DP info

[Deleted]

I'm writing a research paper on my stand on the death penalty issue. I need help finding sites that tell how much it costs to keep an inmate alive on death row. I also need a simplified answer to the question "is the death penalty truly a deterrant to crime?"....

And the only sources I've found for the latter of my two questions is papers that are way too far over my head. Papers roughly 40 pages in length and studies, etc. I'm not familiar with.

Can anyone help me?

[Felix2]

thepunisher said:

I'm writing a research paper on my stand on the death penalty issue. I need help finding sites that tell how much it costs to keep an inmate alive on death row. I also need a simplified answer to the question "is the death penalty truly a deterrant to crime?"....

And the only sources I've found for the latter of my two questions is papers that are way too far over my head. Papers roughly 40 pages in length and studies, etc. I'm not familiar with.

Can anyone help me?

I am sure Joe Philips can help, he is a master in terms of simple answers. I dont intend offence but dont you think issues of life and death warrant something more in depth that a simple answer, irrespective of which stance you take? If you search the site you will find a wealth of info and links here.

[Dave]

Try some of these sites

www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/

look under issues and you should find costs. The cost does vary from state to state.

www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/deathrow.htm

thats the site for Texas death row look under death row facts and you'll find the cost per day per offender.

www.ncadp.org/fact_sheet3.html

www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/deathrow/index.html#Routine

death row facts for floridas death row

[josephdphillips]

thepunisher said:

I'm writing a research paper on my stand on the death penalty issue. I need help finding sites that tell how much it costs to keep an inmate alive on death row. I also need a simplified answer to the question "is the death penalty truly a deterrant to crime?".... And the only sources I've found for the latter of my two questions is papers that are way too far over my head. Papers roughly 40 pages in length and studies, etc. I'm not familiar with. Can anyone help me?

You need to base your argument on morals, not economics. Whether or not capital punishment costs more money to implement than lesser forms of punishment, the taxpayers could save even more money by not punishing murder in the first place. Bottom line: if you want justice, you have to pay for it either way.

Human beings instinctively react retributively to acts of murder. It is an extension of our collective instinct to survive as a social group. Once executed, that murderer, at least, can't cause anyone any harm. You can never say that about someone who is merely incarcerated.

Furthermore, an execution is final. It closes the book on the murder and on the murderer. That is also something you can never say about incarceration.

As long as a murderer is alive, someone is fighting for his/her release, and that murderer can never be trusted not to escape, and we must also assume that it intends harm to anyone charged with its care and maintenance. Execute a murderer, and those concerns die with it.

An execution is arguably brutal and icky, but it accrues a safety benefit to law-abiding citizens. Sparing the lives of murderers makes the morally squeamish feel better, at the cost of public safety.

Which is more important to you? Public safety or an ephemeral, selfish feeling of virtue?

[ltdc]

thepunisher said:

I'm writing a research paper on my stand on the death penalty issue. I need help finding sites that tell how much it costs to keep an inmate alive on death row. I also need a simplified answer to the question "is the death penalty truly a deterrant to crime?"....

And the only sources I've found for the latter of my two questions is papers that are way too far over my head. Papers roughly 40 pages in length and studies, etc. I'm not familiar with.

Can anyone help me?

actually simple answers are the hardest to argue with. the more complicated you make things there more avenues and tangents people can run off on.
I say keep it simple

Costs: beware of studies and stats here. some people will take every convict on death row for the last thirty years, add every concievable cost, right down to dental floss, add it up and divide by x number of executions in the last thirty and come up with some ridiculous amount of money for "per execution costs".

simple answer: cemetaries don't require guards and commisary

realistic answer: Joe is absolutely right, justice costs money


DP deters crime:

simple answer is no, but then neither do traffic fines, jail time, probation, parole, ankle bracelets. prison time, 5 to life or life without possibility of parole. none of them deter crime all that much, so why do we do any of them?

realistic answer: execution deters the executed convict from ever commiting crime again, that cannot be argued, end of debate

so again, for those two topics, I say keep it simple

[Deleted]

josephdphillips said:

thepunisher said:

I'm writing a research paper on my stand on the death penalty issue. I need help finding sites that tell how much it costs to keep an inmate alive on death row. I also need a simplified answer to the question "is the death penalty truly a deterrant to crime?".... And the only sources I've found for the latter of my two questions is papers that are way too far over my head. Papers roughly 40 pages in length and studies, etc. I'm not familiar with. Can anyone help me?

You need to base your argument on morals, not economics. Whether or not capital punishment costs more money to implement than lesser forms of punishment, the taxpayers could save even more money by not punishing murder in the first place. Bottom line: if you want justice, you have to pay for it either way.

