http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/02/maryland-death-penalty-repeal_n_3202249.html Well now who do they answer to..........?

Stupid. He says its pointless it doesn't stop crime, ok and neither does banning guns? Lol people are so dumb in this world! I understand it doesn't stop crime but hey it's like "go ahead and kill people, we will then lock you up for life but don't worry we will feed you, give you a place to stay (yes crappy), and whatever else your allowed to have". I know if I ever lost a love one from someone I wouldn't want my taxes keeping them alive, but that's just me.

Me too..................................

In Maryland we don't kill you, we send you to prison for life where you can bang and impregnate our guards and run a drug king pin..

He says its pointless it doesn't stop crime, ok and neither does banning guns? Lol people are so dumb in this world! I understand it doesn't stop crime but ....

 

I would argue the point that it doesn't stop crime. The recidivism rate following execution is zero.

 

Few things about crime are that certain.

Eh... the liberal in me is coming out.

 

The problem is that if you send an innocent man to jail for life, you can always release him. If you sentence a man to die, you can't resurrect him if he was innocent. I'd rather 1000 hardened criminals go free than punish once innocent man.

 

But as a soldier, treason, and items like Article 99 need the death penalty to enforce good order and discipline.. So I could make an exception for military justice.

Eh... the liberal in me is coming out.

 

The problem is that if you send an innocent man to jail for life, you can always release him. If you sentence a man to die, you can't resurrect him if he was innocent. I'd rather 1000 hardened criminals go free than punish once innocent man.

 

But as a soldier, treason, and items like Article 99 need the death penalty to enforce good order and discipline.. So I could make an exception for military justice.

 

I'm more or less on the same page as you here. I also see execution as the easy way out for many of these hardened criminals. Let them serve life... but old school life cracking rocks and eating stale bread and water for the rest of their lives. None of this modern prison with cable TV and a gym.

I think the death penalty in absolute cases is appropriate. But they need to figure out a way to make the process cheaper. If I remember correctly, it currently costs more to execute a prisoner than to keep them in jail for life.

 

As for using it as a bargaining chip, I think plea bargaining is already abused. That a career criminal can get little to no jail time for providing testimony or intel while an otherwise law abiding citizen gets the full weight of the sentence for the same crime is ridiculous.

In my opinion they should get rid of it ONLY because of possible mistakes. I feel no sympathy for people who murder in cold blood, however innocent people can and have been killed.

I would support abolishing death penalty if they brought back work gangs. There is no valid reason prisoners shouldn't be working to offset the cost of their incarceration.

I'm for execution......Public in fact.....but only in extreme case where there is no doubt.......much like the case in Boston......a telephone pole and a rope.

Innocent people die because of gov't mistakes and malfeasance all the time.

 

Much more frequently than innocent people are executed in the US. There were 43 executions in the US in 2012. Out of 3,000 plus prisoners on death row. Roughly 1 1/2 percent. A convicted murderer is more likely to die of natural causes on death row than to be executed. He's probably safer there than he was in his mother's womb.

...

 

The problem is that if you send an innocent man to jail for life, you can always release him. If you sentence a man to die, you can't resurrect him if he was innocent. I'd rather 1000 hardened criminals go free than punish once innocent man...

 

 

This.

but old school life cracking rocks and eating stale bread and water for the rest of their lives. None of this modern prison with cable TV and a gym.

 

Now that's what I'm talking about. Today's prisons are basically spas with community college thrown in.

 

But I like Sheriff Joe's approach better. Tent cities, pink underwear and you get cable TV but only the disney channel and the weather channel.

 

 

Now that's what I'm talking about. Today's prisons are basically spas with community college thrown in.

 

But I like Sheriff Joe's approach better. Tent cities, pink underwear and you get cable TV but only the disney channel and the weather channel.

 

You have to work in one to know what you are saying. Sheriff Joes approach while funny and some say is harsh probably gets more officers hurt each year than another model. Give people nothing to do and the DEVIL will come out.

I'm for execution......Public in fact.....but only in extreme case where there is no doubt.......much like the case in Boston......a telephone pole and a rope.

 

100% agreed.

 

what about this: we've all seen escape from new york right???

You have to work in one to know what you are saying. Sheriff Joes approach while funny and some say is harsh probably gets more officers hurt each year than another model. Give people nothing to do and the DEVIL will come out.

 

They don't have nothing to do. He has chain gangs.

Innocent people die because of gov't mistakes and malfeasance all the time.

 

Much more frequently than innocent people are executed in the US. There were 43 executions in the US in 2012. Out of 3,000 plus prisoners on death row. Roughly 1 1/2 percent. A convicted murderer is more likely to die of natural causes on death row than to be executed. He's probably safer there than he was in his mother's womb.

I am against people dying due to any govt mistake--whether it was intentional or not. I support the death penalty at least in theory; my only issue is its finality--as other s have said, you can't take it back or recompense the victim of such a mistake. Just because other mistakes happen all the time does not mean we should overlook this one. I am all for quick execution for DP crimes, but I think there should be a higher threshold to invoke the DP. Especially with what has been documented in some police interrogation (e.g. the Central Park Five, and those U.S. Navy sailors who went to jail only to be exhonerated for the murder of one of their neighbors); thankfully such cases are rare, but they do happen.

 

It is not an easy answer--I would err on the side of caution (not killing innocent people); but the costs can become greater than the cost of lifetime incarceration. And as for incarceration--life should be LIFE, no parole! I think it is great if a criminal reforms and tries to redeem themselves in prison, but that should have NO BEARING on release--if you take someone's life by murder, you should have to pay--if not the DP then with the remainder of your life. And prison should be really bad--provide the basic required to sustain life (food, water, shelter, limited exercise) and reading material that would be limited to one religious book of yoru choice (e.g. the bible) and a complete basic law library (if someone is truly innocent they should have the resources to prove it).

and reading material that would be limited to one religious book of yoru choice (e.g. the bible)

 

First amendment. Won't fly.

Did they ban the death penalty because they banned all forms of deadly weapon and forgot to leave a loophole for the executioner?

First amendment. Won't fly.

Convicted criminals lose all kinds of constitutional rights. Liberty is severely curtailed during incarceration. 2A is annulled during incarceration and after for felons, I believe voting is curtailed. Certain types of crimes affect access to telecomm and computer equipment (e.g. hackers). So there is no legal issue with the abridgement of 1A for convicted felons.

Even if you agree with the death penalty conceptually as a punishment, do you really trust the politics of the prosecutors office with that kind of power? 

 

I don't. Also, in general I prefer the notion of an armed citizenry who makes committing the criminal act more dangerous. Making it dangerous 10-30 years after the fact isn't going to be nearly as effective as the increased potential of not succeeding in the act, possibly fatally, in the first place. When people get all excited about speeding up the execution process, I double down on the fear of politicians replacing justice with spinning the news cycle to their advantage, or DAs, AGs, etc. working on their stats for promotions or a political run.