Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should the Death Penalty be reintroduced for convicted paedophiles? Watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Opinion)
    In my examples, the person is 100% guilty and is never found to be innocent, I am talking about this scenario, in this scenario, I support the death penalty.
    It is impossible for you to create a scenario whereby you can be 100% sure of guilt.

    (Original post by The_Opinion)
    They already have appeals. Please tell me how exactly the cost of an appeal over a death sentence costs more than that of a life sentence, provide some actual figures showing the differences.
    - 'A Seattle University study examining the costs of the death penalty in Washington found that each death penalty case cost an average of $1 million more than a similar case where the death penalty was not sought ($3.07 million, versus $2.01 million).'
    - 'The State Appellate Public Defenders office spent about 44 times more time on a typical death penalty appeal than on a life sentence appeal (almost 8,000 hours per capital defendant compared to about 180 hours per non-death penalty defendant). Capital cases with trials took 20.5 months to reach a conclusion while non-capital cases with trials took 13.5 months.
    - 'he authors concluded that the cost of the death penalty in California has totaled over $4 billion since 1978:
    $1.94 billion--Pre-Trial and Trial Costs
    $925 million--Automatic Appeals and State Habeas Corpus Petitions
    $775 million--Federal Habeas Corpus Appeals
    $1 billion--Costs of Incarceration
    (As you can see it's not so expensive because of long term incarceration, that accounts for 1/4).

    - 'Even in cases that ended in a guilty plea and did not go to trial, cases where the death penalty was sought incurred about twice the costs for both defense ($130,595 v. $64,711) and courts ($16,263 v. $7,384), compared to cases where death was not sought.'

    I can keep going, there's plenty more


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elivercury)
    Okay, but this discussion was started with a petition to make this a reality in place. Sure, support it in principal under ideal circumstances, but the discussion was really about whether this would work in real life. And I think the answer is no.

    I mean if we're going to create ideal scenarios then we can also assume there are no barriers and expenses associated with convicting the (known) guilty party, so the death penalty is a fine option.

    Incidentally I still feel the death penalty is disproportionate for paedophile charges unless they are serving life.
    I'm personally undecided regarding paedophile charges, although it would depend on exactly what the person did.

    You can have a system that has the death penalty and has no risk of killing innocent people. As you could have a not guilty, guilty, and super guilty styled system, with the latter offering death penalty when the person is so guilty there is no way that they are innocent. For example if you walked on to a football pitch, surrounded by video cameras and 90,000 people and murdered someone, that could easily be a super guilty verdict.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    It is impossible for you to create a scenario whereby you can be 100% sure of guilt.



    - 'A Seattle University study examining the costs of the death penalty in Washington found that each death penalty case cost an average of $1 million more than a similar case where the death penalty was not sought ($3.07 million, versus $2.01 million).'
    - 'The State Appellate Public Defenders office spent about 44 times more time on a typical death penalty appeal than on a life sentence appeal (almost 8,000 hours per capital defendant compared to about 180 hours per non-death penalty defendant). Capital cases with trials took 20.5 months to reach a conclusion while non-capital cases with trials took 13.5 months.
    - 'he authors concluded that the cost of the death penalty in California has totaled over $4 billion since 1978:
    $1.94 billion--Pre-Trial and Trial Costs
    $925 million--Automatic Appeals and State Habeas Corpus Petitions
    $775 million--Federal Habeas Corpus Appeals
    $1 billion--Costs of Incarceration
    (As you can see it's not so expensive because of long term incarceration, that accounts for 1/4).

    - 'Even in cases that ended in a guilty plea and did not go to trial, cases where the death penalty was sought incurred about twice the costs for both defense ($130,595 v. $64,711) and courts ($16,263 v. $7,384), compared to cases where death was not sought.'

    I can keep going, there's plenty more

    Posted from TSR Mobile

    Your stats prove my point, as the trials etc cost more money, but over the space of a few years, the money saved from not having them in prison would mean that it would pay for itself, especially if the criminal was quite young, and thus likely to spend 60+ years in prison.


    Also, the US has a long, drawn out system, you don't need to base the system on that, lots of nations have more efficient systems.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UnoriginalBen)
    An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
    Imbecile.

