Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Innocent but Dead * the Death Penalty kills innocent man

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Innocent but Dead * the Death Penalty kills innocent man
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 4:55 am Post subject:

here is what you wrote:

Quote:

The state cannot be entrusted with the power to kill captive citizens, or even captive non-citizens for that matter. Such a monopoly is bound to corrupt.

You bring up the word monopoly for some reason. It looks like you bring it up because you think the gov't having a monopoly is bound to corrupt. The gov't has a monopoly on punishment. It should. If you think killing is different, it is not because of some monopoly issue. Only the gov't can lock people up and throw away the key. Why would the monopoly to do that not corrupt but a monopoly to execute people would?
The hypothetical of locking up people in our basements is totally relevant to your issue with the gov't having a monopoly. We can't lock people up, the gov't and only the gov't can. Does this monopoly corrupt the gov't?

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 5:29 am Post subject:

flakfizer wrote:

here is what you wrote:

Quote:

The state cannot be entrusted with the power to kill captive citizens, or even captive non-citizens for that matter. Such a monopoly is bound to corrupt.

You're saying I can't draw lines. I'm drawing a line between incarceration and actively putting someone to death. There has to be some entity that protects society from criminal behavior, and isolates criminals from the general population. There also has to be some entity that punishes criminal behavior. There can't be multiple entities to do these jobs, or else punishment wouldn't be final, due process would be given over to second or third opinions. With me so far?

However, killing someone goes beyond mere incarceration. There's the possibility for political pressure to get involved, that previous concerns for justice merge into vengeance, perhaps even a desire to create fear and subdue. That possibility also exists with incarceration, but the damage is greater with capital punishment, even while the possible gains capital punishment might provide are less than certain.

Moreover, I'm willing to allow that five innocent men be incarcerated out of 100 guilty so that we can sustain a system of justice and protect society. I'm unwilling to allow a single innocent man to be killed out of 100 guilty. Its not necessary to kill individuals if they are incarcerated and held captive.

Mr. Pink

Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: China

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:16 am Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

flakfizer wrote:

here is what you wrote:

Quote:

The state cannot be entrusted with the power to kill captive citizens, or even captive non-citizens for that matter. Such a monopoly is bound to corrupt.

You currently live outside your country of birth. Your profile says Beijing, you are posting on Korea forums...so you are in Asia. How long have you been here and how long will you stay?

I ask because your statement above requires a hell of a lot of tax money and I get the feeling you haven't really gone through working in your home country and had the pleasure of the tax man dinging your paycheck for 30%+, not to mention all the sales taxes and other government grabs for your hard earned money. Surprisingly, a lot of that money goes into paying for your police, judicial system and all those prisons that hold all those people that should be kept for life.

The last time I checked it was around $40,000 a year per prisoner on the tax payers dime. Let's say you had someone commit murder at the age of 18 and they got life....and maybe they live 50 years in prison. That is a hell of a lot of money to spend, when a bullet to the head after the last appeal is about $1 or less. 2mil dollars to house that inmate.

Pretty soon I can the hard working middle class is going to get sick and tired of being the back which carries the burdens of a country. This equality for all notion works for everyone except those who bust their ass to pay for everyone else in society.

But then, you, like I, live outside our respective countries, so this discussion is sort of moot isn't it? Our tax dollars go to the country we are working in. We don't get votes in those countries, so again, why are we discussing this?

bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:36 am Post subject:

Mr. Pink wrote:

I ask because your statement above requires a hell of a lot of tax money and I get the feeling you haven't really gone through working in your home country and had the pleasure of the tax man dinging your paycheck for 30%+, not to mention all the sales taxes and other government grabs for your hard earned money. Surprisingly, a lot of that money goes into paying for your police, judicial system and all those prisons that hold all those people that should be kept for life.

The last time I checked it was around $40,000 a year per prisoner on the tax payers dime. Let's say you had someone commit murder at the age of 18 and they got life....and maybe they live 50 years in prison. That is a hell of a lot of money to spend, when a bullet to the head after the last appeal is about $1 or less. 2mil dollars to house that inmate.

