Poll: punishment for murder

[Gaderael]

Spoiler: the birth of australia

Yes, all acts of homicide should be dealt with using extreme force. I don't want to pay for murderers to eat better than bums and get free cable tv.

EDIT: there is one way to appease both crowds. The people who don't want to pay and the people who don't want to kill. And it is this...

Everyone convicted of a serious enough crime should be sent to a large island in the south pacific and dropped off on the beach. All of them on the same island. Fend for themselves, create their own convict laws and do whatever the hell they want. Set a couple coastguard boats to patrol the waters in case they decide to make a raft. That is it. Problem solved.

The last time we tried that we got Australia.

Indeed, however australia was way to big and was desirable to live there. I'm thinking something smaller like easter island. Though not that island specifically. Something around that size. Or maybe a little bigger, after all, there are a lot of cons out there.

It's cheaper to put them in jail for life then to execute them.

That statement literally does not compute. I read it three times and i can't feel anything towards it. I hope to god you are joking because the urges to laugh, be appalled, and be astounded all compete and ultimate leaving me with a serious case of WTF.

Well, here's a couple of examples:

Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice
You can download the report from here. [http://www.ccfaj.org/]

?The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California?s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.?

And...

Maryland
New Study Reveals Maryland Pays $37 Million for One Execution

A new study released by the Urban Institute on March 6, 2008 forecasted that the lifetime expenses of capitally-prosecuted cases since 1978 will cost Maryland taxpayers $186 million. That translates into at least $37.2 million for each of the state?s five executions since the state reenacted the death penalty. The study estimates that the average cost to Maryland taxpayers for reaching a single death sentence is $3 million - $1.9 million more than the cost of a non-death penalty case. (This includes investigation, trial, appeals, and incarceration costs.) The study examined 162 capital cases that were prosecuted between 1978 and 1999 and found that those cases will cost $186 million more than what those cases would have cost had the death penalty not existed as a punishment. At every phase of a case, according to the study, capital murder cases cost more than non-capital murder cases.

Of the 162 capital cases, there werer 106 cases in which a death sentence was sought but not handed down in Maryland. Those cases cost the state an additional $71 million compared to the cost non-death penalty cases. Those costs were incurred simply to seek the death penalty where the ultimate outcome was a life or long-term prison sentence.

Download this report here (direct pdf file) [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/CostsDPMaryland.pdf]

 

[grimsprice]

Yes, all acts of homicide should be dealt with using extreme force. I don't want to pay for murderers to eat better than bums and get free cable tv.

EDIT: there is one way to appease both crowds. The people who don't want to pay and the people who don't want to kill. And it is this...

Everyone convicted of a serious enough crime should be sent to a large island in the south pacific and dropped off on the beach. All of them on the same island. Fend for themselves, create their own convict laws and do whatever the hell they want. Set a couple coastguard boats to patrol the waters in case they decide to make a raft. That is it. Problem solved.

not to sound pessemistic but man is made for freedome sooner or later there gonna escape(ist) its better to keep them in secure facilitys where they are guarded a cople of costgards wont be able to hold them. that and WHAT THE hell are you thinking if ur gonna punish them why set them on a paradise iland.

If the island is far enough out to see they won't be able to escape without a damn big boat. I'm not talking alcatraz island... more... easter island. Some coastguard ships would be able to keep them there. Do you think Tom Hanks' character was happy in the movie cast away? being on a paradise island is cool for about a month, then its hell. And besides this island is full of rapists and murderers, not exactly a vacation getaway.

 

[quiet_samurai]

I think that maybe the dude already had mental issues. She went on the radio and announced to the world that she was cheating on him. I think she should have been the humiliated one, not him. If my GF went on the radio and announced what a slut she was I would probably have laughed and ran with it, making her image seem worse then it actually is.

Your scenario is quite vague though, there are too many variables left out so making a decision on his punishent isn't easy... that's why I picked other.

 

[Jedoro]

Take 'em out back and put one in his head. It's cheap, quick, and quiet if you have a silencer.