    I hate people who don't reference quotes, GET YOUR OWN.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bulletzone)
    Imbecile.

    I hate people who don't reference quotes, GET YOUR OWN.
    I hate people who use insults for no reason. I never claimed it was mine.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UnoriginalBen)
    I hate people who use insults for no reason. I never claimed it was mine.
    Wait I dunno why that's there

    In all honesty though, at-least just state it was by Ghandi or something, because any person looking at that would take be given the impression you came up with that, due to the fact it's not in quotations or anything.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bulletzone)
    Wait I dunno why that's there

    In all honesty though, at-least just state it was by Ghandi or something, because any person looking at that would take be given the impression you came up with that, due to the fact it's not in quotations or anything.
    I'll just leave this link here:
    http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/12...for-eye-blind/

    "In conclusion, Mahatma Gandhi may have used the expression, but no conclusive evidence for this has yet been discovered. It is also possible that the ascription is inaccurate and the books of Louis Fischer may have inadvertently helped to establish the attribution. A more extravagant version of the adage with the words “blind and toothless” was used by 1914."
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Opinion)
    Your stats prove my point, as the trials etc cost more money, but over the space of a few years, the money saved from not having them in prison would mean that it would pay for itself, especially if the criminal was quite young, and thus likely to spend 60+ years in prison.


    Also, the US has a long, drawn out system, you don't need to base the system on that, lots of nations have more efficient systems.
    You must looking at different stats. What I provided demonstrates that it's the cost of trials which makes it expensive, not the cost of incarceration. Even if we take your stats of £40k a year to keep someone in jail they would have to be in jail for fifty years longer than they would have been if they were sentenced to death.

    Most countries that use the death penalty have terrible human rights records (not really a coincidence) so the US statistics are the most relevant. Even in Japan capital cases cost 100 times the amount it costs to house a prisoner for a year.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by markova21)
    I've just been reading about a British man convicted of abusing very young children abroad. I'm talking about the rape of babies, among other sick offences.He faces life in prison. Is this proper punishment? Do paedophiles deserve to be put to death? I have just started an online petition calling for the Death Penalty to be reinstated by the UK Govt. No chance of it happening,sadly. Just wondered what people on here thought?
    Yes I do think the death penalty should be bought back because it's wrong.Why would you rape a child.There was on man in America who kidnapped children,raped them,murdered them,killed them and ate them.its on YouTube,the video is called top 11 last meal requests by the richest.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Englishmop)
    Yes I do think the death penalty should be bought back because it's wrong.Why would you rape a child.There was on man in America who kidnapped children,raped them,murdered them,killed them and ate them.its on YouTube,the video is called top 11 last meal requests by the richest.
    What exactly do you achieve by executing someone?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)
    I classify them as humans and thus part of that governments 'people'. I think the USA uses it because it's become so entrenched in their judicial system that way too many people would not be happy to see it gone. It's the same as the right to own a gun, it serves no practical purpose and just causes more harm but it's so normal that people wouldn't want to lose that right.

    I don't really get what point you're trying to make. The US may spend more on their military than anything else but the fact remains they cost themselves billions of dollars by killing their own citizens.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Umm.. the death penalty is barely used and only legal in certain states. Its not the go-to- method for every crime. The USA only uses it when the crime is extremely brutal. I'm not pro gun or anti but if people feel safer owning a gun and practice gun safety how is it harming you? You do realize there is a process to go through before having a gun, right? You just buy a gun out of a gun store and walk out lol. I don't know how guns are done in the UK but here in the USa, there are background checks, mental exams, classes/tests for gun safety. Guns can be sued for malicious purposes and they can be used for defensive. If a shooter enters a school and no cop has a cop to shot the shooter, everyone is defenseless.

    Just cuz someone is a citizen of the US doesn't mean they can escape any forms of punishments or the death penalty. Citizenship doesn't really matter if you commit a crime. If you murder someone or rape someone you have the right to an attorney but you lose the right to freedom if guilty. In some states 20 years for a crime is justice and some states the death penalty is jusice.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SmileyVibe)
    Umm.. the death penalty is barely used and only legal in certain states. Its not the go-to- method for every crime. The USA only uses it when the crime is extremely brutal.
    That's not strictly true, kill a police officer and you're dead, regardless of whether it was brutal or not.

