Options

Capital Punishment thread

13468918

Posts

  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    We're talking about people imprisoned for life or sitting on death row awaiting final disposition. They get care far beyond what the average inmate receives.

    Source?

    HERE is a good place to start, but you can also find information by just using Google.

    Sorry if you were expecting a thesis on the subject.
    I'm not finding anything on the pro death sites other than some horribly subjective essays about murderers being evil, innocents needing the government to avenge them and, in some cases, the left being dumb.

    Quid on
  • Options
    CoJoeTheLawyerCoJoeTheLawyer Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    We're talking about people imprisoned for life or sitting on death row awaiting final disposition. They get care far beyond what the average inmate receives.

    Source?

    HERE is a good place to start, but you can also find information by just using Google.

    Sorry if you were expecting a thesis on the subject.
    I'm not finding anything on the pro death sites other than some horribly subjective essays about murderers being evil, innocents needing the government to avenge them and, in some cases, the left being dumb.

    Read the statistics, not the stupid subjective essays genius.

    Additionally, If you have something to contrary that says inmates on death row/serving life without parole receive equal to less resources towards their care while in prison, I'm sure everyone would like to see it. Hell, I would even like to see more recent numbers if someone can find them.

    CoJoeTheLawyer on

    CoJoe.png
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    200 convictions have been turned over in the US on DNA evidence alone, at least one of them involving a guy who was on death row.

    Over here? One. Not because our justice system is better, but because our rules of evidence combined with shitty police record-keeping make it nearly impossible for convicts to get a hold of old evidence and request that new forensic techniques be applied to them. Justice systems are untrustworthy when it comes to lives.


    You know what else bugs me? I'm reasonably sure that plenty of you pro-death penalty types put much less faith in the justice system when it comes to things like family law, which are far more likely to affect you and your wallet. Hypocrites.
    I've been talking about the US system exclusively, so I don't know how things are handled in other countries. And when it comes to any laws, be they family, criminal, tax, whatnot, I don't see what it has to do with my wallet. Besides, I think most things like family law and divorce court and such are where we need the biggest reforms. Man, you wanna talk about innocent people being bent over a chair...

    THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, YOU DOLT

    you see huge (largely anecdotal) miscarriages of justice in areas of the courts where you're statistcally more likely to end up, but you don't give a crap about those parts of the law you perceive as unlikely to affect you, despite the fuckuppery being pretty much even across the board. Hypocrisy. Self-centredness. Idiocy.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Oddly enough I'm not finding the living conditions an inmate on death row receives in the statistics links. Perhaps you could link it then as I really have no intention of sifting through every statistics page on there to prove your positive.

    Quid on
  • Options
    WalrusWalrus Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    I am opposed to the death penalty and always have been. However, some of the arguments put forward against it here seem pretty unconvincing. For instance, the assertion that life imprisonment is a worse or more fitting punishment than execution maybe right, but hardly sits well with the idea of implementing state justice rather than vengeance.

    If we assume that punishment is meted out for the benefit of the rest of society then could the death penalty not be the most valid and effective way of removing someone from the society which he has relinquished his right to live in. Of course the practical barriers to this argument are massive i.e. the cost of capital punishment or the possibility of a wrongful execution, but in principal could execution not be the most efficient way of dealing with people who pose an undeniable danger to society?

    Walrus on
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    To be fair, you're describing what the average prisoner lives though, and you're right, it's not a happy existence. However, we're talking about convicted murderers sentenced to death or life imprisonment without parole (and getting off track, this thread is suppose to be about capital punishment, not prison quality of life). They get more of everything than the average prisoner.

    No, they don't. Jesus Christ. Death Row inmates get smaller cells, fewer belongings, and much less time out of the cell (1 hour a day in Mississippi, and the guards are free to decide that you can take your exercise at midnight). No aircon, either. Lifers and DR prisoners are also far more likely to be placed in solitary for extended periods for infractions that lesser prisoners get a pass on. You clearly know nothing about the prison system.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    CoJoeTheLawyerCoJoeTheLawyer Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    Oddly enough I'm not finding the living conditions an inmate on death row receives in the statistics links. Perhaps you could link it then as I really have no intention of sifting through every statistics page on there to prove your positive.

    If you don't want to do the reading, keep your trap shut during the argument.

    Besides, this is getting off topic.