Human beings instinctively react retributively to acts of murder. It is an extension of our collective instinct to survive as a social group. Once executed, that murderer, at least, can't cause anyone any harm. You can never say that about someone who is merely incarcerated.

Furthermore, an execution is final. It closes the book on the murder and on the murderer. That is also something you can never say about incarceration.

As long as a murderer is alive, someone is fighting for his/her release, and that murderer can never be trusted not to escape, and we must also assume that it intends harm to anyone charged with its care and maintenance. Execute a murderer, and those concerns die with it.

An execution is arguably brutal and icky, but it accrues a safety benefit to law-abiding citizens. Sparing the lives of murderers makes the morally squeamish feel better, at the cost of public safety.

Which is more important to you? Public safety or an ephemeral, selfish feeling of virtue?

My paper is NOT based on economics. It's based on my beliefs. My teacher is requiring we include any economic aspects to our issue. The paper is research/opinion.

In any case, there was recently a shooting in Forsyth County, Georgia, where 7 people, all under 17 years old save for one victim, was shot and killed. The remaining 8 were severely wounded and are still in critical condition. All 15 people in that house were friends of my girlfriend. That wasn't what made me pro death penalty, but it gave me another reason to be. So, why did they execute 7 and leave 8 with the horror of watching their friends die for the rest of their life? The shooters though these 15 innocent people had drugs and were refusing to sell the drugs to them.

My reasons for being pro death penalty mostly revolve around the victims and their families. Now, my view on the matter is hard to verbalize, but I assure you that it has nothing to do with money. Justice needs to be served for once in this country without someone complaining about it. If you kill someone, thus leave others with emotional pain beyond belief behind them, how is it not justified to kill the killer?

In short, Joe, what you ask of me as to what is more important to me, I have this to say to you:

The preservation of public safety leads to a feeling of virtue that is, in no way at all selfish. If the officers of the law will do nothing, who will? For lack of a better example, take Frank Castle's situation. His family was executed because Bobby Saint got killed. The bullets that killed him were not from Castle's gun. If a real-life situation like that were to occur, hypothetically, how is justice obtainable? Granted, the Punisher's story is a fictional story, but if the law is too afraid to do what is right and execute those who commit such heinous crimes as execution of the innocent, who will do it? Execution is the only way to rid this earth of murderers. I do not believe in giving murderers a second chance. Yes, they are people too, but what are you gonna tell the families of the victims? "I'm sorry you lost a loved one to this dude, so we put him in a small room until he dies. And don't worry, we'll use your tax dollars to feed him."

Yes, Joe, that is justice. How the hell could you sleep at night knowing the murderer of your loved one is still alive and, although incarcerated, still has that chance of escape to do it again? Take this into consideration: the definition for justice: The quality of being just; fairness. As Ron White says: "you kill someone....we will kill you back." Fair is fair. And execution of murderers is more than that. An eye for an eye....

And, Felix, in the word "simplicity," I mean that I am not aware of cases and people presented in these people's papers, as I am merely a senior in high school. Maybe I'll get to them in college, as I intend to take a double major--one of which is criminal justice. By simple, I mean that I need something that is basic. Something that involves nothing more than I need and just the same nothing less.

And thank you, Dave, for the links.

[Deleted]

ltdc said:

thepunisher said:

I'm writing a research paper on my stand on the death penalty issue. I need help finding sites that tell how much it costs to keep an inmate alive on death row. I also need a simplified answer to the question "is the death penalty truly a deterrant to crime?"....

And the only sources I've found for the latter of my two questions is papers that are way too far over my head. Papers roughly 40 pages in length and studies, etc. I'm not familiar with.

Can anyone help me?

actually simple answers are the hardest to argue with. the more complicated you make things there more avenues and tangents people can run off on.
I say keep it simple

Costs: beware of studies and stats here. some people will take every convict on death row for the last thirty years, add every concievable cost, right down to dental floss, add it up and divide by x number of executions in the last thirty and come up with some ridiculous amount of money for "per execution costs".

simple answer: cemetaries don't require guards and commisary

realistic answer: Joe is absolutely right, justice costs money


DP deters crime:

simple answer is no, but then neither do traffic fines, jail time, probation, parole, ankle bracelets. prison time, 5 to life or life without possibility of parole. none of them deter crime all that much, so why do we do any of them?

realistic answer: execution deters the executed convict from ever commiting crime again, that cannot be argued, end of debate

so again, for those two topics, I say keep it simple

Thanks.

And I know justice in either end of the spectrum costs money. Everything costs something at some point in time. I just believe that i's better for the general welfare to oust the murderers. That way, that minute chance they'll escape is reduced to absolute zero, in a sense. Granted, I know of nobody who has escaped from death row....