Nice extreme case of a hypothetical, but let us now consider the reality that in fact it costs more to execute an inmate than to imprison him for life.

The financial argument is another against the death penalty.

flakfizer

Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 3:27 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

flakfizer wrote:

here is what you wrote:

Quote:

The state cannot be entrusted with the power to kill captive citizens, or even captive non-citizens for that matter. Such a monopoly is bound to corrupt.

I'm allowing you to draw lines and understand the lines you just drew, but what does that have to do with a monopoly corrupting gov't? There are many ways to draw a line between imprisonment and execution, but I don't see how the gov't having a monopoly on either helps to draw that line. You never answered the question I asked as to whether or not you think the gov't is corrupted now due its monopoly on criminal punishment.

itaewonguy

Joined: 25 Mar 2003

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:06 pm Post subject:

bacasper wrote:

what gives you that idea???

ok lets see, 40k per year, stay on deathrow for lets say 10 years..
400.000 dollars of tax payers money, NOT including lawyer fees that tax payers are also paying..

how does it cost 400k to inject someone??

if what you say is true.. then we need to treat these prisoners like animals and take them out to the woodshed and it will cost a price of a bullet...

Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:18 pm Post subject:

Why is it that the pro-murder side of this argument keeps arguing that the death penalty shouldn't be expensive? In reality, it is expensive, and the only way to reduce that expense is by giving convicts sentenced to death fewer chances to appeal, which in turn increases the probability of the state murdering innocents. The death penalty is expensive, and that cost is going to be paid in either tax dollars or in innocent blood. Personally, I'm not willing to pay for these executions with either, and I'm very proud my home state has no death sentence. But then, Wisconsin does a lot of things right.

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:34 pm Post subject:

Mr. Pink wrote:

Kuros wrote:

flakfizer wrote:

here is what you wrote:

Quote:

The state cannot be entrusted with the power to kill captive citizens, or even captive non-citizens for that matter. Such a monopoly is bound to corrupt.

You shouldn't have even gone there, dude.

1) The death penalty is more costly than incarceration, largely due to legal expenses (appeals, etc)

2) I had a job in the States and I did pay the taxman. I was a title abstractor, which meant I would record title history on property to check for tax liens, open debt, etc. This was in 2004. I left b/c I saw housing prices rise 50% during the time I was in college alone, and I decided to leave the U.S. madhouse. Best decision I've ever made. Not that any of my personal history is remotely relevant.

3) Even arguing from a cost-standpoint shows the divergence of philosophies at play. Firstly, even if it is cheaper to kill a man, shouldn't we pay the extra money, in case we are in error? Secondly, the number of people actually up for capital punishment isn't that great (thankfully), so the savings will be pretty slim. Meanwhile, the U.S. gets a lot of bad press abroad for even having a few States that practice the death penalty.

4) American ex-pats pay taxes while abroad. There's a $80k-something exclusion, but most other countries' ex-pats do not pay taxes.

5) Slighting peoples' opinions here simply because they are ex-pats is not going to win you credibility or serious attention.

flakfizer wrote:

You never answered the question I asked as to whether or not you think the gov't is corrupted now due its monopoly on criminal punishment.

The Drug War as (failed) social policy morphing into criminal punishment. There are others examples of this, but I want to make clear that criminal punishment wouldn't work if it weren't a gov't monopoly.

itaewonguy

Joined: 25 Mar 2003

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:03 pm Post subject:

Fox wrote:

Why is it that the pro-murder side of this argument keeps arguing that the death penalty shouldn't be expensive? In reality, it is expensive, and the only way to reduce that expense is by giving convicts sentenced to death fewer chances to appeal, which in turn increases the probability of the state murdering innocents.

The death penalty is expensive, and that cost is going to be paid in either tax dollars or in innocent blood. Personally, I'm not willing to pay for these executions with either, and I'm very proud my home state has no death sentence. But then, Wisconsin does a lot of things right.

you guys have still not presented any evidence to show that its more expensive... some Stats if you please...

I personally think you are making this up...

Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:14 pm Post subject:

itaewonguy wrote:

Fox wrote:

you guys have still not presented any evidence to show that its more expensive... some Stats if you please...

I personally think you are making this up...

Data is wasted on idiots like you. Anyone with a remote interest in the truth all ready researched it independently of this thread. Believe what you want to.

itaewonguy

Joined: 25 Mar 2003

Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:53 pm Post subject:

Fox wrote:

Data is wasted on idiots like you. Anyone with a remote interest in the truth all ready researched it independently of this thread. Believe what you want to.

I know what you mean.. I said the samething to some Idiot in the Theist thread when he asked me for evidence to prove spirituality... can you believe the nerve of some people these days? Rolling Eyes

ontheway

Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...

Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 2:13 am Post subject:

itaewonguy wrote:

Fox wrote:

you guys have still not presented any evidence to show that its more expensive... some Stats if you please...

I personally think you are making this up...

During the recent California budget deadlock, while reviewing the state budget, I was surprised to learn that it costs less than $8,000 per year to house prisoners. The budget line was $7,000 something, like $7600 dollars. It would be less for long term prisoners who do not need to be processed in and out. It would increase for elderly prisoners, of course.

Meanwhile, the stats for executions show that it routinely costs over $1,000,000 dollars to execute a prisoner. When you include the legal costs, appeals, and all the safeguards, plus, setting up for an execution, observers, media, security, public officials, dealing with the controversey by the Governor's office - it comes to well over a million dollars per execution.

It is much cheaper to house a prisoner for life than it is to execute him.

itaewonguy

Joined: 25 Mar 2003

Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 2:24 am Post subject:

ontheway wrote:

itaewonguy wrote:

Fox wrote:

you guys have still not presented any evidence to show that its more expensive... some Stats if you please...

I personally think you are making this up...

media, observers, public officals do not get paid to attend the death..
safeguards? the room is already in place and fully equipt with the equipment needed for the procedure!
so I still don't see where the 1 million dollars is going...

now some one is milking the system and pocketing the money...

It doesn't cost 1 million dollars to kill someone...

ontheway

Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...

Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 8:10 am Post subject:

itaewonguy wrote:

ontheway wrote:

itaewonguy wrote:

Fox wrote:

you guys have still not presented any evidence to show that its more expensive... some Stats if you please...

I personally think you are making this up...

Here are the facts:

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

Quote:

North Carolina

North Carolina Spends More per Execution than on a Non-death Penalty Murder Case
The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than the a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment (. On a national basis, these figures translate to an extra cost of over $1 billion spent since 1976 on the death penalty. ("The Costs of Processing Murder Cases in North Carolina" Duke University, May 1993)

Quote:

Florida

Florida Spends Millions Extra per Year on Death Penalty
Florida would save $51 million each year by punishing all first-degree murderers with life in prison without parole, according to estimates by the Palm Beach Post. Based on the 44 executions Florida has carried out since 1976, that amounts to an approximate cost of $24 million for each execution. This finding takes into account the relatively few inmates who are actually executed, as well as the time and effort expended on capital defendants who are tried but convicted of a lesser murder charge, and those whose death sentences are overturned on appeal. ("The High Price of Killing Killers," Palm Beach Post, January 4, 2000)

Florida Spent Average of $3.2 Million per Execution from 1973 to 1988
During that time period, Florida spent an estimated $57 million on the death penalty to achieve 18 executions. ("Bottom Line: Life in Prison One-Sixth as Expensive," Miami Herald, July 10, 1988)

Quote:

California

California Spends Millions More on Capital Cases
California spends $90 Million dollars annually above and beyond the ordinary costs of the justice system on capital cases. $78 million of that total is incurred at the trial level (Sacramento Bee, March 18, 1988). In January 2003, despite a budge deficit, California Governor Gray Davis proposed building a new $220 million state of the art death row. ("San Quentin Debate: Death Row vs. Bay Views, New York Times, December 18, 2004).