    CoJoeTheLawyer on

    CoJoe.png
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    We're talking about people imprisoned for life or sitting on death row awaiting final disposition. They get care far beyond what the average inmate receives.

    Source?

    HERE is a good place to start, but you can also find information by just using Google.

    Sorry if you were expecting a thesis on the subject.
    I'm not finding anything on the pro death sites other than some horribly subjective essays about murderers being evil, innocents needing the government to avenge them and, in some cases, the left being dumb.

    Read the statistics, not the stupid subjective essays genius.

    Additionally, If you have something to contrary that says inmates on death row/serving life without parole receive equal to less resources towards their care while in prison, I'm sure everyone would like to see it. Hell, I would even like to see more recent numbers if someone can find them.

    why don't you pick out the links that have all these statistics you're talking about instead of sending me to a site with five hundred dead links?

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    CoJoeTheLawyerCoJoeTheLawyer Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    To be fair, you're describing what the average prisoner lives though, and you're right, it's not a happy existence. However, we're talking about convicted murderers sentenced to death or life imprisonment without parole (and getting off track, this thread is suppose to be about capital punishment, not prison quality of life). They get more of everything than the average prisoner.

    No, they don't. Jesus Christ. Death Row inmates get smaller cells, fewer belongings, and much less time out of the cell (1 hour a day in Mississippi, and the guards are free to decide that you can take your exercise at midnight). No aircon, either. Lifers and DR prisoners are also far more likely to be placed in solitary for extended periods for infractions that lesser prisoners get a pass on. You clearly know nothing about the prison system.

    Source on the smaller cells, belongings etc?

    I believe you in terms of the solitary

    CoJoeTheLawyer on

    CoJoe.png
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    Oddly enough I'm not finding the living conditions an inmate on death row receives in the statistics links. Perhaps you could link it then as I really have no intention of sifting through every statistics page on there to prove your positive.

    If you don't want to do the reading, keep your trap shut during the argument.

    Besides, this is getting off topic.

    Stop squirming.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    To be fair, you're describing what the average prisoner lives though, and you're right, it's not a happy existence. However, we're talking about convicted murderers sentenced to death or life imprisonment without parole (and getting off track, this thread is suppose to be about capital punishment, not prison quality of life). They get more of everything than the average prisoner.

    No, they don't. Jesus Christ. Death Row inmates get smaller cells, fewer belongings, and much less time out of the cell (1 hour a day in Mississippi, and the guards are free to decide that you can take your exercise at midnight). No aircon, either. Lifers and DR prisoners are also far more likely to be placed in solitary for extended periods for infractions that lesser prisoners get a pass on. You clearly know nothing about the prison system.

    Source on the smaller cells, belongings etc?

    I believe you in terms of the solitary

    John Grisham (I know you're going to jump around like a damn fool on this one, but the dude does his research), plus a few proper reports in news articles, and that study on prisoner rape that was released last year. And no, I'm not going to googlehunt for you until you fix your own sources.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    Oddly enough I'm not finding the living conditions an inmate on death row receives in the statistics links. Perhaps you could link it then as I really have no intention of sifting through every statistics page on there to prove your positive.

    If you don't want to do the reading, keep your trap shut during the argument.

    Besides, this is getting off topic.
    Because that's not how it works here? You say death row inmates receive better treatment than the average prisoner. You've put forward a claim which means that in this forum at least you're expected to back it up with some sort of evidence. If you'd like an example of this Hacksaw did an excellent demonstration of proving his claim.

    Quid on
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    For the most part, death row inmates are the best behaved and least disruptive of of all inmates. It is also true, however, that we have little opportunity to be otherwise, gieven that many death units operate on the "22+2" system: 22 hours locked in cell, followed by 2 hours of recreation out of cell. Outdoor recreation takes place in a cage, ringed with double-edged razor wire- the "dog pen". All death rows share a central goal: "human storage" in an "austere world in which condemned prisoners are treated as bodies kept alive to be killed."

    Live From Death Row, Mumia Abu-Jamal p. 6


    the whole first chapter (the whole book really) is relevant, but damned if i'm going to transcribe the whole thing. it's a book i think everyone should read in the process of deciding if they're for or against the death penalty, though.