[josephdphillips]

thepunisher said:

My paper is NOT based on economics. It's based on my beliefs. My teacher is requiring we include any economic aspects to our issue. The paper is research/opinion. In any case, there was recently a shooting in Forsyth County, Georgia, where 7 people, all under 17 years old save for one victim, was shot and killed. The remaining 8 were severely wounded and are still in critical condition. All 15 people in that house were friends of my girlfriend. That wasn't what made me pro death penalty, but it gave me another reason to be. So, why did they execute 7 and leave 8 with the horror of watching their friends die for the rest of their life? The shooters though these 15 innocent people had drugs and were refusing to sell the drugs to them. My reasons for being pro death penalty mostly revolve around the victims and their families. Now, my view on the matter is hard to verbalize, but I assure you that it has nothing to do with money. Justice needs to be served for once in this country without someone complaining about it. If you kill someone, thus leave others with emotional pain beyond belief behind them, how is it not justified to kill the killer? In short, Joe, what you ask of me as to what is more important to me, I have this to say to you: The preservation of public safety leads to a feeling of virtue that is, in no way at all selfish. If the officers of the law will do nothing, who will? For lack of a better example, take Frank Castle's situation. His family was executed because Bobby Saint got killed. The bullets that killed him were not from Castle's gun. If a real-life situation like that were to occur, hypothetically, how is justice obtainable? Granted, the Punisher's story is a fictional story, but if the law is too afraid to do what is right and execute those who commit such heinous crimes as execution of the innocent, who will do it? Execution is the only way to rid this earth of murderers. I do not believe in giving murderers a second chance. Yes, they are people too, but what are you gonna tell the families of the victims? "I'm sorry you lost a loved one to this dude, so we put him in a small room until he dies. And don't worry, we'll use your tax dollars to feed him." Yes, Joe, that is justice. How the hell could you sleep at night knowing the murderer of your loved one is still alive and, although incarcerated, still has that chance of escape to do it again? Take this into consideration: the definition for justice: The quality of being just; fairness. As Ron White says: "you kill someone....we will kill you back." Fair is fair. And execution of murderers is more than that. An eye for an eye.... And, Felix, in the word "simplicity," I mean that I am not aware of cases and people presented in these people's papers, as I am merely a senior in high school. Maybe I'll get to them in college, as I intend to take a double major--one of which is criminal justice. By simple, I mean that I need something that is basic. Something that involves nothing more than I need and just the same nothing less. And thank you, Dave, for the links.

I nice post, Punisher. Well-stated.

Your teacher must be an anti, then, if s/he's forcing you into submitting economic statements. S/he's not interested in the moral aspects of crime and punishment.

You and I are on the same page regarding the rectitude of the death penalty. You'll do well on your debate.

[josephdphillips]

ltdc said:

actually simple answers are the hardest to argue with. the more complicated you make things there more avenues and tangents people can run off on.

Quite true, LTDC.

ltdc said:

Costs: beware of studies and stats here. some people will take every convict on death row for the last thirty years, add every concievable cost, right down to dental floss, add it up and divide by x number of executions in the last thirty and come up with some ridiculous amount of money for "per execution costs". simple answer: cemetaries don't require guards and commisary realistic answer: Joe is absolutely right, justice costs money DP deters crime: simple answer is no, but then neither do traffic fines, jail time, probation, parole, ankle bracelets. prison time, 5 to life or life without possibility of parole. none of them deter crime all that much, so why do we do any of them? realistic answer: execution deters the executed convict from ever commiting crime again, that cannot be argued, end of debate so again, for those two topics, I say keep it simple

Ditto. That some people can't be deterred from murder is all the more reason to execute them.

[Deleted]

I'm not sure she's an anti, but I have to agree that it sure seems like she is. My main problem is that people focus on the one being executed and calling that inhumane. I just want to ask antis this: what's humane about three drug-abusing maniacs executing 7 innocent, drug-free people because they need their high? Seriously....7 people shot execution-style. Humane? I think not. And I hate to bring a fictional character such as the Punisher into my point, but when you have as little "real world" experience as I at age 17, what else do you have to go on?

My teacher spend ten minutes asking me if I could find the economic side to this issue. Anyone with half a brain can make a good pro DP paper without that crap. It's not the money that makes it wrong or right. It's the crimes of these people. Call me crazy, but isn't LWOP more like a half-assed slap on the wrist for murderers? I mean, prisons aren't exactly the Ritz-Carlton, but they aren't exactly torture, either. It's basically like house arrest....what does it do? Nothing. If you want to punish someone without executing them, I've got two words for you: "solitary confinement". Unfortuneately, that is "crel and unusual punishment". But isn't "punishment" the whole point? Bah, I guess that's another discussion for another time....

