Is Death So Desirable?

[ThomWV]

Today's CNN Poll asks "Should John Allen Muhammad get the death penalty in the sniper case?"

I voted no, just because I don't believe in the death penalty under any circumstance. It did not suprise me at all that I am in the minority view, but it did suprise the hell out of me to see that it was 89% pro execution.

Thom

God Bless Robert Byrd

[adriennel]

1. No, and what's the deal...

...with moving the trial from Maryland (where the crimes were committed)to Virginia because they have the death penalty? Is this legal? Does this mean anyne who commits a crime can be tried in a different state that has the death penalty?

[BlueEyedSon]

2. I think he did in fact shoot some people in VA..... nt

[ThomWV]

3. Several States

As I recall more states than just Maryland and Virginia had charges but that somehow the Justice Department got involved in the negotiations to decide who got first crack. Maryland would have seemed to be the most likely, because I believe that is where the most victim were. When I saw it go to Virginia I just assumed it was because Maryland must not have a Death Penalty and that Ashcroft must have got involved. I don't know that to be the case but I just expected that sort of thing from this bunch of .......

[rucky]

4. We kill killers....why don't we rape rapists?

n/t

[quaker bill]

5. It probably happens to some that go to prison.

[Speck Tater]

6. That kind of pathological behavior is a disease.

I wish we had the cure for it, but we don't.
And even if we did there are some "bleading hearts" who would question whether removing a person's sociopathic tendancies was a violation of their rights. Therefore, curing such sickos is out of the question.

Now we have to decide what to do with them other than curing them. To make that dertemination we have to decide what we are trying to accomplish. Obviously we are not trying to cure or reform him, but to protect ourselves from him. That gives us three options. Banish him from the country, lock him away forever, or kill him.

Banishing him wouldn't work because no one wants to allow dangerous sociopaths into their country. That leaves locking him away forever and killing him.

Killing him is certainly the cheaper option, and probably the most secure since it insures he will not escape at some future date and be free to kill again.

However, killing him has a few negative aspects. First, in many cases (even if not in this one) there is the remote (or not-so-remote) possibility that the person convicted of the crime is actually not guilty. In that case, killing him is not only wrong, but eliminates any possibility of that erroneous conviction being reversed and justice being served. Second, it is remotely possible that the incarcerated prisoner might still contribute something to humanity from his jail cell. As remote as this possibility might be, we cannot say with perfect assurance that it is impossible.

On the other hand, given that he has really messed up this life, maybe it's actually better for his soul that he be removed from this incarnation so that he can get a fresh start in his next incarnation.

But even if that were true, spending 80 years in jail waiting for a natural death might teach him something of value for his next incarnation. Who knows.

All things considered, life in prison is probably the best option, even though it fails to satisfy some people's blood lust that seeks revenge.

[UnAmericanJoe]

7. Actually, studies have shown

That it is more expensive to execute a prisoner (appeals, appeals, appeals) than it is to imprison them for life.

[DUreader]

8. You say: "Killing him is certainly the cheaper option"

Do you have a source for this?

It runs contrary to every analysis I have read.

I have wondered if the 'streamlining' and denials of appeals have

sped things up to the point where death has become cheaper now

and am wondering if you can cite anything that proves it.

Thanks for your other comments

[Speck Tater]

9. Ah, I stand corrected then.

I just assumed it was cheeper to execute than to imprison someone for 50 to 80 years.

I had no idea appeals could be that costly.

[ThomWV]

10. Gettin' Cheaper All the Time

Well, if you are successful at reducing the apeals available that will certainly lower the cost of execution. I suppose that in a properly Starved-Beast style of Government an executioner could simply be assigned to the court and the offenders could be led out back and shot. Let no right get in the way of the pursuit of justice.

Thom

God Bless Robert Byrd

[DUreader]

12. That is my fear, Thom, I thought new data may have been released

we are headed in that direction

[Kitsune]

11. I've never understood

why killing someone for something they did makes up for it.

If punishment is the purpose, I should think that killing them right off lets them off the hook for the lifetime in prison, which I would regard as far more of a punishment. Then again, I believe in reincarnation...

If restitution is the purpose, killing the criminal doesn't bring those whose deaths he is responsible for back to life.

If protecting the rest of society is the purpose, keeping them locked up does the job just as well as killing them, without the problem of further bloodshed.

Regardless of the purpose, killing someone is something that should never be done, by anyone, including the state.

</rant>

[MojoKrunch]

13. We can be vindictive hairless beach monkeys.

We're all mostly nuts now... no quality control.

Mojo