Time To Get Rid Of The Death Penalty, Worldwide

[DBT]

Our readiness to treat the taking of an innocent life by a heinous murderer as no different from someone stealing your car, defines our community and what we think about heinous crimes.

No, not the same at all. The more serious the crime, the longer the prison time. Those that have no hope of being rehabilitated should never be released. That does not mean that we should torture or execute those who are sociopaths, killers, rapists, but are no longer a threat to society. They are the mental fuck ups of our society, but we have them in custody and they can no longer cause harm to innocent people.

That would be nice if that actually happened. As has been pointed out, the jail terms for murderers vary widely. A guy writing a hot check could in some states once upon a time, have run afoul of the "three strikes and your out" law, and be sentenced to life, while a first time murderer got out on good behavior after 7 years.

And as I pointed out, that is an issue with sentencing, which can be addressed, and should be addressed. Inadequate sentencing does not mean that potentially dangerous criminals cannot be put away for as long as necessary.

What you are basically saying is: The courts do not put risky individuals away for as long as they should, therefore these people should be killed because they are a potential risk.

 

[DBT]

Possibly, but DBT is mistaken.

Do you think it's that difficult for Prison administrators to assess risk and deal with a prisoner who are deemed to be a risk to prison guards and other inmates? Given the infrastructure of maximum security prisons, it shouldn't difficult to manage each prisoner individually according to risk. Basic management practice really.

 

[Unbeatable]

You could argue that a prison guard is doing his job voluntarily, but what about the other inmates? They are also at risk.

Ideally, of course the dangerous individuals should be isolated and there should be adequate measures to protect the guards, so in the end it's not about security, it's about cost of that security. The way prisons are run in the US seems to cut costs at the expense of security (of inmates, and to lesser extent the guards), which together with the appeal process distorts the comparison of costs between death penalty versus incarceration.

Agreed.

 

[dystopian]

You could argue that a prison guard is doing his job voluntarily, but what about the other inmates? They are also at risk.

Ideally, of course the dangerous individuals should be isolated and there should be adequate measures to protect the guards, so in the end it's not about security, it's about cost of that security. The way prisons are run in the US seems to cut costs at the expense of security (of inmates, and to lesser extent the guards), which together with the appeal process distorts the comparison of costs between death penalty versus incarceration.

This is ignoring the fact that I pointed out that according to statistics by the US bureau of Justice; inmates are actually SAFER than non-prisoners. The murder rate for people incarcerated is 3 per 100.000; versus 4.7 per 100.000 for non incarcerated people nationwide.

 

[credoconsolans]

You could argue that a prison guard is doing his job voluntarily, but what about the other inmates? They are also at risk.

Ideally, of course the dangerous individuals should be isolated and there should be adequate measures to protect the guards, so in the end it's not about security, it's about cost of that security. The way prisons are run in the US seems to cut costs at the expense of security (of inmates, and to lesser extent the guards), which together with the appeal process distorts the comparison of costs between death penalty versus incarceration.

This is ignoring the fact that I pointed out that according to statistics by the US bureau of Justice; inmates are actually SAFER than non-prisoners. The murder rate for people incarcerated is 3 per 100.000; versus 4.7 per 100.000 for non incarcerated people nationwide.

Except of course, there shouldn't be ANY crimes in a prison, right? Tight control, guards and all that? It's a completely controlled environment...or SHOULD be..compared to the outside world.

Using that as a basis for a comparison, the fact that being free is hardly more dangerous than being in prison is a disgrace to the prison system.

 

[DBT]

Well, isn't that's what should be looked at? improving prison administration, optimum sentencing, reform programs, education etc. And not just consider killing the individuals who are potentially dangerous because they are the mental train wrecks of our society.

 

[dystopian]

Except of course, there shouldn't be ANY crimes in a prison, right? Tight control, guards and all that? It's a completely controlled environment...or SHOULD be..compared to the outside world.

Using that as a basis for a comparison, the fact that being free is hardly more dangerous than being in prison is a disgrace to the prison system.

So you consider almost 2 fewer *murders* to be 'hardly less dangerous' then...

...good to know you don't give a shit about actually minimizing the risk of being murdered and that everything you've been arguing is based not on your opposition to people getting potentially murdered but nothing more than your own desire for revenge...

...which of course, most of us reading this thread already knew.


You were arguing that we should just execute murderers because keeping them imprisoned risks the lives of the guards and other inmates. But the *fact* is that those guards and inmates are SAFER in that prison than you are outside here. In other words, that means you don't get to use that particular argument anymore; not unless you advocate severely restricting personal liberties to such an extent that the risk out here drops below that faced by the people in prison. And you can take my personal liberties when you pry them from your own cold dead hands.