this week that Davis "has had ample time to prove his innocence" and failed to do so,

both of these people seem to have the system backwards

i thought it was "innocent until proven guilty" not "guilty until proven innocent"

He was given a fair trial, and I'm certain he had a number of appeal attempts over the last 20 years (I'm being dumb and discussing this issue without doing any research... do as I say, not as I do, kids!)

As far as the court of law is concerned, he WAS innocent until proven guilty... and the court ruled that he was proven guilty. Was that ruling wrong? Quite possibly. Our legal system is one that was designed by humans, is operated by humans, and judges humans... therefore, by nature, it is flawed. Mistakes will happen, and innocent people will die. It is in a continuous state of improvement, but it will NEVER be perfect. Overall, the number of innocent people imprisoned, or even put to death, is only a very VERY small percentage of the overall population, which are legitimately guilty of their crimes.

I, for one, care about the money quite a bit. Call me callous, but I have a vested interest in the way my state uses the funds that they have received based on the taxes I, and my fellow Tennesseans, pay.

This is not to say that in all circumstances the only proper solution is the one that costs the state the least. In the situation at hand, we are comparing the issue of life without parole and the death penalty.

There are many people who protest against the death penalty, and see it as fundamentally wrong from a moral standpoint. Let's say that you get rid of the death penalty and seek life without parole in those cases that you would have gone for the death penalty from the get-go. I think it is obvious that you would have very few, if any, people outside of the courthouse protesting that the prosecution isn't going far enough and should try and kill the man. This is especially true if the suspect is convicted and put in prison for life. Think about the amount of people out there pushing to get people off death row that are on it right now and then think about the number of people that are pushing to get someone upgraded from life without parole to death row.

If we can keep someone alive for less money than it takes to kill them then I see no way we can keep pushing for the death penalty. ABSOLUTELY

I think that putting someone to death is far more animalistic than putting a price on someone's life (which is more capitalistic than anything else).



Let's go with your numbers and assume it costs $47,000 to house an inmate for one year. Still keeping with the numbers, let's say that it costs $4 million for an entire capital punishment case. This means that in order for a life sentence to cost California more than a capital punishment case, the inmate would have to live in prison for over 85 years. If they went in at age 20 that would mean they would be 105 years old before it started to cost California more money than if they sentence them to the death penalty.

And how often does that happen? That's right, never.



That's something that I feel should be up to the person we are going to lock away. If a guy thinks he's happy with living the rest of his life in jail, then let him do so. If he doesn't want to, then he will probably kill himself, which happens all too often. This is a terrible way to think of it, but that is something that is outside the hands of the justice system.



He was proven guilty, so the burden rests on him to prove his innocence. The fact that a team of lawyers couldn't do so over the long course of the court proceedings leads me to believe that there is more to the case than "Everyone recanted and there is no evidence." The mass media likes to present such a case in the worst light possible, because it helps ratings. There is most likely far more to the case than we will ever know.

The media paints the man as innocent. The legal system paints him as a cop killer. Both sides are biased. The prosecution just had the better case, and the evidence wasn't in Davis's favor. If it was innocent, that's sad... but that is our system as it is today.

But yes... incarcerating a person for life makes far more sense. They can still live, have some quality of life, be productive to some extent in society, and if they are innocent they MAY be able to be set free should new evidence arise. It would suck to be imprisoned for 20 years for a crime you didn't commit, just to have them say "whoops... sorry about that buddy!"... but it's better than being killed and never having that option! Usually, if someone is put away for a crime they didn't commit, they PROBABLY still had some involvement in it anyway. It's rare that someone completely uninvolved is going to be blamed for a crime.

[Ralphie]

Im sure he was guilty.

I mean how long did this go on and and it wasn't overturned?

In this day and age when a case comes in front of a judge to over rule a death penalty ruling they tend to take it serious as there is A LOT of scruitiny on them these days.

The fact that he wasn't released shows that obviously whatever evidence there was, was enough.

And if in fact the jury was cooerced and it all was a wash, well that is the # 1 reason for making sure you keep your ass out of the justice system.

