Death Sentence Supporters: Would you still support the death sentence if it costs more than a prison sentence?

Question

Recent studies by the Californian State as well as studies into Texas by the US GAO as well as numerous other studies by Justice For All (JFA) the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), Death Penalty Focus of California, California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, The Washington State Bar Association, and The American Civil Liberties Union - all found that the cost of the death sentence is significantly more than the cost of life without parole.

As I often see the argument "it is cheaper for the death sentence than to imprison them", would you still support the death sentence on the basis that it would cost more (the average death sentence case costing $2M plus additions) than life without parole?

Or do you support the death sentence on principal or other reasons? And if for other reasons, please state. Thank you.


--

I am asking here due to the fact that many in Polls & Surveys are well... I would hate to say here due to violation, but let's just say if Yahoo! Answers was the human anatomy, Polls & Surveys would be the anus.

Answer 1

You raise an interesting moral dilemma. What would your reaction be (and the people who support the death penalty, especially on economic grounds), if a close relative or loved one was falsely accused of a crime, was put to death and it later transpired that he / she was in fact innocent. A huge number of people in the past have spent many years in prison for crimes they didn't commit and were later released, would your conscience have allowed you to put them to death?

Answer 2

i support the death sentence - although it costs a much higher amount then life imprisonment. i believe it is better because of inexcusable crimes such as rape and sexually abuse of children should be punished and in the most severe way possible. it gives closure for the family of the victim - if a family knows that the criminal is still 'out there' it cant be good for them - the death sentence is a way of over coming that.



i mean, and this is my own view here, people who commit such terrible crimes have lost all human rights when they commit them and dont deserve a life time of jail - this is because of very relaxed *in some cases* jails where prisoners are rewarded and have an easy life.



it will cost more then life imprisonment because people could be waiting years and years on death row, there'll be appeals ect but in the end i think they should pay for what they have done. i support the death sentence because it is justice for the family of the victim.



to put a different slant on it - the death sentence by lethal injection has been criticized becuase the 3 injections used - the first one if i am correct just relaxes the facial and other muscles so you cant see - but the prisoner does still actually feel the pain - i know i may sound extremely harsh here but they deserve to feel the pain of the injection - they have ruined not only one person's life but the family as well, they deserve to be punished - i mean you could argue that life imprisonment is emotional punishment but still they arent getting proper punishment for their crime and that's why i support the death sentence.

Answer 3

I could never understand where all the expense comes from with our system.

I once saw a video of a trial in China where the prisoner was found guilty and sentenced to death.

The guard marched him out behind the court and shot him in the back of the head.

That's one extreme, what we are doing is the other extreme.

We need a system in the middle.

Answer 4

I would still support it on moral grounds, yes. It should be noted, however, that the reason executions cost so much is that advocacy groups that coddle criminals have pushed our criminal justice system to implement our unnecessarily complex lethal injection process, when a simple bullet to the head would suffice and be equally painless. It also doesn't help that these sentences are delayed for years or even decades by the abused appeals process.

Answer 5

I support the death sentence on principle, but lawyers have found a way to extract every dollar possible from the system during the process.

If it's cheaper to keep them alive, then I support that route. The greatness of this country is short lived anyway. Might as well save as much money as possible.

Answer 6

With out a death penalty there is nothing stopping inmates from killing the guards or anyone else.

Answer 7

I do not support the idea of life without parole. The intent of prison is not punishment; it is rehabilitation. By making it punishment the government has stopped trying to solve the problem and have in essence made it worse. I think that if you are not able to be released there is no reason to keep you in a "scumbag petting zoo". At that point it is less cruel to you and those you love/love you to just receive a poison needle and let healing and closure take over.

Answer 8

they should make the judgement rational...i mean even when a person kills another ...he deserves the same fate...even though it is a mistake..it costed someone his life....so i think all murder and attempt to murders guilty should be awrded death penalty after they are proven with sufficient evidence ... equivalant exchange-- an eye for an eye..

although prison sentence is better if it focuses on rehabilitation...maximum prison should be 15 years...if the crime is serious than that ...then criminals should be awarded death penalty...

Answer 9

Cost is not the criteria for determining proper sentencing. Killers need to die because that's the right thing to do to them.

Answer 10

If they would quit taking their time putting them through death row and just blow their frickin' brains out then it wouldn't much, it would be effective, and it would be fast.

Answer 11

Well...I don't really see how that's possible.But I guess if it were true then hell yeah I would.

Answer 12

I dont believe in it.