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    DynagripDynagrip Break me a million hearts HoustonRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    Too many innocent people have gone to jail for me to be comfortable with the death penalty. Also, I believe that the penal system should be far more about rehabilitation instead of straight up punishment. And if rehabilitation isn't working out with a particular individual then at least get some use out of him/her via work gangs and such.

    Dynagrip on
  • Options
    CoJoeTheLawyerCoJoeTheLawyer Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Oddly enough I'm not finding the living conditions an inmate on death row receives in the statistics links. Perhaps you could link it then as I really have no intention of sifting through every statistics page on there to prove your positive.

    If you don't want to do the reading, keep your trap shut during the argument.

    Besides, this is getting off topic.
    Because that's not how it works here? You say death row inmates receive better treatment than the average prisoner. You've put forward a claim which means that in this forum at least you're expected to back it up with some sort of evidence. If you'd like an example of this Hacksaw did an excellent demonstration of proving his claim.

    http://www.usdoj.gov/jmd/budgetsummary/btd/1975_2002/2002/html/page117-119.htm

    If you don't want to, or in some cases, can't read, the average cost per a year per a prisoner in a federal facility was roughly $25,000.00 in 2003. Easy enough to understand.

    Let's compare it to what it cost to keep someone in a maximum security prison, where death row inmates would be sent until execution. Estimates range from $50,000.00 a year (http://www.post-gazette.com/scrutiny/day2.asp) to $75,000.00 a year (http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#D.Cost). As the article from the Post-Gazette indicates, there is no absolute definite figure on what is spent on an inmate in maximum security per a year. Additionally, actual numbers will vary state to state, and from year to year. I could start listing reports going state to state, but that's redundant and I'm tired.

    Now, I’m no math major, but $50,000 > $25,000. That’s about double for an inmate in a federal maximum security prison as compared to your average prisoner in a federal facility. If you can’t accept that, then either post your own evidence, or suck my cock.

    CoJoeTheLawyer on

    CoJoe.png
  • Options
    The CatThe Cat Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    Keep it civil.

    You still haven't drawn a logical conclusion, anyway. You've just quoted figures without stating what the money is being spent on. I'm pretty sure its not on a new pink DS for every inmate. Very likely that extra cost is 90% about the higher security in the facilities in which they're held. Which, fair enough.

    The Cat on
    tmsig.jpg
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    Quid wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Oddly enough I'm not finding the living conditions an inmate on death row receives in the statistics links. Perhaps you could link it then as I really have no intention of sifting through every statistics page on there to prove your positive.

    If you don't want to do the reading, keep your trap shut during the argument.

    Besides, this is getting off topic.
    Because that's not how it works here? You say death row inmates receive better treatment than the average prisoner. You've put forward a claim which means that in this forum at least you're expected to back it up with some sort of evidence. If you'd like an example of this Hacksaw did an excellent demonstration of proving his claim.

    http://www.usdoj.gov/jmd/budgetsummary/btd/1975_2002/2002/html/page117-119.htm

    If you don't want to, or in some cases, can't read, the average cost per a year per a prisoner in a federal facility was roughly $25,000.00 in 2003. Easy enough to understand.

    Let's compare it to what it cost to keep someone in a maximum security prison, where death row inmates would be sent until execution. Estimates range from $50,000.00 a year (http://www.post-gazette.com/scrutiny/day2.asp) to $75,000.00 a year (http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#D.Cost). As the article from the Post-Gazette indicates, there is no absolute definite figure on what is spent on an inmate in maximum security per a year. Additionally, actual numbers will vary state to state, and from year to year. I could start listing reports going state to state, but that's redundant and I'm tired.

    Now, I’m no math major, but $50,000 > $25,000. That’s about double for an inmate in a federal maximum security prison as compared to your average prisoner in a federal facility. If you can’t accept that, then either post your own evidence, or suck my cock.


    but your argument was that they receive better treatment not that they cost more

    no duh a single cell per prisoner with a giant door and massive security precautions and suicide watch costs more than just throwing a couple dudes in an eight by ten.

    cite where they get better treatment plz

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited August 2007
    'Cost' includes things like security, bureaucracy, and profits for whoever is running the damn thing. By itself, it means very little, so keep that cock in your pants.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Options
    ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    The Cat wrote: »
    Keep it civil.

