No. If inmates kill in prison, they are put in segregation where they are unable to harm anyone anymore. The way I see it, spending your life in solitary is a worse fate than death.

@RoboGraham and if you think that that's sufficient punishment for killing somebody then I'm sorry but I don't want to be related to you

@RoboGraham it's called punishment and deterrence. You never heard of anyone escaping from segregation huh?
so they get general population for their first murder and segregation for their second murder. What's for the third murder when they escape?

@lerlo The death penalty is not an effective deterrent. Punishment is counterproductive to rehabilitation. I would wager that there have been fewer segregation escapes than innocent people executed.

@RoboGraham look up the deterrent. That inmate won't kill ever again, quite the deterrent

@RoboGraham I am not about vengeance I am about removing a murderer who will kill again if given a chance. Why risk another persons life when the answer is to terminate that persons life. We can do a battery of tests and see if they have any organs that can save a persons life. Since they did something so bad they get the death penelty why not let them save someones life.

@lerlo It takes years to execute a person. That inmate will have opportunity to kill again. Except no, because he will be placed in solitary confinement where he will not be a danger to others.

@RoboGraham sorry your proclamations don't make it so. You've decided that no one can escape from solitary confinement. You've decided that the death penalty is not a deterrent to murder. How many people have told you that they have not killed someone because they don't want to get the death penalty?

@lerlo No, I have acknowledged that it is possible to get out of solitary. Will you acknowledged that innocent people are sometimes executed?

@RoboGraham thanks for switching my words around, let's go back to what I said. The person"s in prison for a murder they already got convicted of.
You say they may have been innocent. They commit another murder in prison, you say they're innocent of this one too and they shouldn't be killed?

@lerlo Just because it happened in prison doesn't definitely mean he is 100% guilty. Do you think no one has ever been framed in prison?

@RoboGraham well now you've backed off deterrence and punishment and are back to just we shouldn't kill anybody no matter what they do. Tell that to the victim's family when someone's a mass murderer...tell that to the guard's family when the guard is killed by an inmate in prison...tell that to the family of the person the escapee kills. Poople might be innocent so we shouldn't convict anyone and we shouldn't punish anyone on the off-chance that we were wrong.

@lerlo Conducting justice with the motivating factor of the satisfaction of the Vitim's family is not justice, it's vengeance. Justice is blind. We should convict guilty people and we should separate them from society and put them in solitary permanently if necessary but killing them after having proven guilt in an imperfect system is immoral because it will mean that some innocents will die unfairly.

@RoboGraham apparently you prefer giving murderers the chance to do it again and again, I don't. Innocent people die on the highways all day, are you stopping people from driving? You mean driving isn't a perfect system? Next time you disagree with somebody's comment maybe you should just make your own comment.

@lerlo I did make my own comment, you can see my take on it there. If you can't deal with being disagreed with, perhaps you ought not post comments on these contentious topics. People dying in vehicle crashes is totally different, it's not a human being intentionally killed by other humans as execution is.

Yes I think killing is wrong and shouldn't be done except in self defense and war. Most of the world agrees with me. This barbaric practice has been abolished in the majority of countries including all of the rest of the 1st world.

@RoboGraham I'll keep it up as long as you will. If you just weren't a bleeding heart and could answer my deterrence question...which you can't, you might have a point. We have light houses designed to keep boats from colliding, can you prove they don't work? Should we tear down lighthouses? Got anything more than we just shouldn't kill people?

@lerlo Okay let's talk deterrence. Type the following words into your google browser- is capital punishment an effective deterrent- see what comes up and then let's have a discussion.

@lerlo
I do have something other than the morality augment actually. It is more expensive to execute than to give a life sentence.

@RoboGraham just because you proclaim it and somebody else proclaims it doesn't make it right. There is no way for anyone to know how many people don't get killed because of the death penalty. Sorry to burst your bubble.

@RoboGraham well if it didn't take 19 years and all the appeals to kill somebody it would be a whole lot easier but show me the figures because food clothing and medical care for life is certainly more expensive.

@lerlo It's not just me and somebody else proclaiming it, it's me and the experts who have done the research.

If there is no way to know how many people don't get killed because of the death penalty, you have no way to prove that it is an effective deterrent. If you have no way to prove that it is an effective deterrent, how can you justify using it when you know full well that using it will result in the deaths of innocent people? You are the one making the claim that it is an effective deterrent. You see that the evidence and studies don't back up your claim so now your argument is that there is no way to know if it works or not. Your line of reasoning is weak and you have lost this argument.

