O'Malley says the death penalty is expensive and ineffective.

[rudy_d]

Is the collateral damage worth it?

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/inno...reed-death-row

These are just those who were exonerated. Undoubtedly many innocent people weren't so lucky.

This is the only argument I see against the death penalty that's valid, but it's pretty powerful.

[Rumorhasit]

Is the collateral damage worth it?

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/inno...reed-death-row

These are just those who were exonerated. Undoubtedly many innocent people weren't so lucky.

This is the only argument I see against the death penalty that's valid, but it's pretty powerful.

I researched this a couple years ago and could find no evidence that we've executed any innocent people. Can you point me in the direction of some examples of the many innocent people that weren't so lucky?

[Dryfire]

expensive because the slip and fall crowd over at the MD BAR ***'n has lenghtened the appeals process to the point of someone actually dying on death row from old age while exhausting their appeals.

It is expensive to keep someone alive in prison for 20-60 years.

It is cheap to get the conviction, and take them out back and put 2 in the skull.

depending on caliber of the handgun, it would be about $2.00-$5.00.....

Firing squad of three shooting a .308 ballistic tip through the heart is less than 5 bucks. I'll donate a box.

[Omaha Beach]

I researched this a couple years ago and could find no evidence that we've executed any innocent people. Can you point me in the direction of some examples of the many innocent people that weren't so lucky?

That is the same question i have posed to the death penalty opponents ad nauseum and none of them can give an example. They all talk about Kirk Bloodsworth. His case shows the system works in PREVENTING innocent people from being executed.

Vernon Evans was convicted in 1984 of a cold blooded double contract killing. No doubt at all to his guilt. 29 years later after endless State and Federal appeals the taxpayers, are still paying to keep that POS alive. That is what is wrong with the system.

[PaleAleMan]

Bloodsworth was exonerated only because he was able to have DNA tests run years aftrer his conviction. Those tests weren't available at the time of his trial. Had he been charged 5 or 10 years earlier, he'd pr bably be dead today.

How many murders are committed in Maryland each year? How many are prosecuted as DP cases? How many were prosecuted as DP cases 5 or 10 years ago, beforee the recent changes in the law? One can build a case that prosecuting someone as a DP case amount to cruel and unusual punishment, since it's used so rarely.

And don't give all the blame to judges. They don't make the decision to prosecute as a DP case. The state's attorneys. Never a big fan of the Baltimore County state's attorneys, but at least they attempt to prosecute all eligible DP cases as DP cases.

[demopublican]

The thugs fear the other thugs, not the Cops or the eletric chair.

[rudy_d]

That is the same question i have posed to the death penalty opponents ad nauseum and none of them can give an example. They all talk about Kirk Bloodsworth. His case shows the system works in PREVENTING innocent people from being executed.

Sorry, but it's a bit naive to assume that no innocent people have been put to death considering how many people who were later exonerated have ended up on death row. Once someone is dead, there's considerably less urgency to prove their innocence.

[demopublican]

And how many have died after known violent criminals were released to kill again?
Are those people any less dead?

[rudy_d]

And how many have died after known violent criminals were released to kill again?
Are those people any less dead?

Many people have died after known criminals were released to kill again. That's unacceptable but a completely different argument.

[Omaha Beach]

Sorry, but it's a bit naive to assume that no innocent people have been put to death considering how many people who were later exonerated have ended up on death row. Once someone is dead, there's considerably less urgency to prove their innocence.

Assume all you want. Give some FACTS as to a person executed who was later found to be innocent.

[demopublican]

Many people have died after known criminals were released to kill again. That's unacceptable but a completely different argument.

Not really. The same elected tools that are going after capital punishment could be spending their time finding ways to keep violent criminals in prison.

[rudy_d]

Assume all you want. Give some FACTS as to a person executed who was later found to be innocent.

OK:

http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/crime/8-peo...-innocent.html

But you're missing the point. The American legal system is certainly better than most every country, but it's not infallible. There's considerable subjectivity involved. Just look at how many obviously guilty people get off. It works the other way as well.

[ybnormal]

Ok Mr. Tax Man, I'd like to see a cost benefit analysis comparing the cost to execute an inmate vs spending over $28,000.00/year to house, feed and clothe, as well as provide taxpayer-funded health and dental care, to him/her for the rest of his/her miserable life.

Oh, and Mr. Tax Man, while you're at it, you may want to consider putting a limit on the number of appeals that can be filed by death row inmates to say, ONE. That should reduce the overall cost of the death penalty significantly.

But, in the end, many of us with an IQ higher than our shoe size can see through your agenda Mr. Tax Man - it's all about votes and getting elected.

[musicmd]

The thugs fear the other thugs, not the Cops or the eletric chair.

How do you know ?

[The Eternal White Belt]

Ok Mr. Tax Man, I'd like to see a cost benefit analysis comparing the cost to execute an inmate vs spending over $28,000.00/year to house, feed and clothe, as well as provide taxpayer-funded health and dental care, to him/her for the rest of his/her miserable life.

Oh, and Mr. Tax Man, while you're at it, you may want to consider putting a limit on the number of appeals that can be filed by death row inmates to say, ONE. That should reduce the overall cost of the death penalty significantly.

But, in the end, many of us with an IQ higher than our shoe size can see through your agenda Mr. Tax Man - it's all about votes and getting elected.

For a death row inmate, there should be no limit to the number of appeals, especially if there is new evidence.

[bmore_ken]

For a death row inmate, there should be no limit to the number of appeals, especially if there is new evidence.

New evidence should be the only reason for an appeal

[jessup270]

The death penalty is not a deterrent for a number of reasons:

a. Most criminals are too stupid to understand the principle of deterrent.

b. Most criminals think they will never be caught and the truth is they are convicted only for a very small percentage of the crimes they commit.

c, Putting convicted murderers in a general prison population is wrong.

They need to be sent to a prison that exclusively houses people convicted of murder. The harshest prison conditions allowed by law.

[karlydee]

Why should the state be allowed to murder someone?

The death penalty does not lower murder rates, nor provide any recompense to the victim's family.

I say a better sentence for murder is life involuntary servitude with the profits going to the victim's family/estate. If the P-o-S offs himself/herself oh well.

[Omaha Beach]

The death penalty is not a deterrent for a number of reasons:

a. Most criminals are too stupid to understand the principle of deterrent.

b. Most criminals think they will never be caught and the truth is they are convicted only for a very small percentage of the crimes they commit.

c, Putting convicted murderers in a general prison population is wrong.

They need to be sent to a prison that exclusively houses people convicted of murder. The harshest prison conditions allowed by law.

Dont we already have a place like that with Super Max?

[The Eternal White Belt]

New evidence should be the only reason for an appeal

No way. If there are issues with the constitutionality or the manner in which he was convicted, he should be granted an appeal just like any other member of society. If he/she was wrongly convicted, it shouldn't matter what crime they were wrongly convicted of...