 

[grimsprice]

Those cases cost the state an additional $71 million compared to the cost non-death penalty cases. Those costs were incurred simply to seek the death penalty where the ultimate outcome was a life or long-term prison sentence.

Download this report here (direct pdf file) [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/CostsDPMaryland.pdf]

Yeah, our system is wacked. There would need to be drastic changes. Because it should never be more expensive to kill someone than to keep them alive for life. Thats common sense, or to be more precise, uncommon sense.

 

[Pimppeter2]

Depends on the case.

 

[The_ModeRazor]

Forgive them. If they have any pride, they'll lose all that's rest of their sanity. So you can send the fruit cakes to an asylum.
If they lack pride, then just kill them panilessly. That works too.

Hmmm... come to think of it, the first one is just too ruthless. Just kill them.

 

[Stevanchez]

Ok heres the the scene:A 28 year old man with no previous record has murded a 21 year old girl by strangling her after she had cheated on him then publicly telled every one on radio just to spite him.
She had not told him about her cheating before hand,she was murded that night.Before this crime he was a pefectly stable man with a good steady job.

Is this you? Seriously, be truthful. It sound like you, man.
This is a very specific scenario. You got every event before and up to the murder.
And those are some pretty specific ages. Maybe you should talk to a lawyer.

 

[Gebi10000]

I'd say the right thing to do would be 10 years of jail, with counceling. everybody deserves a second chance.If we would kill him we would be just as bad, if not worse, as in this case the muder was not in cold blood.Executeing people is Medievel to say the least. and anyone who thinks its right is a murderer by thought

 

[LockHeart]

I put the life option, but tbh it sounds more like a charge of murder reduced to manslaughter on the grounds of provocation (provided he acted within a short time of the radio broadcast or being informed of it). In the case of manslaughter, I'd say 14-20 years before he's eligible for parole. However, in the case of premeditated murder - life at hard labour.

I used to support the death penalty but now I find that I can't - not on moral grounds, but only that a person can ever be proven guilty 'beyond reasonable doubt'. If there was a guaranteed foolproof way of ascertaining guilt then I would be the first to tie a noose, but sadly that's not a currently available option.

 

[Syndef]

Hm. Sounds like a crime of passion--possessed by the moment, if you will. When a person is humiliated and degraded like that, this kind of thing happens.

I'm not a crazy fellow, but given the present circumstances, I found no reason to feel sorry for the woman in this case. Really.

Needless to say, the man in this case must be dealt with. For me, I guess prison time coupled with group counseling sessions would work. After all, he was a productive member of society before. I am of course thinking within the American legal system. If I were allowed to deliver a punishment of any sort, I'd say a few weeks in total isolation (including sensory deprivation) to let him cool off. Then a short prison term coupled with therapy sessions to sort things out, then he will be presented to the family of the victim, and they get to determine how much money he has to pay for compensation.

 

[Disaster Button]

I find it kinda scaary how some people say the punishment should be councilling.

I mean, what could be safer than putting a murderer in the room with a shrink who will try and make the murderer feel the same way he did when he killed somoene. Nope, totally safe..

 

[G1eet]

Everyone convicted of a serious enough crime should be sent to a large island in the south pacific and dropped off on the beach. All of them on the same island. Fend for themselves, create their own convict laws and do whatever the hell they want. Set a couple coastguard boats to patrol the waters in case they decide to make a raft. That is it. Problem solved.

Fuck that, send them somewhere colder. Maybe the Falklands? How 'bout the Faroes?

(Although the general idea is sound, and I agree wholeheartedly)

 

[Internet Kraken]

An eye for an eye is not a call for vengance it is a call for justice.

Unless the victim is kidnapped jail serves no deterrant, (I know guys who have done crime to get back inside, aint the UK grand)take an equal measure, a true equal measure. Would you rob a bank if your family would be indentured for the next 50 years ?

Accidental manslaughter's punishment is a death sentance but painless would encourage people to drive more carefully & refrain from violence.

But its irrelevant the middleclass hippies will never allow it.

'Hang em all let Dog sort them out'

Nobody commits an act of murder thinking that they will be caught. I doubt the punishment for such a crime prevents people from doing it.

