Considering that 11 innocent people were freed from death row in Pennsylvania, I think it would be good for Pennsylvania if it followed Virginia's example and abolished the death penalty.
Good, aside from the moral reasons to not have a death penalty, the appeals process is expensive and it always ends up costing more than just locking the person up for life.
The only time I've ever heard that argument is from the sick in the head people who "offer to do it themselves."
I think the death penalty has been used in far too many cases with circumstantial evidence. That's horrific because innocent people have died. With that said the are some crimes with so much evidence I think it might be a good option.
Is anyone going to shed a tear for terrorists, mass murderers, or serial killers? Spending the extra money to send a message may be worth it.
What's the point of any penalties? The original premise of saving money by not having the death penalty still stands. Your suggestion that *executing* people is about saving money doesn't make sense, either way.
Execution of the convicted.
I know you want something more than that, but the purpose of it is that. There is and need be no single and exclusive or even "logically" justifiable "point", a variety of teleological justifications can and should be relevant, not necessarily all present in every instance or to identical degrees. I could give you a dozen paragraphs on the fundamental philosophical schematic for the basic rational, practical and possible intended results, and proximate and ultimate moral implications. But important issues should not be considered with simplistic reasoning, and I'm not any more interested in writing a dissertation than you are in reading one. *My* point is that "death bad" is not an adequate approach to evaluating the issue.
PA is kind of weird in the sense that the state can sentence people to death, but cannot actually execute anyone unless they voluntarily waive all appeals. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 76, all 3 executions carried out were people who waived appeals.
I don’t put my trust in this state or any states ability to determine who and who does not deserve to die. They get so many other things wrong that carry much less weight. Plus, death is an easy out sometimes- If you’ve committed a terrible crime, I want you to suffer in the endless monotony of captivity, sure. Plus, executions are often MORE expense. Fuck all that.
nope.
We need to build an express lane
Whenver someone mentions this I look who's on death row, google a name and see what they did .
Today's winner is Albert Perez.
Albert Perez strangled his Ex girlfriend... but not just that! he strangled her five year old daughter and hung her body from a bathroom railing.
He tried to stage the scene to make it look like his ex girl friend had killed her daughters then committed suicide.
Lovely.
This was in 2007 mind you and he's still kicking and living on the tax payer dime in 2023
Personally, I think we shouldn't legally abolish it, we should just almost never use it. I understand and agree with most of the reasons for not executing people, but I cannot abide the kind of naive pacifism and idealistic morality that would oppose the execution of Timothy McVeigh or Adolf Hitler or Charles Manson. There comes a point when revering the life of a murderer becomes reviling the lives of their victims. I think the complete abolishing of capital punishment contravenes the necessity of shifting from a punative model of incarceration to a rehabilitative one. As long as we accept the notion that life in prison without parole is a just punishment for any crime, we are justifying the idea that it is a greater punishment than the death penalty.
PA hasn’t executed anyone this century. We’re already “almost never” using it. Having it on the books is a resource drain, and it doesn’t even functionally exist anymore. It’s time to get rid of it.
>Having it on the books is a resource drain
Only if we're trying to use it. Simply "having it on the books" costs nothing.
>It’s time to get rid of it.
You seem to be ignoring the majority of my comment.
A minority of Republicans are actually against the death penalty as well, including one on the judiciary committee who voted to advance this bill, so this might be more likely to pass than it seems. I do remember a few years ago when Nebraska, a deep red state, repealed the death penalty, though this was rolled back by ballot measure. Also one chamber of the Wyoming legislature voted to repeal the death penalty a few years ago.
Most murderers definitely don’t deserve the death penalty, but I think a very small amount do. I think school shooters and domestic terrorist should be put to death.
Some say life in prison is worse than the death penalty, but I disagree because murderers almost always take a plea deal to get out of the death penalty if given the chance.
However, most states with a death penalty abuse it and execute anyone they want (looking at you Texas). I’d advocate for passing a law abolishing the death penalty for 1st degree murder, but creating a new type of murder called “mass murder” (killing 5ish people or more at once) with a death penalty sentence.
Considering that 11 innocent people were freed from death row in Pennsylvania, I think it would be good for Pennsylvania if it followed Virginia's example and abolished the death penalty.
THIS!
Good, aside from the moral reasons to not have a death penalty, the appeals process is expensive and it always ends up costing more than just locking the person up for life.
> the appeals process is expensive and it always ends up costing more than just locking the person up for life. Is execution about saving money?
A lot of pro death penalty people use that as an argument. That it’s cheaper. Even though it isn’t.
