[[Killing) Pair arrested in fatal shooting at ATM...

[dookie joe]

In 25 percent of all cases where DNA proved an inmate had been wrongfully convicted, police coerced false confessions.

That alone is a strong argument against the death penalty.

How about giving the death penalty to any police officer who is found to have coerced a false confession? If we're going to become law-and-order hardasses, let's start with those who have sworn to uphold law and order.

[firstandten]

In 25 percent of all cases where DNA proved an inmate had been wrongfully convicted, police coerced false confessions.

That alone is a strong argument against the death penalty.

How about giving the death penalty to any police officer who is found to have coerced a false confession? If we're going to become law-and-order hardasses, let's start with those who have sworn to uphold law and order.

Great point ! Even in cases where there is "overwhelming proof" mistakes are made, justice is unequal, years later the person was found to be innocent.At least with life imprisonment mistakes can be addressed.

Don't get me started on the brotherhood of the blue !

[Danny]

Does jail comfort black folks? Surely it's far more better than living free and poor in the United States.

[psubliminal]

Since we don't have the death penalty, I agree with whoever said solitary confinement. No TV and no human contact, except doctors. And a bible is all they ever get to read for the rest of their lives.

[TKshreve]

Instead of the death penalty, I agree with whoever said solitary confinement. No TV and no human contact, except doctors. And a bible is all they ever get to read for the rest of their lives.

Can anyone say "cruel and unususal punishment"?

Why don't we waterboard them for 25 years straight, only stopping to jam a carrot down their throat to keep them alive.

I think some here are missing the point. With "Overwhelming" eveidence it should be a no brainer. Such as cases where DNA supports the conviction [[along with video, witnesses, confessions, etc.). Locking them up in solitary confinement is expensive and tortuous.

I failed to mention that I am a proponent of super-max style prisons as well. If given a choice between being in a super-max prison for life or being executed, I would venture to say most criminals would gladly pick the latter.

Then let them! I see common ground here for sure. Inconceivable!

It is a different world where an exponentially growing population is squeezing resources and budgets to the limit. So yes, it makes economical sense [[as well as serving justice) to remove offenders who are unquestionable guilty. Maybe create a death panel who can absorb the blame if they actually made a mistake. It would be unlikely [[again, gonna say overwhelming), but a death panel could be the final say.

And to all the life-ists here debating this topic, I'll ask again........ why don't you pick up the tab for a life imprisonment? Put YOUR money where your mouth is.

It's been proven time and again it actually costs more to give a perp the death penalty then life in prison. Its a myth that death row is cheaper.

I'm sure you don't mind handling the burden of proof on that statement. I mean....... we all can plainly comprehend the fact that life in jail costs money. But could you add up the costs of administering capital punishment for me? Seems a little clarification might be needed, unless of course you're used to being immediately discredited before your sentences end.

[firstandten]

Can anyone say "cruel and unususal punishment"?

Why don't we waterboard them for 25 years straight, only stopping to jam a carrot down their throat to keep them alive.

I think some here are missing the point. With "Overwhelming" eveidence it should be a no brainer. Such as cases where DNA supports the conviction [[along with video, witnesses, confessions, etc.). Locking them up in solitary confinement is expensive and tortuous.



Then let them! I see common ground here for sure. Inconceivable!

It is a different world where an exponentially growing population is squeezing resources and budgets to the limit. So yes, it makes economical sense [[as well as serving justice) to remove offenders who are unquestionable guilty. Maybe create a death panel who can absorb the blame if they actually made a mistake. It would be unlikely [[again, gonna say overwhelming), but a death panel could be the final say.

And to all the life-ists here debating this topic, I'll ask again........ why don't you pick up the tab for a life imprisonment? Put YOUR money where your mouth is.



I'm sure you don't mind handling the burden of proof on that statement. I mean....... we all can plainly comprehend the fact that life in jail costs money. But could you add up the costs of administering capital punishment for me? Seems a little clarification might be needed, unless of course you're used to being immediately discredited before your sentences end.

I understand your argument but you are making an invalid assumption and coming to a conclusion and in the process insulting the other posters who disagree with you

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29552692/

[TKshreve]

firstandten:

I appreciate you addressing my comments and request. Likewise, your link answered my curiosities on the subject quite well. After reading the article, it is hard for me to adjust my opinion for certain reasons. Allow me to explain.

Death penalty trials are more expensive for several reasons: They often require extra lawyers; there are strict experience requirements for attorneys, leading to lengthy appellate waits while capable counsel is sought for the accused; security costs are higher, as well as costs for processing evidence — DNA testing, for example, is far more expensive than simple blood analyses.

California's legendarily slow appeals system, which produces an average wait of nearly 20 years from conviction to fatal injection — the longest in the nation. Of the nine convicted killers McCartin sent to death row, only one has died. Not by execution, but from a heart attack in custody.