It takes 19 years and all the appeals because the justice system is flawed and executions are final so they want to make damn sure that they are about to kill the right person. Even with this long expensive process, they still get it wrong occasionally and an innocent person dies. Would you rather executions be expedited and even more prone to ending the lives of innocent people?

As far as the expenses, again, google it. The results it pulls up will overwhelmingly support the fact that capital punishment is more expensive. Death penalty cases cost millions. Life in prison without parole cases are very expensive too but death penalty cases are so much more expensive that, even including the costs of imprisoning the person for life, death penalty cases are still much more costly. And the prisoner has to be held for 19 years or however long it takes to get through appeals and that adds even more cost on top of the massive bill for the capital punishment case and all the appeals.

@RoboGraham yep, that's it, just declare yourself the winner--works every time--for you and trump. You never answered me about the lighthouses...should we take them down because we don't know if they work? just keeping saying you won over and over and then try and back up that with some facts--you know it's not out there--and I don't buy b.s. claims of fact without seeing it--like some people in this convsersation

@lerlo If you want to bring Trump into this, he supports capital punishment.

I declared myself the winner because I logically checkmated you. You said "There is no way for anyone to know how many people don't get killed because of the death penalty." Okay if there is no way to know then you cannot say it is an effective deterrent, which is your entire argument. You have no ground to stand on. But actually there is a way to know. You can look at what the people who have actually studied the deterrent hypothesis have written and see that they have concluded overwhelmingly that it does not function as a deterrent. Either way, you are wrong.

I have described to you the costs of capital punishment compared to life without parole. I'm not going to layout all the facts for you. You are a grown up, I'm sure you are capable of looking into it yourself. It only takes a simple google search and a bit of motivation to read rather than just declaring that it's not out there.

As for the light houses, that's an entirely different scenario. People understand that light means land so they keep away. I ignored this question because it is a terrible example, a false equivalence. The light house doesn't deter them from hitting land, it is an aid, not a deterrent, they don't want to hit the land, they are trying to not hit land regardless of if there is a light house or not. If they do hit rocks, it's by accident. In contrast, killers want to kill, that's why they do it. The light house help people avoid doing something they don't want to do. Capital punishment is supposed to prevent people from doing something that they do want to do but it doesn't actually work.

Here is a question for you. If Capital punishment is an effective deterrent, why do the states that have the death penalty have higher murder rates? If you don't believe that's true, google it. I'll also offer you the following article from the new york times- [nytimes.com]

@RoboGraham now all makes sense, you can't read. As I said the purpose of a lighthouse is to prevent boating accidents. Do you know how many accidents lighthouses have prevented? No you don't. Do we take light houses down because we don't think they work, no we don't. You also refuse to acknowledge the deterrence of that person not being able to commit murder again. I can keep making the argument and you can keep ignoring it. If you seriously believe that keeping someone in prison from the time they are 19 years old for life is less expensive than killing them at 19 you're out of your mind. Since you're going to ignore everything I just said anyway why not just admit that you're just against killing.

@lerlo I have stated that I am against killing, except in self defense and and war. Perhaps you can't read? most people are against killing in a civilized world. You are the outlier here.

You really should drop the lighthouse line of reasoning, it's doing you more harm than good. Again, you are the one making the claim that execution is an effective deterrent. If your argument is that, it can't be disproved that it is a deterrent, therefore we need to keep using it, you are thinking very irrationally. I could argue the same for prayer. You can't disprove that praying to not be murdered everyday prevents/deters murderers from killing. Therefore we must continue praying. Does that make sense to you? This logic is very faulty.

If you execute someone, you prevent them from causing harm to others, sure. But an equally effective way to do that is to keep the person locked in segregation for life.

How can a 19 year old be executed? It takes 10-20 years or more. So the kid must have done the crime at 9 at the oldest. We don't execute people for crimes committed when they are small children. Even the hardliners would disagree with you there. Just proclaiming that keeping people in prison for life is more expensive than execution doesn't make it so. Do some research, look at the numbers. It's all readily accessible to you, just a quick google search will show you how wrong you are but you refuse do your due diligence. You'd rather continue making the same ignorant claims blissfully unaware that you are utterly incorrect. Did you bother to have a look at the article I put in the last comment? Have you done anything other than make assumptions? Will you provide any evidence to back up your bogus claim that execution is an effective deterrent or that it is cheaper than life in prison?