    (Original post by SmileyVibe)
    I'm not pro gun or anti but if people feel safer owning a gun and practice gun safety how is it harming you?
    It's not harming me personally but I'd argue it's harming the hundreds of people who die every year from gunfire in the US

    (Original post by SmileyVibe)
    You do realize there is a process to go through before having a gun, right? You just buy a gun out of a gun store and walk out lol. I don't know how guns are done in the UK but here in the USa, there are background checks, mental exams, classes/tests for gun safety.
    Guns are sold in supermarkets, getting hold of a gun in the USA is essentially like buying milk. Yes there are background checks but only when buying in a shop (not if you buy at a gun show) and according to CNN people are refused on the basis of their background check less than 1% of the time.

    (Original post by SmileyVibe)
    Guns can be sued for malicious purposes and they can be used for defensive. If a shooter enters a school and no cop has a cop to shot the shooter, everyone is defenseless.
    Implement gun control laws and less civilians will have guns. I'm not saying completely take guns from the police.

    (Original post by SmileyVibe)
    Just cuz someone is a citizen of the US doesn't mean they can escape any forms of punishments or the death penalty. Citizenship doesn't really matter if you commit a crime. If you murder someone or rape someone you have the right to an attorney but you lose the right to freedom if guilty. In some states 20 years for a crime is justice and some states the death penalty is jusice.
    You are aware the point of the criminal justice system isn't to punish people? It's to rehabilitate and protect the public. You lose the right to freedom to protect a greater number of people's rights, killing someone isn't necessary to protect other people's rights. Executing someone achieves absolutely nothing. It simply costs the USA government billions of dollars. A western 'liberal democracy' wastes billions of dollars to kill it's own people - I don't know how that doesn't sound insane to you.

    That last part is an enormous exaggeration. No state would give twenty years where another would give the death penalty for an identical offence




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Underscore__)

    You are aware the point of the criminal justice system isn't to punish people? It's to rehabilitate and protect the public. You lose the right to freedom to protect a greater number of people's rights, killing someone isn't necessary to protect other people's rights. Executing someone achieves absolutely nothing. It simply costs the USA government billions of dollars. A western 'liberal democracy' wastes billions of dollars to kill it's own people - I don't know how that doesn't sound insane to you.
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The whole point of the criminal justice system is to serve justice. Not everyone is satisfied that rehabilitation is a form of justice, especially the families who have had their child raped or murdered. Justice to many is seen in the form of punishment: which is why people want the lives of pedophiles taken away or even having them tortured.

    The system that is used to sentence the death penalty in the US is an extremely long and time-wasting procedure. Could it not be argued that when a criminal has been found guilty of committing the crime of rape/murder of a child, he/she is immediately sentenced to death? The maximum number of appeals that can be made to the sentence is one. Would this be considerably more cheaper and still be fair?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Khanthebrit)
    The whole point of the criminal justice system is to serve justice. Not everyone is satisfied that rehabilitation is a form of justice, especially the families who have had their child raped or murdered. Justice to many is seen in the form of punishment: which is why people want the lives of pedophiles taken away or even having them tortured.
    The point of the justice system is not to 'serve justice' - that's a very vague and ambiguous term. The overall point of the justice system is to better society through dealing with those who break the law, it's not about individuals. Society isn't best served by killing people, it achieves nothing.

    (Original post by Khanthebrit)
    The system that is used to sentence the death penalty in the US is an extremely long and time-wasting procedure. Could it not be argued that when a criminal has been found guilty of committing the crime of rape/murder of a child, he/she is immediately sentenced to death? The maximum number of appeals that can be made to the sentence is one. Would this be considerably more cheaper and still be fair?
    So you think the US wastes money by dragging things out for the sake of it? We can't know how much we'd spend on capital punishment if it was brought back from the dark ages but there's nothing to suggest it would be cheaper than life imprisonment.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.