<!--quoteo(post=1591344:date=Dec 22 2006, 12:59 PM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 22 2006, 12:59 PM) [snapback]1591344[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> That seems to be one of the best arguments against the death penalty - the cost of it including numerous appeals etc. But as already noted this could be remedied by re-working the judicial system.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> How? So far you haven't provided any answers as to how we should go about this. Do we simply stop allowing those sentenced to death the appeal their sentence? Do we simply take them into a room behind the courtroom and shoot them in the back of the head once the verdict has been delivered? What?
<!--quoteo(post=1591483:date=Dec 23 2006, 01:35 AM:name=Renegade)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Renegade @ Dec 23 2006, 01:35 AM) [snapback]1591483[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> How? So far you haven't provided any answers as to how we should go about this. Do we simply stop allowing those sentenced to death the appeal their sentence? Do we simply take them into a room behind the courtroom and shoot them in the back of the head once the verdict has been delivered? What? <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Good question, and I've contacted my legislator regarding this. We'll see what <b>HE</b> has to say about it.
<!--quoteo(post=1591510:date=Dec 23 2006, 01:20 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 23 2006, 01:20 AM) [snapback]1591510[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Good question, and I've contacted my legislator regarding this. We'll see what <b>HE</b> has to say about it. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yeah, because he's <i>clearly</i> qualified to determine the problems of our judicial system. <img src="http://www.penny-arcade.com/forums/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif" border="0" alt="IPB Image" />
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
edited December 2006
Right, so since this discussion is turning into one of economics, can you also ask your legislator at what price point the death penalty should be. Also, perhaps you should consider privatising the process so that it costs the state nothing, and allows some entrepreneur to turn a profit from the process. You might be able to implement some legislation for compensation, so that the families of people executed who later win an appeal, can be paid a monetary compensation roughly equivalent to the monetary cost you attach to a human life.
Of course, more savings can be made by selling organs to the private transplant market, who knows, maybe even the gold teeth can be extracted, melted down and sold to further compensate the state for the inconvenience of having to execute people. Surely anyone who believes you can take someone's life is well beyond objecting to taking any of these items from the resultant cadaver.
<!--quoteo(post=1591536:date=Dec 23 2006, 05:06 AM:name=Renegade)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Renegade @ Dec 23 2006, 05:06 AM) [snapback]1591536[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Yeah, because he's <i>clearly</i> qualified to determine the problems of our judicial system. <img src="http://www.penny-arcade.com/forums/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif" border="0" alt="IPB Image" /> <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Much more qualified than you or I, yes. <!--quoteo(post=1591553:date=Dec 23 2006, 06:17 AM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(puzl @ Dec 23 2006, 06:17 AM) [snapback]1591553[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Right, so since this discussion is turning into one of economics, can you also ask your legislator at what price point the death penalty should be. Also, perhaps you should consider privatising the process so that it costs the state nothing, and allows some entrepreneur to turn a profit from the process. You might be able to implement some legislation for compensation, so that the families of people executed who later win an appeal, can be paid a monetary compensation roughly equivalent to the monetary cost you attach to a human life.
Of course, more savings can be made by selling organs to the private transplant market, who knows, maybe even the gold teeth can be extracted, melted down and sold to further compensate the state for the inconvenience of having to execute people. Surely anyone who believes you can take someone's life is well beyond objecting to taking any of these items from the resultant cadaver. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not bad ideas at all, puzl. The compensation deal though ... since the possibility of this happening is so remote it's really not a factor.
<!--quoteo(post=1591566:date=Dec 23 2006, 05:26 AM:name=Depot)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Depot @ Dec 23 2006, 05:26 AM) [snapback]1591566[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Much more qualified than you or I, yes. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Why? Does he hold a degree in law, or is a practicing lawyer? What makes him more qualified to determine what's wrong with our judicial process than you or I? And please don't say "because he's an elected official." Because, really, being elected to office doesn't qualify you for sh*t.
<!--quoteo(post=1591573:date=Dec 23 2006, 07:41 AM:name=Renegade)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Renegade @ Dec 23 2006, 07:41 AM) [snapback]1591573[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Why? Does he hold a degree in law, or is a practicing lawyer? What makes him more qualified to determine what's wrong with our judicial process than you or I? And please don't say "because he's an elected official." Because, really, being elected to office doesn't qualify you for sh*t. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, and yes. Who else would you contact if you wanted a particular law amended?