As for this particular incident, it's hard to decide what should be done with so few details. However, I believe that no person deserves to lose their life, so the death penalty is not an option.

Have you been a victim of crime ?

Not a major crime. What's your point?

 

[captainwillies]

in the eyes of the law

in the original hypothetical question you are given his fate. so techniqually its your justice not anyone elses. of course if your if your ideal justice mimics that of the courts then thats fine with me.

A one time thing like that, there's no need for checking his tendencies. There are none. It was a one time act (crime of passion.) If he had a history of abusing women or violent crimes, THEN you give him counseling, from prison.

but thats just it he didn't have any past criminal offences, he was just a normal guy who was sent over the edge, would he ever be put in that situation again? and if he did find himself in that situation again its better if he has psychiatric treatment now so he can deal with the situation better if it ever happens again. imo prison is just to much for a normal guy, jail or community service would be better.

The point of prison is twofold: the first is to separate from society people who are dangerous.

hes not dangerous if he gets help now.

The second is to punish acts that society finds unacceptable.

more than one case of murder, terrorism, having sex with the body of a dead girl in a bath tub full of maggots and theres shit everywhere(goddamn it 4chan). those are socially unacceptable to me. Its not like he has some kind of "evil gene". this guys reason was rage, a rage that he couldn't cope with. he needs help not ass rape(imo).

This is a case of the latter, he deserves to be punished. If that woman had been you sister or friend or cousin you would understand that murderers (even the ones that don't mean to do it) deserve some kind of punishment so at the very least they are more careful in the future.

no. you do not decide who I am or what i think, if he killed a loved one and was genuinely remorseful he needs help. if he showed no signs of remorse and only seems satisfied with what hes done then he needs ass rape(prison). as for the man in the original hypothetical example not much detail is given on hes personality after the incident but assuming that he was remorseful and its not fake then if his fate was in my hands i would be inclined to see him to councilling.

 

[MiserableOldGit]

I say that the death sentence is most probably the best way to make sure nothing happens.
An eye for an eye and all that stuff.
But maybe we should just torture him, and bring him to the edge of reason, and then recruit him as a goverment funded super assassin and they send him to do their evil and make sure 'nobody knows what happend'

Okay, hardman, just one thing. If we're going for eye for an eye, what happens when someone is tried and executed, then it is subsequently brought to light that they were innocent? An innocent person has been subjected to a pre-meditated killing. Who do we kill in this instance? How about we have a list of everyone who is pro-capital punishment, as they are the ones responsible for the state taking this action in the first place, and we kill one of them. If it then turns out that the original suspect was guilty after all, we could kill another one. I'll put you down at the top of the list, shall I?

Of course if someone close to you gets you'll probably thirst for blood- thats why we have justice meted out by objective third parties. The point of justice is to ensure the survival of civilisation when individuals deviate from its established values, not to make people feel better.

 

[sirdanrhodes]

You know, if anyone murders when I am in charge, they will be placed in a pure white room, locked in isolation for as long as they live, they will be given the bare minimum to survive, have no changes of clothes and will have to sleep / eat / go on the floor...

Why did I choose other, that sounds like torture...

 

[asinann]

no. you do not decide who I am or what i think, if he killed a loved one and was genuinely remorseful he needs help. if he showed no signs of remorse and only seems satisfied with what hes done then he needs ass rape(prison). as for the man in the original hypothetical example not much detail is given on hes personality after the incident but assuming that he was remorseful and its not fake then if his fate was in my hands i would be inclined to see him to councilling.

This is why nice people need to stay the hell out of the criminal justice system. Call me when a loved one is murdered and we'll talk about how "If he's remorseful he just needs counseling." Until a loved one is murdered (and my sister was) your thoughts and opinions in the matter are invalid. I'm not calling for the chair or even life without parole, he does need to be punished for his crime though, and since part of prison involves getting the needed mental health treatment, I'm sure the few sessions he needs to get rid of the rage vs. the years of it he might need to get over the feelings of guilt and shame are better spent making license plates and watching for Bubba. You kill someone on purpose, you don't deserve to be safe from prison rape while you get your government funded treatment and shelter.