    You still haven't drawn a logical conclusion, anyway. You've just quoted figures without stating what the money is being spent on. I'm pretty sure its not on a new pink DS for every inmate. Very likely that extra cost is 90% about the higher security in the facilities in which they're held. Which, fair enough.
    Well, let's see, now, death row inmates are generally kept in solitary confinement, whereas general population inmates generally have cellmates. So, 1 cell per death row inmate versus 1 cell per 2 regular inmates, not to mention the higher guard-to-inmate ratio in death row... No, I'm sure that has nothing to do with the cost.

    We could be buying them premium cable, including porn, in their cell, and it would only add around $1200 a year to the cost of keeping them. We could be feeding them filet mignon for every meal, and it would add around $4500 a year to keep them. So, unless their living conditions are absolutely palatial, I don't think you can pin it on the luxuries.

    Thanatos on
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    well, every death row inmate does get a new typewriter, so there's that

    oh wait, no
    One inmate, more interested in his life than his entertainment, argued forcefully with prison administrators for permission to buy a non-impact, non-metallic, battery-operated typewriter. Predictably, permission was denied for security reasons. "Well what do y'all consider a thirteen-inch piece of glass?" the prisoner asked. "Ain't that a security risk?'

    "Where do you think you'll get that from?" the prison official demanded

    "From my TV!"

    Request for typewriter denied.

    Live From Death Row, Mumia Abu-Jamal p. 7, 8


    and just as a sidenote, in response to mister abu-jamal's book being published-
    The government's predictable answer to this allegedly constitutionally protected expression was lock-down for "engaging in the business or profession of journalism." Thirty days in the hole.

    from the introduction to the paperback edition

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    FirstComradeStalinFirstComradeStalin Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    I thought that, primarily, the cost of a death row inmate to the state is overwhelmingly from the legal actions that need to be taken for the death sentence to occur.

    FirstComradeStalin on
    Picture1-4.png
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    and taking all the proper precautions with whatever method a given state uses (whether it's sterilizing the needles, acquisition of the approved chemicals for the gas chamber, finding and training someone who isn't a total psycho to operate these mechanisms, etc etc)

    they don't just fling open your cell door on the day of and pump a couple of fo-five hardball into you

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    I thought that, primarily, the cost of a death row inmate to the state is overwhelmingly from the legal actions that need to be taken for the death sentence to occur.
    A lot of it is that, because the state is paying for the accused's lawyer (rich people are very rarely charged with capital crimes, and when they are, they frequently still get declared indigent, because very few people can afford the millions upon millions a capital trial lawyer is going to end up getting paid, including the Menendez brothers), the state's lawyer, the judge, the jury (which is almost always sequestered for a long period of time, and requires several alts), etc.

    The cost also ends up being way more than for a non-death-row convict because it's all front-loaded; you pay the vast majority of the money up-front. $50,000 a year for 30 is basically nothing, even though it adds up to 1.5 million. $500,000 for a trial over the next year is way, way more.

    Thanatos on
  • Options
    ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Servo wrote: »
    and taking all the proper precautions with whatever method a given state uses (whether it's sterilizing the needles, acquisition of the approved chemicals for the gas chamber, finding and training someone who isn't a total psycho to operate these mechanisms, etc etc)

    they don't just fling open your cell door on the day of and pump a couple of fo-five hardball into you
    I believe construction of San Quentin's new death row facility is estimated at $117 million.

    Thanatos on
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    CoJoe, you seem to misunderstand why inmates are given TVs and hobby supplies. It's not for their benefit, it's to pacify them so they don't riot and attack the guards.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    FirstComradeStalinFirstComradeStalin Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Al_wat wrote: »
    I don't believe we, or the governments which represent us, have the right to take life away from anyone.

    FirstComradeStalin on
    Picture1-4.png
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    Feral wrote: »
    CoJoe, you seem to misunderstand why inmates are given TVs and hobby supplies. It's not for their benefit, it's to pacify them so they don't riot and attack the guards.

    once again from mumia-
    TV is more than a powerful diversion from a terrible fate. It is a psychic club used to threaten those who dare resist the dehumanizing isolation of life on the row. To be found guilty of an institutional infraction means that one must relinquish TV. After months or years of noncontact visits, few phone calls, and ever decreasing communication with one's family and others, many inmates use TV as an umbilical cord, a psychological connection to the world they have lost. They depend on it, in the way that lonely people turn to TV for the illusion of companionship, and they dread separation from it. For many, loss of TV is too high a price to pay for any show of resistance.

    page 8 again.