I like how we're all free to suggest how we would all benifit from a totalitarian society where human life is worth very little, but not free to point out that if someone would try to impose these types of fascist laws and ideals where I live I would take up arms against the fascists to defend myself and my fellow men. If I call Depot a fascist for viewing these ideals my posts will get edited.
Fascist laws being reviewed and passed by educated and elected men are still fascist. No matter how you try to package this it smells bad. Civil wars have been started over less.
Let me summarise: if you try to do this near me, I'll shoot you myself.
I'm sorry, just because you hold a political position doesn't mean your opinion is that is something that is better then anyones. People are elected to represent a majority of people. Not the correct response Depot.
Just because you sit at a fancy desk doesn't mean you have any better a say or knowledge of a subject then anyone else.
Before we demonise Depot too much, let's remember he's not the one who proposed using the death penalty across the board. He proposed using it in the most severe cases. That alone is not enough to qualify a government as totalitarian.
<!--quoteo(post=1591656:date=Dec 23 2006, 03:12 PM:name=Revlic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Revlic @ Dec 23 2006, 03:12 PM) [snapback]1591656[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I'm sorry, just because you hold a political position doesn't mean your opinion is that is something that is better then anyones. People are elected to represent a majority of people. Not the correct response Depot.
Just because you sit at a fancy desk doesn't mean you have any better a say or knowledge of a subject then anyone else. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> If you want a law amended the best way I know of to do it is to contact a member of the legislature, preferably one you support and helped place into office. The fact that he may hold a law degree would be even better I would think.
We're not talking about anyones opinion being better than anyone elses - we're talking about the best way to amend the appeals process so it's not so costly for those on death row (since several people brought up the economic factor of appeals).
Private_ColemanPhD in Video GamesJoin Date: 2002-11-07Member: 7510Members
<!--quoteo(post=1591553:date=Dec 23 2006, 06:17 AM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(puzl @ Dec 23 2006, 06:17 AM) [snapback]1591553[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Right, so since this discussion is turning into one of economics, can you also ask your legislator at what price point the death penalty should be. Also, perhaps you should consider privatising the process so that it costs the state nothing, and allows some entrepreneur to turn a profit from the process. You might be able to implement some legislation for compensation, so that the families of people executed who later win an appeal, can be paid a monetary compensation roughly equivalent to the monetary cost you attach to a human life.
Of course, more savings can be made by selling organs to the private transplant market, who knows, maybe even the gold teeth can be extracted, melted down and sold to further compensate the state for the inconvenience of having to execute people. Surely anyone who believes you can take someone's life is well beyond objecting to taking any of these items from the resultant cadaver. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The problem here is that since humans are naturally greedy, it is only a matter of time before said entrepreneur will realise he can make more money by getting more people killed. Enter big push for harder sentences and corporate sentencing.
X_StickmanNot good enough for a custom title.Join Date: 2003-04-15Member: 15533Members, Constellation
I'm against the death penalty for a reason I don't often hear... I honestly don't consider it that much of a punishment. To me, the death penalty is a relic of a time where people believed that there was an afterlife, and killing a criminal would just get them to a punishment greater than man can inflict, and do it faster than nature would.
I hold no religious beliefs, and that whole "seperation of church and state" thing should mean that the government shouldn't, either. Once a criminal is dead, they're gone, no longer there. Nothing. The family of the victim, however, has to live on. This doesn't mean I'm in favour of prolonged torture, by the way, I just don't think that saying the death penalty is a "just" punishment is justification for it existing... because it isn't.
I also realise that the <b>waiting</b> for the punishment to be carried out must be one of the worst things someone can go through, and probably the most "fitting" punishment for a murderer (putting myself in the place of a murder victim, before they're dead but knowing there's no way out, honestly terrifies me). But that ends, and after that? Nothing.
That, combined with the previously mentioned financial facts (keeping someone alive costs less) and the statistics showing that the death penalty doesn't affect murder rates, makes me think it's entirely pointless.