Red Tape - Signs of a broken system. I know that this is how our justice system is designed. It is not perfect and it still puts innocent people in jail [[assuming/hoping that number is less and less as technology get better). Appeals are available to give second hope to convicted felons, and that is good thing as well. Everyone should be awarded a second opportunity at justice........ once.

What I can't understand is how these processes take so long. The fact that someone on death row spends twenty years in jail is a proverbial oxymoron to sat the least. And to touch on the DNA area of this business........ most of the references regarding DNA entail people who committed crimes years ago and are being exonerated by this technology today. I would hope that DNA testing is used with every case involving capital punishment moving forward so we can eradicate/fix the long overdue mistakes of the courts. They misdirectly fuel the fire of the anti-capital punishment groups.

Let's be fair here and agree that once someone is sentenced to death, they are inadvertantly sentenced to 15+ years followed by death. You don't need to be a quantum physicist to realize where a loss of money comes from regarding capital punishment. This type of justice could be handed down in a much more efficient manner, but our legal system and all its intricacies have made it impossible to realize capital punishment for what is was designed to do.......... deter crime and hand out justice. How about the families who wait years upon years to see these death penalties of convicts who murdered their relatives? Where is their justice? On hold?

I understand your argument but you are making an invalid assumption and coming to a conclusion and in the process insulting the other posters who disagree with you

Could you explain exactly who I am insulting and how? Now I'm insulted.

[firstandten]

TK

Good discussion, in a perfect world if we could find someone guilty then take them out back and shoot them then capital punishment would be cheaper than life imprisonment. However our system would never allow it. Under the best of conditions it will cost less for imprisonment. Our system tries to be thorough with folks on death row and guess what ? They still make a ton of mistakes. Philosophically the eye for an eye stuff sounds good, but in a first world society such as ours that is hard to pull off. Economically the way our system is structured presently you can't make a case for your position.

I am just pointing out to you the difference between the way things are and the way you would like them to be.

I could be with you on this if the mistakes could be eliminated [[ basically impossible) and if the executions could be very public. I believe that is the only way capital punishment could be a deterent.

BTW on second thought the word insulting was a little harsh I think smarmy is a more accurate statement. Example: statements like you pay for it , put your money where your mouth is [[and thats after you threw out your false premiss)

[detrola]

In the case of these animals there is eyewitness, physical and VIDEO evidence. In rare circumstances such as this we should have no compunction in putting these animals down with no APPEALS. There are and have been several instances where people on death row have been cleared. That is why the death penalty should be reserved for cases such as this.

It is the lengthy appeals the greatly add to the cost of keeping a death row inmate cooling his heels while the system stumbles along. The guide lines for imposing death should be examined so that there is as close as possible, insurance of absolute guilt. The appeals process should reserved for for a select few circumstances. There have been cases where appeals have been filed against the wishes of the person sentenced to die. There was a guy sentenced to death who requested a firing squad and a group filled a stay and fought the method of his execution. So much for the rights of the accused.

The point of putting these animals down is not deterrence. Having the death penalty in place would not have deterred the female from pulling the trigger. The point of the death penalty without appeal in this case is simply save the tax payers from having to care for this animal for the next 40 YEARS or more. It forfeited it's right to exist the moment it a man's life.

[casscorridor]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29552692/

So death penalty is only wrong if it is more expensive than life? Wow, our society's morals are fucked up when someones life is decided based on a budget deficit. What if it was cheaper to execute?

[casscorridor]

An eye for an eye will make the whole world go blind said Gandhi. And he is right still today. Even if it was literally an eye for an eye, but it never is. When the united states gets attacked and 2,000 people die, we retaliate and kill 2 million. Why? Because to us it is 'eye for an eye', because those 2 million in the "third world" and equal to our 2,000 in the "first world," American lives are simply worth more than ones in Iraq or Afghanistan or Pakistan or the like.

The death penalty is morally and spiritually wrong. It sickens me to hear posters on this site call human beings animals. The crime of murder is unspeakable, especially when it was because of money, and EVEN when the person being murdered is the murderer. But is every solution of the tough on crime, law and order type? The solutions on this forum base around death penalty vs. life in prison, when we all know that both are horrible. And arguably life in prison is worse.

Should the government have a monopoly over the legitimate use of violence? We call someone who committed the ultimate crime of murder once an animal, but someone who committed the ultimate crime of murder thousands of times [[pick any U.S. President) a hero. We give the petty robber 10 years in jail and the robber barron 10 months. The one time murderer the death penalty and the mass murder a medal of honor.

Come one people, what has happened to our morality? It doesn't matter how many criminals we sentence to death, or lock away for life in prison. It won't change conditions on the street, it won't change the conditions that breed situations like these, where people become desperate and do things they otherwise wouldn't do. Every human has the potential to murder, but also the potential to do great things. I'm not condoning these horrible and brutal actions, only trying to give perpetrators humanity, not write them off as "animals." I'm only saying that the murderer could have been YOU if placed in the right context, the right situation.