Posted on 05/07/2007 2:09:16 PM PDT by Coleus
The only reason the death penalty has become so expensive to the taxpayers is liberal judges and lawyers.
It costs a small fortune to imprison someone for a lifetime. Putting a really bad killer to death SHOULD be much cheaper. It only costs more because you inevitably end up housing murderers for 10, 15, or 20 years while they go through the appeal process, with public defenders who are subsidized on the taxpayer’s dime.
In an earlier time in America, before the liberals took charge, the process was far cheaper and more expeditious.
There's a post today about a 78 year-old murderer that served twenty years for killing wife #1 and wife #2.
Guess what? He killed wife #3, and accidentally himself, when he tried to use arson to cover the killings (I think he killed another person)
There was one last week. Convicted murderer gets released, only to kill again.
"Vengeance is Mine, Saith the Lord."
(Although I think that was written pre-Christianity. The rules for Christians may be different.)
No, I’m pretty sure the rules for Christians are the same. But that still doesn’t invalidate capital punishment. So should we not even punish criminals at all then, if vengeance belongs to the Lord?
Bingo! Can the opponents of capital punishment point to a single case, even one, where it was proven that a convict was innocent after he was executed by mistake? Compare that to the veritable rivers of blood shed by people who were released from prison.
Go back to sleep dear.
Of course we punish them. Lock them away. Never release them for any reason.
Slow day at the office for these NJ legislators.
Thank you for your reasoned responses.
In NJ there are no prosecutors who have to showboat for re-election; the prosecutors are appointed by the Governor with approval from the local state senator ( I think it’s for a 5-yr. term). No elections or grandstanding. Some NJ prosecutors work behind the scenes and are not in the papers until a reporter contacts them.
The very last thing that any of the current crop of legislators want is your opinion on anything. Why? Because they have an agenda that is not what anyone wants - certainly not a “fully informed” taxpayer. Oh, they’ll go through the motions, to give the illusion of public participation and input.
Clearly, when so many falsehoods, sophistry and logical errors can be condensed in just a few sentences - e.g. “The fact is...”; be very afraid.
That is the one problem with the death penalty. It’s easy to just forget about the murderer if he’s in prison forever. But, with the death penalty he gets way too much attention.
There was a FBi report written years ago, that had studied wrongful convictions that lead to the death penalty. They had concluded at least 20 innocent men had gone to the gallows. I can’t cite this, but I did first read the report from a FR post.
In fact I think that's true of many of the problems people have with the death penalty. Some of them have been cited here; i.e. It takes too long, it's more expensive than life without parole, the endless appeals, it's not a deterrent, etc. If murderers were actually executed in a timely fasion, these problems wouldn't exist. It would be cheaper, it wouldn't clog up the legal system, liberals wouldn't be able to make political hay out of their execution, and who knows but that it might actually become a deterrent.
The one that gets me the most is where liberals complain that it's not a deterrent and that it's too costly. Who's complaining that it's too costly? The liberals. Who's making it too costly? The liberals.
I'd be interested to see that report. It is unfortunate, and it underscores the need to make sure that innocent men aren't executed, but I bet if you counted the number of innocent victims killed by men who were supposed to be in prison for life and committed murders while on parole, the numbers would be staggeringly higher.
Years ago I heard Dennis Prager on his radio show give figures that stated that the average sentance given for murder in the U.S. was 11 years. Based on that, you could make the case that American society really doesn't think murder is that bad. Or at least, the American criminal justice system doesn't think so.
I gotta admit, it’s strange debating capital punishment on FR. I’d have thought we all were of a like mind on the subject.
I am ....But I sure don’t like it. ~P~
My prisons would be all one person per cell;plain food,have the opportunity for some productive work that did not entail the acquiring of better criminal skills,and strictly censored reading ,limited entertainment,etc.Murderers could look forward to no movie or book deals and parole would be extremely difficult .
Corrupt prison guards could expect harsh sentences and there would have be a strong review board and inspector general who would thoroughly check the operations.
We really don't seriously attack violent crime,we just build criminal colleges.
I think that argument is a red-herring. Don’t let the perfect get in the way of the good, so to speak. We don’t demand perfection in any other avenue of life, it pains me to admit. Clearly the law has a long history of siding or erring on the side of caution (at least with any sort of tradition of civilization)
Clearly there are numerous cases beyond count, of known, admitted, convicted psychopaths to keep ole’ sparky busy.
The “Joe Arpaio method”; put ‘em in tents in the desert, give them bologna to eat, and make ‘em wear pink prison jumpers!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.