Also, throwing my own personal beliefs into the ring, I hate the system of punishment to begin with. Bad vibes breed bad vibes. Taking it down to a basic level, imagine you're out with a friend. Someone punches your friend in the face, so you kick him in the balls. He doesn't go home and think "Wow I need to change my life" and become a charity worker. I realise it's not that simple on full scale, but it's not too different. Punishment for crimes essentially works around fear. I hate that. People shouldn't, say, not steal something because they think "I might get caught", because that's a horrible frame of mind (to live in fear) and just means they'll do it if they think they can get away with it. They should not steal because they think "that's a bad thing to do".
But that's all fanciful thinking, and will probably never happen on large scale.
i still don't see how un-screwing-up the parole system and beefing up security solves almost every problem: - life in prison == you die in a steel cage. subject terminated. - - the sunject also has the ability to think about what caused them to end up in the steel cage. - - - possibly after dropping the soap. - there is some measure of undoability (though it's hard to say "oops. we stuck the wrong guy in that box," it's a decent bit easier than "well, sucks that we killed him...") - it's hard to screw up the simple process of putting someone in a small room and locking the door, unlike the seventy bajillion chemicals you have to place into a sunject for a lethal injection. (what happened to .45 asprin? that was simple...)
edit: also, depot, the best way to get any part of the law changed is to <i>pay</i> an elected official, contacting them earns you an automated response. campaign donations are where it's at.
Comments
That seems to be one of the best arguments against the death penalty - the cost of it including numerous appeals etc. But as already noted this could be remedied by re-working the judicial system.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How? So far you haven't provided any answers as to how we should go about this. Do we simply stop allowing those sentenced to death the appeal their sentence? Do we simply take them into a room behind the courtroom and shoot them in the back of the head once the verdict has been delivered? What?
How? So far you haven't provided any answers as to how we should go about this. Do we simply stop allowing those sentenced to death the appeal their sentence? Do we simply take them into a room behind the courtroom and shoot them in the back of the head once the verdict has been delivered? What?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Good question, and I've contacted my legislator regarding this. We'll see what <b>HE</b> has to say about it.
Good question, and I've contacted my legislator regarding this. We'll see what <b>HE</b> has to say about it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, because he's <i>clearly</i> qualified to determine the problems of our judicial system. <img src="http://www.penny-arcade.com/forums/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif" border="0" alt="IPB Image" />
Yeah, because he's <i>clearly</i> qualified to determine the problems of our judicial system. <img src="http://www.penny-arcade.com/forums/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif" border="0" alt="IPB Image" />
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Heh, penny arcade hates you for stealing their smileys.
/agrees though.
Of course, more savings can be made by selling organs to the private transplant market, who knows, maybe even the gold teeth can be extracted, melted down and sold to further compensate the state for the inconvenience of having to execute people. Surely anyone who believes you can take someone's life is well beyond objecting to taking any of these items from the resultant cadaver.
Yeah, because he's <i>clearly</i> qualified to determine the problems of our judicial system. <img src="http://www.penny-arcade.com/forums/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif" border="0" alt="IPB Image" />
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Much more qualified than you or I, yes.
<!--quoteo(post=1591553:date=Dec 23 2006, 06:17 AM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(puzl @ Dec 23 2006, 06:17 AM) [snapback]1591553[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Right, so since this discussion is turning into one of economics, can you also ask your legislator at what price point the death penalty should be. Also, perhaps you should consider privatising the process so that it costs the state nothing, and allows some entrepreneur to turn a profit from the process. You might be able to implement some legislation for compensation, so that the families of people executed who later win an appeal, can be paid a monetary compensation roughly equivalent to the monetary cost you attach to a human life.
Of course, more savings can be made by selling organs to the private transplant market, who knows, maybe even the gold teeth can be extracted, melted down and sold to further compensate the state for the inconvenience of having to execute people. Surely anyone who believes you can take someone's life is well beyond objecting to taking any of these items from the resultant cadaver.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not bad ideas at all, puzl. The compensation deal though ... since the possibility of this happening is so remote it's really not a factor.
Much more qualified than you or I, yes.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why? Does he hold a degree in law, or is a practicing lawyer? What makes him more qualified to determine what's wrong with our judicial process than you or I? And please don't say "because he's an elected official." Because, really, being elected to office doesn't qualify you for sh*t.