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    The point of locking up people in a prison is to keep them from hurting society. I don't really care if they're not being fed bread and water in their urine-stained cell, and the outrage over them having TV or whatever doesn't make sense to me.

    Kaputa on
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    Kaputa wrote: »
    The point of locking up people in a prison is to keep them from hurting society.

    but should it be?


    (and is it now, really?)

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    KetherialKetherial Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Al_wat wrote: »
    I don't believe we, or the governments which represent us, have the right to take life away from anyone.

    really? even cops?

    Ketherial on
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    self-defense isn't even close to the same thing as the state death penalty

    what a false analogy

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    KetherialKetherial Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    it wasn't an analogy. it was a direct response to the statement. nice try though.

    Ketherial on
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    it is an analogy though

    you're saying that the situation where the state deliberately takes a selected individual and pre-meditatively murders them is like what could happen when an officer of the law is being shot at

    and guess what

    it isn't

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Ketherial wrote: »
    it wasn't an analogy. it was a direct response to the statement. nice try though.
    Self defense is far enough removed from the death penalty debate that it shouldn't even be in this thread. If you look at Al_wat's post without any context your response might have been valid, but (not to be the "ZOMG FALLACY" guy) throwing the self defense thing out there seems like a red herring to me.

    Kaputa on
  • Options
    ServoServo Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited August 2007
    i guess it really is more like a simile in my post there, but still

    Servo on
    newsigs.jpg
  • Options
    Descendant XDescendant X Skyrim is my god now. Outpost 31Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Ketherial wrote: »
    it wasn't an analogy. it was a direct response to the statement. nice try though.

    Cops are only permitted to use deadly force when they feel that they are under an immediate threat of injury or death. That is a far cry from the death penalty, me bucko.

    Descendant X on
    Garry: I know you gentlemen have been through a lot, but when you find the time I'd rather not spend the rest of the winter TIED TO THIS FUCKING COUCH!
  • Options
    KetherialKetherial Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    the point is, we condone killing people in certain situations. defense of self, defense of others, trespass into one's home, war, etc.

    it's not just, "if you try to kill me, it's okay for me to kill you". legitimate killing is broader than that. state administered retribution is just one more thing that some people, including me, add to the list of legitimate killing.

    Ketherial on
  • Options
    FirstComradeStalinFirstComradeStalin Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Ketherial wrote: »
    Al_wat wrote: »
    I don't believe we, or the governments which represent us, have the right to take life away from anyone.

    really? even cops?

    The post timer has turned me into a thread nomad.

    As everyone else has professed, self-defense is a completely different situation.

    FirstComradeStalin on
    Picture1-4.png
  • Options
    FeralFeral MEMETICHARIZARD interior crocodile alligator ⇔ ǝɹʇɐǝɥʇ ǝᴉʌoɯ ʇǝloɹʌǝɥɔ ɐ ǝʌᴉɹp ᴉRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Ketherial wrote: »
    the point is, we condone killing people in certain situations. defense of self, defense of others, trespass into one's home, war, etc.

    Seems to me we were down this road once before and you got your ass handed to you on a plate.

    Oh, right, you did.

    Yeah, we condone killing people in certain situations. The death penalty should not be one of those situations, for reasons that have been well-established for the last 10 pages (and for 17 more pages the last time we had this discussion). If you disagree with those reasons, you need to address them. The ball's in your court.

    Feral on
    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.

    the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
  • Options
    FirstComradeStalinFirstComradeStalin Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Ketherial wrote: »
    the point is, we condone killing people in certain situations. defense of self, defense of others, trespass into one's home, war, etc.

    it's not just, "if you try to kill me, it's okay for me to kill you". legitimate killing is broader than that. state administered retribution is just one more thing that some people, including me, add to the list of legitimate killing.

    If I could imprison someone who's shooting at me with some kind of jail-producing gun instead of shooting them back, then I'd do it. But it's hard to find those this holiday season.

    When the state has you and imprisons you for life with no parole, you are no longer harming anyone. That's the purpose of shooting someone in self-defense, to get them to stop attempting to harm people.

    FirstComradeStalin on
    Picture1-4.png
Sign In or Register to comment.