Cost of Life without Parole vs Death Penalty

[Rocket]

I'm writing a paper in support of Edward Koch's "Death and Justice." I'm interested in learning how much of taxpayers' money is spent on criminals who get life without parole, versus the cost of executing offenders. Any and all accurate information would be great.

[HANGMAN1981]

I can tell you one thing about without parole;it isn't cheap. The cost varies between states and depends on a number of factors; prison size, number of inmates, ect. The fad these days is that it is more expensive to execute an inmate, which is actually false. The figure of $35,000 per year for incarcerating an inmate is also flashed around by the abolitionists. It is considerably higher than this and runs around 50-$60,000 per inmate, and has a 2% increae each year.

As for "high costs" of execution, it is accounted for a long period on death row. This long time is caused by numerous appeals to have the case reviewed by various courts. Despite what you may hear, most of these appeals a delaying tactics to hold off the execution as long as possible. It costs more to hold an inmate on death row than in a standard prison cell, so the defense take advantage of this, and even after the inmate is executed, they point to the high cost of keeping them alive on death row for a decade, which actually was nothing more than manipulation of the justice system.

As for the cost of execution itself, here is a breakdown of the methods:
Lethal Injection-$86
Firing Squad-$15
Electrocution-$300
Hanging-$30
Gas Chambers-$1000 +

As you can see, which the exception of the gas chambers, which are only used in 5 states, the execution process itself is very cheap. It is getting there that is the problem. Hope this helps and feel free to e-mail me with any more questions.

[ginger]

cr1976 said:

feel free to e-mail me with any more questions.

He's such a FONT of misinformation.

[Donnie]

cr1976 said:

As for "high costs" of execution, it is accounted for a long period on death row. This long time is caused by numerous appeals to have the case reviewed by various courts.

Once the death penalty is replaced by LWOP, the groups that are now working to save murderer's lives will switch to getting them back on the street sooner. They will take two approaches. First, they will appeal individual cases in the same manner that they now appeal death penalty cases. Second they will work to abolish LWOP, using almost all of the arguments that they now use against the DP. This is not hypothetical, it started a couple of years ago. The Michigan ACLU, a federal appeals judge in the south and some international "jurists" group remain at work on this. Thus the cost argument is less than worthless.

[brumsongs]

donnie said:

cr1976 said:

As for "high costs" of execution, it is accounted for a long period on death row. This long time is caused by numerous appeals to have the case reviewed by various courts.

Once the death penalty is replaced by LWOP, the groups that are now working to save murderer's lives will switch to getting them back on the street sooner. They will take two approaches. First, they will appeal individual cases in the same manner that they now appeal death penalty cases. Second they will work to abolish LWOP, using almost all of the arguments that they now use against the DP. This is not hypothetical, it started a couple of years ago. The Michigan ACLU, a federal appeals judge in the south and some international "jurists" group remain at work on this. Thus the cost argument is less than worthless.

I bet it wouldn't be worthless if the figures added up in your favour.

[Californian]

brumsongs said:

donnie said:

Once the death penalty is replaced by LWOP, the groups that are now working to save murderer's lives will switch to getting them back on the street sooner. They will take two approaches. First, they will appeal individual cases in the same manner that they now appeal death penalty cases. Second they will work to abolish LWOP, using almost all of the arguments that they now use against the DP. This is not hypothetical, it started a couple of years ago. The Michigan ACLU, a federal appeals judge in the south and some international "jurists" group remain at work on this. Thus the cost argument is less than worthless.

I bet it wouldn't be worthless if the figures added up in your favour.

Ben: what you often don't see addressed in the LWOP costs are the expenses of end-of-life medical care.

Question: If a 70-year-old LWOPer needs a bone marrow transplant to extend his life, and that procedure costs $500,000, what would you decide if the decision whether to spend that money or not was up to you?

[Donnie]

brumsongs said:

I bet it wouldn't be worthless if the figures added up in your favour.