The California Death Penalty System Costs Taxpayers More than $114 Million a Year
According to state and federal records obtained by The Los Angeles Times, maintaining the California death penalty system costs taxpayers more than $114 million a year beyond the cost of simply keeping the convicts locked up for life. This figure does not count the millions more spent on court costs to prosecute capital cases. The Times concluded that Californians and federal taxpayers have paid more than a quarter of a billion dollars for each of the state's 11 executions, and that it costs $90,000 more a year to house one inmate on death row, where each person has a private cell and extra guards, than in general prison population. This additional cost per prisoner adds up to $57.5 million in annual spending. ("Death Row Often Means a Long Life," Los Angeles Times, March 6, 2005).

1988 Cost Study by the Sacramento Bee
A study done by the Sacramento Bee (March 28, 1988) suggests that California would save $90 million per year if it were to abolish the death penalty. $78 million of these expenses are occurred at the trial level and would not be reduced by shortening appeals. ("CLOSING DEATH ROW WOULD SAVE STATE $90 MILLION A YEAR," Sacramento Bee, March 28, 1988).

Quote:

California

Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice
�The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California�s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.�

Using conservative rough projections, the Commission estimates the annual costs of the present (death penalty) system to be $137 million per year.

The cost of the present system with reforms recommended by the Commission to ensure a fair process would be $232.7 million per year.

The cost of a system in which the number of death-eligible crimes was significantly narrowed would be $130 million per year.

The cost of a system which imposes a maximum penalty of lifetime incarceration instead of the death penalty would be $11.5 million per year.

Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, June 30, 2008).

Quote:

Kansas

Study Concludes Death Penalty is Costly Policy
In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases. The study counted death penalty case costs through to execution and found that the median death penalty case costs $1.26 million. Non-death penalty cases were counted through to the end of incarceration and were found to have a median cost of $740,000. For death penalty cases, the pre-trial and trial level expenses were the most expensive part, 49% of the total cost. The costs of appeals were 29% of the total expense, and the incarceration and execution costs accounted for the remaining 22%. In comparison to non-death penalty cases, the following findings were revealed:

The investigation costs for death-sentence cases were about 3 times greater than for non-death cases.

The trial costs for death cases were about 16 times greater than for non-death cases ($508,000 for death case; $32,000 for non-death case).

The appeal costs for death cases were 21 times greater.

The costs of carrying out (i.e. incarceration and/or execution) a death sentence were about half the costs of carrying out a non-death sentence in a comparable case.

Trials involving a death sentence averaged 34 days, including jury selection; non-death trials averaged about 9 days.

(Performance Audit Report: Costs Incurred for Death Penalty Cases: A K-GOAL Audit of the Department of Corrections) Read DPIC's Summary of the Kansas Cost Report.

Quote:

Maryland

New Study Reveals Maryland Pays $37 Million for One Execution
A new study released by the Urban Institute on March 6, 2008 forecasted that the lifetime expenses of capitally-prosecuted cases since 1978 will cost Maryland taxpayers $186 million. That translates into at least $37.2 million for each of the state�s five executions since the state reenacted the death penalty. The study estimates that the average cost to Maryland taxpayers for reaching a single death sentence is $3 million - $1.9 million more than the cost of a non-death penalty case. (This includes investigation, trial, appeals, and incarceration costs.) The study examined 162 capital cases that were prosecuted between 1978 and 1999 and found that those cases will cost $186 million more than what those cases would have cost had the death penalty not existed as a punishment. At every phase of a case, according to the study, capital murder cases cost more than non-capital murder cases.

Of the 162 capital cases, there werer 106 cases in which a death sentence was sought but not handed down in Maryland. Those cases cost the state an additional $71 million compared to the cost non-death penalty cases. Those costs were incurred simply to seek the death penalty where the ultimate outcome was a life or long-term prison sentence.

(�Death penalty costs Md. more than life term,� by Jennifer McMenamin, The Baltimore Sun, March 6, 2008). Read the entire study here.

ReeseDog

Joined: 05 Apr 2008
Location: Classified

Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2009 10:04 am Post subject:

RufusW wrote:

"two wrongs don't make a right"

No, but they do make things even.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11 Next
Page 9 of 11

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe