[Blewvane]

Originally Posted by spycosis ↗

I agree with you. I'd go so far as to say that we don't even have the right to decide who lives and who dies, as much as I want to see real evil people killed, I think it ain't up to us. And it's a sort of false revenge, because the dead do not suffer, yet we imagine death as an undesirable state to exist in. I think to lock a human away for the rest of their natural life with no hope of release, is as severe a punishment as you can give to anyone. Admitted it does not deliver the acute physical agony of burning someone to death, but the suffering of a life sentence is protracted and allows time for someone to feel truly sorry for what they have done. That is an important experience for the prisoner to go through before he dies in his cell old and forgotten. That's how to get revenge on someone - make them cry for years on end until they die of sadness. I can't help feeling Bin Laden got away with it all too lightly having received such a swift death sentence.

There are problems with locking up prisoners for life. Food, accomodation, utilities, education, recreation, legal services and medical costs are all covered by the tax payer. Over here they are eligible for compensation if injured while incarcerated as well. Add to that the possibility of law changes in the future which mean their life sentence may be reduced or suspended.

I would only support a life sentence if the prisoner had to work long hours 7 days a week to cover the cost of their stay and any extra money earned from their labour went straight to the victim or the victims family. Also there would be very little contact with other prisoners, no recreation time, no luxuries like tv or radio, and their meals were a basic staple food that tasted like shit. As soon as they were no longer able to work they get a bullet in the back of the head.

[spycosis]

I agree with you on some points. The cost of imprisoning someone is indeed a burden on the taxpayer, but the cost of executing someone is at least four times higher than the cost of a 40 year prison sentence. I like the idea of a treadmill in prisons, to generate electricity.

[Blewvane]

Originally Posted by spycosis ↗

I agree with you on some points. The cost of imprisoning someone is indeed a burden on the taxpayer, but the cost of executing someone is at least four times higher than the cost of a 40 year prison sentence. I like the idea of a treadmill in prisons, to generate electricity.

I was discussing this with a friend the other night and have a better understanding of the legal process before an execution. What i understand is the high cost of an execution is legal fees from the trial and appeals , not the actual execution.

[Megamel29]

Originally Posted by Blewvane ↗

I was discussing this with a friend the other night and have a better understanding of the legal process before an execution. What i understand is the high cost of an execution is legal fees from the trial and appeals , not the actual execution.

That's my understanding as well. And I think that they have at least one mandatory appeal, even if the prisoner doesn't want it. There are cases like Ailene Wournos where she was tried and sentenced to death repeatedly. Why? Book and movie deals? Such a waste of tax money.

[Shadedwill]

I think it's because the 'one mistake is one too many' idea of wrongful executions. It's not inconceivable that someone might be railroaded into getting the death penalty for a crime they didn't commit and then threatened out of appealing (beatings, brutality, threats against family, ect.).
If someone somehow found themselves in this situation they wouldn't be able to be intimidated out of appealing because it was automatic.
It's a nice idea but it wouldn't really work, but that's still probably why it's there.

[spycosis]

Originally Posted by Blewvane ↗

I was discussing this with a friend the other night and have a better understanding of the legal process before an execution. What i understand is the high cost of an execution is legal fees from the trial and appeals , not the actual execution.

Sure, I am aware that it is the execution process as opposed to the actual act that costs the money but there are good reasons for that. The trial of someone under the threat of capital punishment has to be infallible and far removed from the type of low budget legal proceedings favoured by countries such as Turkey and Nigeria.

[spycosis]

Originally Posted by Blewvane ↗

There are problems with locking up prisoners for life. Food, accomodation, utilities, education, recreation, legal services and medical costs are all covered by the tax payer. Over here they are eligible for compensation if injured while incarcerated as well. Add to that the possibility of law changes in the future which mean their life sentence may be reduced or suspended.

I would only support a life sentence if the prisoner had to work long hours 7 days a week to cover the cost of their stay and any extra money earned from their labour went straight to the victim or the victims family. Also there would be very little contact with other prisoners, no recreation time, no luxuries like tv or radio, and their meals were a basic staple food that tasted like shit. As soon as they were no longer able to work they get a bullet in the back of the head.

... That's basically the same as being married except convicted murderers don't get to watch the telly.

[deiatetofulfill]

Midazolam is a powerful sedative, his body may have heave a bit but he'd know fuck all about it

[Blewvane]

Originally Posted by spycosis ↗

... That's basically the same as being married except convicted murderers don't get to watch the telly.