Any accurate accounting would be in my favor. But I have no interest in the use of the argument.

[brumsongs]

norcal said:

brumsongs said:

I bet it wouldn't be worthless if the figures added up in your favour.

Ben: what you often don't see addressed in the LWOP costs are the expenses of end-of-life medical care.

Question: If a 70-year-old LWOPer needs a bone marrow transplant to extend his life, and that procedure costs $500,000, what would you decide if the decision whether to spend that money or not was up to you?

I wouldn't spend the money. I think treatment for LWOP'ers should be limited to general care and palliative treatment.

[Felix2]

brumsongs said:

norcal said:

Ben: what you often don't see addressed in the LWOP costs are the expenses of end-of-life medical care.

Question: If a 70-year-old LWOPer needs a bone marrow transplant to extend his life, and that procedure costs $500,000, what would you decide if the decision whether to spend that money or not was up to you?

I wouldn't spend the money. I think treatment for LWOP'ers should be limited to general care and palliative treatment.

Samer here, I'd put death down to natural causes. End of.

[josephdphillips]

donnie said:

brumsongs said:

I bet it wouldn't be worthless if the figures added up in your favour.

Any accurate accounting would be in my favor. But I have no interest in the use of the argument.

Neither do I. The economics of punishments are irrelevant.

[Californian]

felix2 said:

brumsongs said:

I wouldn't spend the money. I think treatment for LWOP'ers should be limited to general care and palliative treatment.

Same here, I'd put death down to natural causes. End of.

As would I. Sadly, though, several recent court decisions say we'd have to do so.

[HANGMAN1981]

donnie said:

cr1976 said:

As for "high costs" of execution, it is accounted for a long period on death row. This long time is caused by numerous appeals to have the case reviewed by various courts.

Once the death penalty is replaced by LWOP, the groups that are now working to save murderer's lives will switch to getting them back on the street sooner. They will take two approaches. First, they will appeal individual cases in the same manner that they now appeal death penalty cases. Second they will work to abolish LWOP, using almost all of the arguments that they now use against the DP. This is not hypothetical, it started a couple of years ago. The Michigan ACLU, a federal appeals judge in the south and some international "jurists" group remain at work on this. Thus the cost argument is less than worthless.

The cost argument doesn't matter to me either. I see no point in putting effort into preserving evil.

[HANGMAN1981]

ginger said:

cr1976 said:

feel free to e-mail me with any more questions.

He's such a FONT of misinformation.

How so, Ginger?

[Donnie]

brumsongs said:

I wouldn't spend the money. I think treatment for LWOP'ers should be limited to general care and palliative treatment.

Another purely imaginative outcome. While their victims are in the grave, the government spends millions for transplants and other medical treatment for murderers.

[Deleted]

norcal said:

felix2 said:

Same here, I'd put death down to natural causes. End of.

As would I. Sadly, though, several recent court decisions say we'd have to do so.

Why?

[brumsongs]

donnie said:

brumsongs said:

I wouldn't spend the money. I think treatment for LWOP'ers should be limited to general care and palliative treatment.

Another purely imaginative outcome. While their victims are in the grave, the government spends millions for transplants and other medical treatment for murderers.

I was asked to imagine what would happen if I were in charge, thus my response was rather determined to be imaginative, genius.

[Lady]

In my state ,the cost of incarcerating an inmate on death row ,depending on which facility they are at, is as follows . This is just the cost to lodge them ,not the cost for their appeals , medical ,or any other factors . At OSP where 144 DR inmates are housed it is 163.41 per day ,while at Manci ,where 31 inmates is housed it is 61.07 a day . I found that interesting, because you would think it would be more expensive at Manci since that is where they keep the inmates who ride the crazy train .

www.drc.state.oh.us/Public/osp.htm

www.drc.state.oh.us/Public/manci.htm

[Rev. Agave]

What antis (and some pros) purposefully fail to realize is that any and all costs associated with the DP can be offset by televisation and corporate sponsorship.