I'm not the one ignoring what the other person says here. I have confronted all of your flawed arguments and showed you how they are incorrect. You on the other hand ignored my question concerning states that legalized the death penalty having higher murder rates than those that have outlawed it. How do yo explain that?

Also, we can see that light houses work. We can look at it statistically. Before the light house, x number of ships were sunk on the rocks. After the light house was built, y number of ship were sunk. If x is significantly larger than y, you know the light house is working.

@RoboGraham do you think the penalty for stealing $1 should be the same as stealing $1,000,000?

@lerlo No, I don't think that.

So it appears that you have given up. I'll take your lack of an attempt to refute the arguments I laid out or to answer the question I asked as admission of defeat.

See you around.

@RoboGraham Figured you'd give up...because if you don't think that the penalties should be the same do you think a confessed murderer of 1 person should be given the same punishment as someone who murdered 50 people in a mass shooting in front of 20 witnesses?

Exactly!

also the death penalty is barbaric and has been eliminated in most 1st world countries

World War II ended 71 years ago. Since World War II, the USA has killed more than 20 million people, that averages out to roughly 282,000 per year, 23,474 per month, or 782 per day. The USA has been at war more than 90% of the time since 1776! The USA:
.
interfered in Iraq - there is a war there now.
interfered in Syria - there is a war there now.
interfered in Libya - there is a war there now.
interfered in Yemen - there is a war there now.
interfered in Ukraine - there is a war there now.
interfered in Somalia - there is a war there now.
interfered in Afghanistan - there is a war there now.
.
No pattern of behavior here at all, right?
.
To all of those who support either Democrats or Republicans . . . . both are war parties . . .

It is no different than you picking up a weapon and shooting children, bombing them, starting wars, coups against democracies . . . . you are devoid of conscience, and you vote for the very criminal parties who sponsor all of the illegal, unjust, and atrocious activities. You are legitimizing them with your vote, you are authorizing the use of white phosphorus, depleted uranium, droning, bombing of hospitals, Israeli racism and murder of Palestinians, invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, etc., you caused the bombing and subsequent flow of refugees out of these countries, you are supporting the ascendency of Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism, even ISIS, Lindsey Graham, the whole fucking Military Industrial Complex and AIPAC . . . . you support it all . . . . you are no better than the war criminals who do the everything mentioned above . .
.
You have given your approval on all of this with your vote, that is an irrefutable fact.
.
This is why capital punishment is a mosquito in a room full of war criminals.
[globalresearch.ca]

niether does life in prison

@vjohnson51 , we don't. We do know that many people were executed and later found innocent. Two stories immediately come to mind. In both the actual guilty party was caught for almost identical crimes later and gave the police the details of the actual crime an innocent person had been put to death for.
Google: Darlie Routier if you need an example of an innocent woman sitting on death row right now.

It's more expensive to execute than it is to keep a person in prison for life.

@RoboGraham how so? Legal maneuvers?

@twill Yeah, court costs. The average price tag per execution is 1 and a quarter million. The average life in prison cost is around 3/4 million.

@vjohnson51 Yeah it's counterintuitive so people assume that it's the other way around. I've gotten into a couple of arguments on this thread that you created about that very issue and these guys just refuse to believe it.

You wrote a paper about this?

@vjohnson51 If I thought that, the death penalty would be too good for him.
Solitary confinement (no books, tv, visitors, correspondence, NOTHING...just him and four blank walls, a bunk, a stiff wooden chair) for life.
That'd be worse than death.

there are several steps before they are put to death. Making the innocent one much more rare then you might think

@benhmiller You stated "making the innocent one much more rare than you might think." Yes, it might be more rare--but as long as there is a death penalty--at some point-- an innocent person will be put to death; and, I am not willing to sacrifice even one innocent person. The death penalty is simply not necessary in order for justice to be served. And, too often, it is about vengeance--not justice.

Religious people, who love the death penalty, do so because they like to imagine that the person goes straight to hell to begin their eternal suffering. But, when they are dead--they are dead. Let them pay in the here an now.

If you were the type to, say, rape and murder children, maybe you'd WANT what you did unto them, done unto you, to get yourself put out of your miserable, despicable life.

Most of those against the death penalty are those who believe in religions

@benhmiller I would need to see statistics on that assessment. Fundamentalists in most religious groups are, from what I've seen, big supporters of the death penalty. Many catholics hold views against it, but not all (it is a part of their Vatican doctrine).

