| Website Owner  Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Gender:  Posts: 5,517 Country:  Thanks: 12
Thanked 78 Times in 66 Posts
 |  Quote: |
Originally Posted by aMFliberal If you're referring to the numbers we both posted, I think you're incorrect in saying that they assume every case goes to the Supreme Court. It's not a cheap way of getting people to disagree with capital punishment, they are average costs for states and different offices etc. and those costs are astronomical. The costs in total of every execution averages to be millions more than the costs of imprisoning a criminal for life.
"Does money really matter anyways?" Holy shit...this is coming from a conservative...I couldn't believe my eyes when I read it
About your "if DNA evidence, execution" idea. It sounds like it makes sense but it would be unfair. The crime is murder, not murder and murder with DNA evidence. If you condemn a criminal to death because DNA evidence was presented in the trial, that criminal is still convicted of murder. Should another criminal convicted of murder not get the death penalty just because there was no DNA evidence, even though they committed the same crime? That's like saying "You're guilty, but you're guilty-er." Reminds me of Animal Farm, "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." That idea would not be fair at all. | I did a bit more research and it turns out you guys were right that it is averaged at about 2 million per prisoner execution. Hopefully that is a fact.
The average costs to prison someone is $40,000-45,000 a year. So it would take around 45-50 years to be at the same costs to execute someone. Maybe I should do some more research and grab the average aged person sitting in jail for life and estimate if they would indeed live 40+ years.
Next point.
You can hear me talk about money when it comes to taxing the hell out of everything. However, when it comes down to something like murder...money shouldn't be the issue. (kinda get my drift?)
You brought up a good point that it's unfair to execute those who are guilty with DNA evidence, and not those without DNA evidence. That's a tough one to think about...maybe in cases when the victim is found guilty, with no possible evidence to prove otherwise (like the Oklahoma City bombing).
I'm just bringing up ideas here. |