I for one think we should have a system more like Europe where a select few of judges preside over the case, study the information, and make the decision.

They KNOW the law and have far more experiene then a handful of "peers".

Some who's primary language isn't even English.



As far as Capitol Punishment i feel that it is justfied to fit the crime.

For instance, the 9/11 hijackers/Osama Bin Laden etc.

Had any of these people stood to stand trial could any of you honestly say after killing 3k people that they deserve to be housed, clothed, and fed 3 times a day while we pay for it for the rest of their natural life whether it's only 10 years or 85 years (and i think the oldest living inmate was 105 or something like that so it does happen TnWgn lol)

And also, our prison system is overcrowded to begin with.

Now most of that is because of bullshit imprisonment like drugs etc.

But i just don't see the point of housing them just in case technology improves.

If you commit a crime is 2001 and by 2006 or 07 your executed and then in 2009 technology comes out that could have got you off, well guess what....try not killing people or mass raping women, or kidnapping and raping children for 18 years etc.

How is it our fault that you were killed even though you were innocent?

You were convicted at the time with the best evidence at hand.

It is not possible to return the hands of the clock so we should just let the scum of the earth relax in prison.

And prison in the us is NOT bad at all.

Try comparing our prisons to prisons outside our borders and then tell me if it is a shitty place to live for 30 years.

[Ralphie]

deevergote
They can still live, have some quality of life,

But going on this logic, then even people who ARE 100% guilty will have a nice quality of life while the families they destroyed will never be the same again.

I would rather kill innocent people and know the 99% of them were guilty then house 100% of them and know that 99% are in fact guilty and are living a nice comfortable life(even though you might not find it comfortable, when people envision prison they automatically picture prisons from yesteryear...prisons today are 150% better then they use to be)

[Ralphie]

and for the record, i do agree that the system if flawed and this practice is barbaric but it is all we have and even though i see that states who use it have higher murder rates, i still can't wrap my head around letting true murderers and people who canno't be rehabilitated, sit around and breathe the same air we do.

On another note- captiol punishment will never be a deterence. I think that posting the murder statistics is kind of skewed.

Clearly the majority of people who have what it takes to commit murder either are insane or do it out of raw emotion. Neither of which think about the consequences and thus the death pentalty will have no weight on their decision to kill either way.

Now that terrorism is a real threat in this country, anyone who comes here to do us harm will definitely not be thinking about it since they are taking care of it themsevles so they can get their 72 virgins.

Good policing and programs like the one in NYC "see something say something" prevents more crime then scary tactics like the death penalty.

[deevergote]

Yes, but this isn't exactly an eye-for-an-eye society. Murderers are removed from society, so they can't murder again. Our justice system isn't about revenge.

I do agree... if someone murdered a person that I loved, I'd want blood... but our system isn't set up to provide that sort of retribution.


Maximum security prison for life isn't exactly the most comfortable living situation, either. You're stripped of your dignity, stripped of your identity, stripped of your freedom to do as you please. You're locked in a cell, aside from when you're allowed to participate in heavily supervised activities... always at risk of someone attacking you for one reason or another.

[Ralphie]

Yes, but this isn't exactly an eye-for-an-eye society. Murderers are removed from society, so they can't murder again. Our justice system isn't about revenge.

I do agree... if someone murdered a person that I loved, I'd want blood... but our system isn't set up to provide that sort of retribution.


Maximum security prison for life isn't exactly the most comfortable living situation, either. You're stripped of your dignity, stripped of your identity, stripped of your freedom to do as you please. You're locked in a cell, aside from when you're allowed to participate in heavily supervised activities... always at risk of someone attacking you for one reason or another.

Yea your right, it isn't that society but in some way's it should be.

In countries where they remove limbs for stealing, it happens a lot less then here. And our system is barbaric lol.


Maximum security is much more comfortable then you give it credit for.

Your thinking about it compared to the comforts you have and what you expect out of comfort.......

problem is is that you are a rationale individual.