Why? Does he hold a degree in law, or is a practicing lawyer? What makes him more qualified to determine what's wrong with our judicial process than you or I? And please don't say "because he's an elected official." Because, really, being elected to office doesn't qualify you for sh*t.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, and yes. Who else would you contact if you wanted a particular law amended?
Fascist laws being reviewed and passed by educated and elected men are still fascist. No matter how you try to package this it smells bad. Civil wars have been started over less.
Let me summarise: if you try to do this near me, I'll shoot you myself.
Just because you sit at a fancy desk doesn't mean you have any better a say or knowledge of a subject then anyone else.
I'm sorry, just because you hold a political position doesn't mean your opinion is that is something that is better then anyones. People are elected to represent a majority of people. Not the correct response Depot.
Just because you sit at a fancy desk doesn't mean you have any better a say or knowledge of a subject then anyone else.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you want a law amended the best way I know of to do it is to contact a member of the legislature, preferably one you support and helped place into office. The fact that he may hold a law degree would be even better I would think.
We're not talking about anyones opinion being better than anyone elses - we're talking about the best way to amend the appeals process so it's not so costly for those on death row (since several people brought up the economic factor of appeals).
Right, so since this discussion is turning into one of economics, can you also ask your legislator at what price point the death penalty should be. Also, perhaps you should consider privatising the process so that it costs the state nothing, and allows some entrepreneur to turn a profit from the process. You might be able to implement some legislation for compensation, so that the families of people executed who later win an appeal, can be paid a monetary compensation roughly equivalent to the monetary cost you attach to a human life.
Of course, more savings can be made by selling organs to the private transplant market, who knows, maybe even the gold teeth can be extracted, melted down and sold to further compensate the state for the inconvenience of having to execute people. Surely anyone who believes you can take someone's life is well beyond objecting to taking any of these items from the resultant cadaver.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The problem here is that since humans are naturally greedy, it is only a matter of time before said entrepreneur will realise he can make more money by getting more people killed. Enter big push for harder sentences and corporate sentencing.
Same deal with organ donation/selling.
To me, the death penalty is a relic of a time where people believed that there was an afterlife, and killing a criminal would just get them to a punishment greater than man can inflict, and do it faster than nature would.
I hold no religious beliefs, and that whole "seperation of church and state" thing should mean that the government shouldn't, either. Once a criminal is dead, they're gone, no longer there. Nothing. The family of the victim, however, has to live on. This doesn't mean I'm in favour of prolonged torture, by the way, I just don't think that saying the death penalty is a "just" punishment is justification for it existing... because it isn't.
I also realise that the <b>waiting</b> for the punishment to be carried out must be one of the worst things someone can go through, and probably the most "fitting" punishment for a murderer (putting myself in the place of a murder victim, before they're dead but knowing there's no way out, honestly terrifies me). But that ends, and after that? Nothing.
That, combined with the previously mentioned financial facts (keeping someone alive costs less) and the statistics showing that the death penalty doesn't affect murder rates, makes me think it's entirely pointless.
Also, throwing my own personal beliefs into the ring, I hate the system of punishment to begin with. Bad vibes breed bad vibes. Taking it down to a basic level, imagine you're out with a friend. Someone punches your friend in the face, so you kick him in the balls. He doesn't go home and think "Wow I need to change my life" and become a charity worker. I realise it's not that simple on full scale, but it's not too different.
Punishment for crimes essentially works around fear. I hate that. People shouldn't, say, not steal something because they think "I might get caught", because that's a horrible frame of mind (to live in fear) and just means they'll do it if they think they can get away with it. They should not steal because they think "that's a bad thing to do".
But that's all fanciful thinking, and will probably never happen on large scale.
- life in prison == you die in a steel cage. subject terminated.
- - the sunject also has the ability to think about what caused them to end up in the steel cage.
- - - possibly after dropping the soap.
- there is some measure of undoability (though it's hard to say "oops. we stuck the wrong guy in that box," it's a decent bit easier than "well, sucks that we killed him...")
- it's hard to screw up the simple process of putting someone in a small room and locking the door, unlike the seventy bajillion chemicals you have to place into a sunject for a lethal injection. (what happened to .45 asprin? that was simple...)
edit: also, depot, the best way to get any part of the law changed is to <i>pay</i> an elected official, contacting them earns you an automated response. campaign donations are where it's at.