@Beowulfsfriend I don't have stats either but tend to agree with you. The fundies are much more authoritarian in mindset, in general.

You are 100% correct. I have seen it first hand the profitability of the prison systems in this country.

So, what's that you say? You're against economic issues? And you go on to say you're against capital punishment (capitalism) specifically? Lol.

Actually I agree with you. I don't think capital punishment makes sense money wise or ethically. And on top of everything else, it's irrevocable -- when a mistake is ever made, there are only the least paths for redress. What's done is done.

The added cost to the death penalty is the endless appeals for them 20 years or more. All lawyers billable hours. The lawyers don't want to loose their cash cow. That is where the extra cost comes from.

@RichCC

I'm not against economic issues. Just not that intetested in economic topics, unless of coarse its associated with archaeology and prehistoric peoples.

@t1nick I know. I was joking about the word similarity.

@RichCC

Got it.

@NoPlanetB No, they are given the same prison sentence as any other type of criminal. What the other prisoners do to them for vengeance is not determined by the justice system and therefore not passed onto them by society. For prisoners at risk of being victimized, segregation is, theoretically, an option.

How can we ever be totally certain the accused is guilty? Execution is final, if new evidence comes to light, well too late.

@RoboGraham multiple whiteness video real confession DNA ect it does happen

@bobwjr Witnesses can lie, videos can be edited, confessions can be coerced, and DNA can be planted by crooked cops.

@RoboGraham whiteness do lie or mistaken altered video can be detected forensics c can detect planted DNA and some readily admit guilt worked medical in corrections and met both real guilty and framed

@bobwjr I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying.

@RoboGraham current justice system is corrupted by the need to win at any cost . Worked medical in corrections got to know some on death row some admit their guilt and some in population were innocent. The guilty ones who were not crimes of passion were sociopaths who would repeat killing with no conscience, those who were crimes of passion would not repeat it. The sociopaths are a danger to all including staff and other prisoners.

Actually, it prevents escapes, wrongful (or wrong-headed!) Parole, release because of overcrowding, and etc......

@AnneWimsey sorry Anne, death row inmates are in max sec prisons, impossible to escape, not one successful escape since the Bonnie and Clyde era, also death row inmates nor lifers can be paroled, nice try but no cigar.

@Mofo1953 charlie manson came up for parole over 20 times.....and he isn't the only one. AS IF age could improve any of them.......

@AnneWimsey Manson was never paroled, to come for parole is not being paroled. Besides he was benefiting from a California law. I never said that some killers are going to improve as you put it, most are irredeemable and just sick bastards. What I am saying is that had Mason been executed, what would you say it had an effect on? Would you say his execution would have prevented future killings in California? Anywhere in America? Would it had deterred a single felony let alone a murder to be committed? The answer is no. It wouldn't even have prevented Polanski to have sex with that minorvand escape the US. So tell me what tangible difference in results happened in America between him dying executed or dying in prison? His punishment was being in death row the rest of his life with all those denied parole hearings, have you heard about the sword of Damocles? Now that is true punishment in my book.

@Mofo1953 true He was not paroled, mostly because of his notoriety. However, others have, and have killed, raped, etc etc Again. Do you think the ruined/ended lives if those (totally unnecessary!) victims are unimportant? I think they are of Paramount importance because if the sick bastards were dead, none of that suffering needed to take place. A society is supposed to protect the majority of its' members the majority of the time. Period.

@AnneWimsey not one has been paroled in death row or lifer, you can protect society locking these people up. Period.

@Mofo1953 do yourself a favor, Google "paroled murderers who killed again"...PAGES of stuff! Including one who was released because "so old"(77) and stabbed a Mom to death in front of her twin daughters. You are not rooted in reality on this.

@AnneWimsey most were failure of the system as I read, most were not death row, most were released because they were not lifers, many were manslaughter or 2nd degree suceptible for parole, I know shit happens, the justice systme is not perfect, but why stoop to their level just because there were 16 reincidents in a span of 50 years, I can give you many more examples than 16 of people who were inocent but were either killed or released after extraordinary efforts to appeal their death sentence, many more than just 16. Sorry Anne, I will never be convinced that in a flawed system the only solution is to kill people when they kill people, unfortunately that is what we have right now despite my beliefs and you should be very happy that the state is being as murderous as them.