[Donnie]

thepunisher said:

My paper is NOT based on economics. It's based on my beliefs. My teacher is requiring we include any economic aspects to our issue.{/quote] I am sorry for your loss.

The cost that is never included in the economic comparisons is that the injuries and deaths caused by unexecuted murderers are not included as a cost. Imprisoned murderers often harm prison employees and other prisoners who are not in jail for murder. Abpit 1000 people have been killed in the US by murderers who were released after an earlier murder conviction. Sometime the imprisioned murderers kill while in prison.

Another major failure of the economic studies is the claim that legal costs would go down if the DP were eliminated. That is false. Most of the people who now drive the costs up would continue to to the same thing for murderers who would be sentenced to LWOP or lesser terms. The major difference would be that all of the murderers would be alive longer, so probably the costs would go up even higher. At the same time they would be keeping legal costs high by working to abolish LWOP. That is happening in MIchigan right now and it has already happened in other countries.

Another thing that isn't included in the cost comparisons is the money saved when a murderer pleads guilty or reveals the location of victims' bodies in exchange for taking the DP off the table.

In the US today, the execution of a murderer is never simply "an eye for an eye". That is because the murderer has usually killed multiple victims or treated the victim is a brutal way before and during the murder. The case that you are, unfortunately, falmiliar with is, sadly, only one example. The Ogden, Utah Hi-Fi Shop murders provide another example. The Mary Alday family killings, the murders of Heather Muller, Wendy Offredo, Amy Sue Seitz, Anita Cobby and MIchelle Thompason are other examples. There are just too many to name them all.

[Donnie]

thepunisher said:

s the death penalty truly a deterrant to crime?

Yes, go here and compare the reduction in the murder rate in Texas from 1976 (death penalty again allowed by the US Supreme Court) to 2000; with the decline in the murder rate in Michigan (no DP since 1846) in the same period. The raw crime numbers are displayed first at the website below, followed by the crime rates. I have listed the changes in murder rates below the link.
www.disastercenter.com/crime/

In 1976, the murder rate in Texas was 12.2, by 2000 it had been pushed down to 5.9.

In 1976, the murder rate in Michigan was 11.1 (lower than Texas), by 2000 it had been declined to 6.7 (higher than Texas). The percent reduction in Texas was quicker and larger than the reduction in Michigan.

Below are two more examples that show that it wasn't a fluke. However, comparison between Texas and Michigan is the most relavent because Michigan is the state that has been without the DP the longest and Texas executes the most murderers.

South Carolina also restored the DP. In 1976, the murder rate in South Carolina was 11.6, by 2000 it had been pushed down to 5.8.

Idaho also restored the DP. In 1976, the murder rate in Idaho was 5.3, by 2000 it had been pushed down to 1.2.

Minnesota is another state without the DP. In 1976, the murder rate in Minnesota was 2.3, by 2000 it had risen to 3.1.

There is also a book called The Death Penalty in America. It has been around since the sixties and some consider it the Bible of the anti-DP crusaders. There is a section where deterrence is discussed in individual cases.

[Donnie]

thepunisher said:

Everything costs something at some point in time.

It made my day to see a young person post the sentence above. Thank you.

[Deleted]

donnie said:

thepunisher said:

Everything costs something at some point in time.

It made my day to see a young person post the sentence above. Thank you.

I'm just curious, but is it that rare for someone my age to realize that?

[Donnie]

thepunisher said:

donnie said:

It made my day to see a young person post the sentence above. Thank you.

I'm just curious, but is it that rare for someone my age to realize that?

My experience is that it is rare for people of any age to realize that. The main belief that people have is that any money from the federal government is free money.

[LEGAL EAGLE]

:DThe Capital Case Data Project of the American Judicature Society announced their count of 125 new death sentences in 2005, one less than in 2004. In addition, AJS counted 14 death sentences imposed through new sentence proceedings after appellate reversals. Those sentenced to death included 63 white defendants, 57 black defendants, and 15 Hispanics. The largest number of death sentences were imposed in California (19) and Florida (16). Texas had 14 death sentences, down considerably from 24 in 2004 . The Bureau of Justice Statistics will release their data on death sentences in 2005 later this year. (BJS reported 125 new death sentences in 2004.) (U.S. Newswire, Press Release, American Judicature Society, March 27, 2006). For AJS summaries of all the cases, click here.

CORRECTION: :-[DPIC had earlier reported an unofficial count of 106 death sentences in 2005 based on its own research. There was an error in the calculation for the first quarter of the year and it now appears that the correct count is that described above.

[tom]

I have the same kind of assignment as threadstarter...is there an exact or average amount that it costs per year to keep someone on death row? or better yet a link with the comparsion of someone not on death row to someone who is? any help would be appreciated. thanks.