Very rarely do people end up there that think like you.

The people there do not think twice about throwing feces at guards, jerking off and throwing their deposit at female guards, urine.....etc

Of course they would all want to be in their own bed or not in the confines of the prison system but it is a lot better then the poor homeless people who sleep outside and under overpasses and in subways.

So imo, the prisoners have it much better then people give them credit for.


Which brings me to my next point.

I realize that the people i am talking about, are mental health patients who DO NOT belong in prisons.

We should bring back mental health facilities to house those patients seperate from criminals.

They did away with them i believe because of horrid coniditons, obv it should be brought back and have oversight commites to make sure the standards are up to par(well at least no worse then your average prison system).

That would also open up 1000s of jobs across the US.

[deevergote]

Yea your right, it isn't that society but in some way's it should be.

In countries where they remove limbs for stealing, it happens a lot less then here. And our system is barbaric lol.

So you're saying the death penalty is a deterrant? Statistics over the last 20 years, as suggested above, say otherwise.

Maximum security is much more comfortable then you give it credit for.

Your thinking about it compared to the comforts you have and what you expect out of comfort.......

It's also very possible that the people who ARE the type to commit murder are living in a situation where they could be killed at any time. Gangbangers, violent drug users/dealers... MOST of our criminals serving life sentences, or those on death row, are people living in the "underworld". Very few of them are living in society as we know it. As I said... the point is to remove them from society, not get revenge for their acts. Also, as stated previously, it has less of a financial impact on taxpayers as a whole to simply house a murderer for life, than it does to put one to death. I don't think it's fair that I would have to pay for someone else's revenge. I'm perfectly happy knowing that the violent criminal is locked away, and will never hurt me. Maybe we should change the law to say that if someone wants the death penalty for the person that wronged them, THEY can foot the bill personally!

problem is is that you are a rationale individual.

Very rarely do people end up there that think like you.

The people there do not think twice about throwing feces at guards, jerking off and throwing their deposit at female guards, urine.....etc

Of course they would all want to be in their own bed or not in the confines of the prison system but it is a lot better then the poor homeless people who sleep outside and under overpasses and in subways.

So imo, the prisoners have it much better then people give them credit for.


Which brings me to my next point.

I realize that the people i am talking about, are mental health patients who DO NOT belong in prisons.

We should bring back mental health facilities to house those patients seperate from criminals.

They did away with them i believe because of horrid coniditons, obv it should be brought back and have oversight commites to make sure the standards are up to par(well at least no worse then your average prison system).

That would also open up 1000s of jobs across the US.

Inmates that are deemed insane ARE kept at high security mental health institutions. You're not going to put a violent schizophrenic in the same prison as regular inmates. Those facilities ARE monitored and kept up to par.
Essentially, you're saying that the inmates don't live as we do... but that those that live that way are insane, and should be cared for as mental patients... which kinda goes against the idea of the death penalty. In fact, it leans far more towards rehabilitation.
So who should be put to death? The schizophrenic? No, he should go to a hospital. The enraged lover that caught his wife cheating? Wouldn't that be temporary insanity? The drug addict that was so doped out of his mind that he cut down an old lady to steal her fake pearl necklace? Couldn't he be fixed by curing his addiction? The guy who, for no particular reason, just decided to see what another person's brains looked like splattered on a sidewalk... there, surely THAT guy can be put to death, because there's nothing mentally wrong with him! (on the other hand... what sane person would do that?)
Or, the gangbanger that was just following the code of his gang... or the drug pusher that took out the competition. Those guys are living in a war mentality... they're not committing murder, they're fighting a war. In their society, it is justified (just as nationally sanctioned wars are considered to be justified...)

If this world was black and white, cut and dry, where people were guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt... and our system could include the death penalty with swift justice, rather than 20+ years of appeals... then yes, perhaps it would be a deterrent... but we'd also be very likely to kill MANY innocent people. There's so much stir over this one guy that MAY have been innocent... imagine if we removed all the appeals and such... it'd be mayhem!

Responses in red.