Originally posted by ares834I've heard that as well.
On the subject of money, from my understanding, it typically costs more to sentence an execution than it does to sentence an inmate to life in prison without parole.
One of the flaws of the execution system. Taking the guy out behind the back and shooting him wouldn't be inhumane, but would be a lot cheaper.
Originally posted by Lord LucienThere are quite a few people in prison who will never be free again, how many of them have gone on killing sprees once in? Most murderers who are jailed aren't serial killers, people who need to kill, or raving lunatics--those guys need to be isolated from everyone. Most are in often for crimes of passion, profit, or gang-related. They want to live, and being surrounded by armed guards who will shoot to kill, or by other inmates who would gladly kill them back claiming defence, is a good deterrent. They also want their privileges. And you address another problem: normal lives. For the habitually criminal and dangerous offenders, I am certainly not in favour of giving them "normal" lives. But I am certainly not in favour of declaring it "ok" to end them.
ADDENDUM: I'll give you this though: someone convicted of murder and sentenced to life who escapes... kill 'em. Other than that, I want them to rot and suffer behind bars for as long possible. That's my preferential form of revenge. It's a tad ironic giving killers long lives, not as a means of rehab, or escape from death, but as a way of letting them corrode steadily, and alone, for decades (if they're not too old already). That's my idea of justice (read: revenge). [/B]
*not talking to sock, just talking in general*
The example said sock used between revenge and justice is not an example of either. It's an example of subjectivity. What is adequate vengeance (justice) to one, is not to another. To someone it may constitute denying whatever they want, to another it is executing them regardless of their desires. To someone (like me) it is making them live in prison forever more, and to someone else, it's a lifetime of medieval-style torture. There have been plenty of cases where the killer has received, say, 20 years without parole, and the family of the victim declares justice. I say it is not, because that's not my definition of justice (read: revenge, satisfaction).
And I'll state for the first time that I am not against "killing" in general in these cases. If a dangerous offender offs another one in prison---hey, sweet. What I am against is it being sanctioned and condoned by any level of government or bureaucracy. I want that shit kept illegal--no state-sponsored killings, no turning a blind eye, no vigilantism. My problem isn't with the death of the murderer/rapist, my problem is with the execution of them.
The Man killed my brother. And raped my mother.
My vision of a government is not one that kills (executes) its own citizenry. The idea of a government, an organization composed of people, chosen by the people, propped up by the people, designed solely to serve and protect the people, and responsible to the people... executing the people. That's an idea that I despise. It's taking away the very right to existence, and I don't think that should be a power granted to anyone. I can already hear the counter that "protecting" and "serving" and "being responsible" would predispose the government to kill... and I call bullshit on that.
The world would operate so much more smoothly if I ruled it.
Anyway, capital punishment unquestionably deals with vengeance since studies show conclusively that it fails as a deterrent. {It would work better as a deterrent if we used it moar often.}
As far as the penal system in general, I'll speak up for Tzeentch's people and say that blacks and Hispanics are incarcerated at a horribly disproportionate rate and that at least one study has intimated a positive correlation between incarceration rates of minorities and political conservatism of local governments.
Food for thought.
Originally posted by Lord Lucien
*not talking to sock, just talking in general*
The example said sock used between revenge and justice is not an example of either. It's an example of subjectivity. What is adequate vengeance (justice) to one, is not to another. To someone it may constitute denying whatever they want, to another it is executing them regardless of their desires. To someone (like me) it is making them live in prison forever more, and to someone else, it's a lifetime of medieval-style torture. There have been plenty of cases where the killer has received, say, 20 years without parole, and the family of the victim declares justice. I say it is not, because that's not my definition of justice (read: revenge, satisfaction).
And I'll state for the first time that I am not against "killing" in general in these cases. If a dangerous offender offs another one in prison---hey, sweet. What I am against is it being sanctioned and condoned by any level of government or bureaucracy. I want that shit kept illegal--no state-sponsored killings, no turning a blind eye, no vigilantism. My problem isn't with the death of the murderer/rapist, my problem is with the execution of them. [/B]
I'll put it this way---what the family of the victim feels about the sentence, whatever it is... I don't care. Whether they agree with it or not, doesn't matter to me. I want emotion ruled out of the sentence as much as possible, so bowing to the whims of the family, no matter what they are, and no matter how sympathetic you are to them... I don't want.
And yes, I've said that a few times now. Elected officials, appointees, judges, cops, civilians, politicians, whatever... I don't want ANYONE to have the authority to condemn another to death. Every human alive has the potential power to, but I want no one to be given the authority, the permission to execute. And in a world where crime is the number one priority above all else, we would have a head for an eye punishment--but thankfully, IMO, there are enough of us who value rights and freedoms above security.
I agree death would be a deterrent... but not to murderers. Serial killers are compelled, mass murderers don't give a shit, and the rest tend not to think about consequences when they decide to act in passion and kill. Death would be a fantastic deterrent to crimes that take precision, planning, time, and consideration. Most murders don't come with those prerequisites, though I think we'd see a huge decline in white collar crimes.
Also, while most people will try to make the best of a situation, people in jail are infinitely worse off than we who aren't. At least, they ought to be. I'm in favor of cancelling all perks and benefits cons receives--at least dangerous offender cons. Enough to keep them physically stable and healthy, but no entertainment (aside from books), no education, no wages (but plenty of work), limited (if any) interaction with others. I want prison for dangerous offenders to be hell, and I want them to seriously consider suicide when they're in.
Handmaiden is pretty awesome. But I kinda prefer Visas.
Oh, I just finished the Revan novel, and I've got mixed feelings. I hate some of the retcons, but thought the Scourge storyline was pretty interesting, apart from the ME3 style ending.
"Sup Y'all, I hear you need to kill the Emperor so Imma kill your friend so someone else can kill the Emperor in 300 years"