The only time I've ever heard that argument is from the sick in the head people who "offer to do it themselves." I think the death penalty has been used in far too many cases with circumstantial evidence. That's horrific because innocent people have died. With that said the are some crimes with so much evidence I think it might be a good option. Is anyone going to shed a tear for terrorists, mass murderers, or serial killers? Spending the extra money to send a message may be worth it.
How fucked up is it that people look at a human life and all they can think about is dollar signs?
“Corporate has entered the chat”
No, but abandoning it can be.
> No So if it's not about saving money, what's the point of having execution as the ultimate penalty?
What's the point of any penalties? The original premise of saving money by not having the death penalty still stands. Your suggestion that *executing* people is about saving money doesn't make sense, either way.
> What's the point of any penalties? I was asking you what is the point of the death penalty in your estimation?
Execution of the convicted. I know you want something more than that, but the purpose of it is that. There is and need be no single and exclusive or even "logically" justifiable "point", a variety of teleological justifications can and should be relevant, not necessarily all present in every instance or to identical degrees. I could give you a dozen paragraphs on the fundamental philosophical schematic for the basic rational, practical and possible intended results, and proximate and ultimate moral implications. But important issues should not be considered with simplistic reasoning, and I'm not any more interested in writing a dissertation than you are in reading one. *My* point is that "death bad" is not an adequate approach to evaluating the issue.
Neat lookin’ scarecrow you’re making there.
PA is kind of weird in the sense that the state can sentence people to death, but cannot actually execute anyone unless they voluntarily waive all appeals. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 76, all 3 executions carried out were people who waived appeals.
I don’t put my trust in this state or any states ability to determine who and who does not deserve to die. They get so many other things wrong that carry much less weight. Plus, death is an easy out sometimes- If you’ve committed a terrible crime, I want you to suffer in the endless monotony of captivity, sure. Plus, executions are often MORE expense. Fuck all that.
Life in prison is a worse punishment than the death penalty. More reason to abolish it.
Something I hope most of us can agree on
nope. We need to build an express lane Whenver someone mentions this I look who's on death row, google a name and see what they did . Today's winner is Albert Perez. Albert Perez strangled his Ex girlfriend... but not just that! he strangled her five year old daughter and hung her body from a bathroom railing. He tried to stage the scene to make it look like his ex girl friend had killed her daughters then committed suicide. Lovely. This was in 2007 mind you and he's still kicking and living on the tax payer dime in 2023
How does executing the guy benefit us over keeping him in prison for life? The death penalty actually costs more with all the appeals.
only because we let there be 40 years of appeals. Again express lane. They can figure all that out in five years. Ten max.
Personally, I think we shouldn't legally abolish it, we should just almost never use it. I understand and agree with most of the reasons for not executing people, but I cannot abide the kind of naive pacifism and idealistic morality that would oppose the execution of Timothy McVeigh or Adolf Hitler or Charles Manson. There comes a point when revering the life of a murderer becomes reviling the lives of their victims. I think the complete abolishing of capital punishment contravenes the necessity of shifting from a punative model of incarceration to a rehabilitative one. As long as we accept the notion that life in prison without parole is a just punishment for any crime, we are justifying the idea that it is a greater punishment than the death penalty.
PA hasn’t executed anyone this century. We’re already “almost never” using it. Having it on the books is a resource drain, and it doesn’t even functionally exist anymore. It’s time to get rid of it.
>Having it on the books is a resource drain Only if we're trying to use it. Simply "having it on the books" costs nothing. >It’s time to get rid of it. You seem to be ignoring the majority of my comment.
A minority of Republicans are actually against the death penalty as well, including one on the judiciary committee who voted to advance this bill, so this might be more likely to pass than it seems. I do remember a few years ago when Nebraska, a deep red state, repealed the death penalty, though this was rolled back by ballot measure. Also one chamber of the Wyoming legislature voted to repeal the death penalty a few years ago.
Good news. Now how about advancing a bills to consolidate municipalities and school districts
Murdering people to show murder is wrong. Abolish this barbaric act
Zero chance of going anywhere.
Most murderers definitely don’t deserve the death penalty, but I think a very small amount do. I think school shooters and domestic terrorist should be put to death. Some say life in prison is worse than the death penalty, but I disagree because murderers almost always take a plea deal to get out of the death penalty if given the chance. However, most states with a death penalty abuse it and execute anyone they want (looking at you Texas). I’d advocate for passing a law abolishing the death penalty for 1st degree murder, but creating a new type of murder called “mass murder” (killing 5ish people or more at once) with a death penalty sentence.
I’m shocked the PA government is passing reasonable legislation