the love thread

[Hell Awaits Us All]

I've got larger concerns than just getting the lowest statistical rate of murder.

then you are a fucking idiot

the purpose of the goddamn justice system is to have the lowest crime rate and thus, the safest environment possible for it's inhabitants

 

[ThisIsACoolName]

Oh shit. Seriously, you are fucking clueless.

Hey, everyone? If you secretley want to punch that slow cashier in the face, it's because you are stupid and you need to get yourself to a good school.

Thanks you filling us in, hibernal_dream!

 

[Evil?]

How do you figure. The cost of a lethal injection is at most 5,000$ AT MOST. The cost of feeding someone for 40 years +, is drastically more expensive.

Even if you calculate feeding the person costs 1$ a day (ROFL)
it would still cost 14,600$ to feed said person in that time. Not to mention all the other things you have to pay for, such as Toilet paper, water for showers for 40 years, etc.

You really have no clue. I think this may be the dumbest comment I've ever seen.

Now if you want to refute said statement^, please tell me the cost of "killing someone" in the main methods. Lethal Injection / Electricity, and then calculate the costs of housing a prisoner for 40+ years.

Ok, you have to take into consideration more than just the actual execution.

The investigation costs for death-sentence cases were about 3 times greater than for non-death cases

The trial costs for death cases were about 16 times greater than for non-death cases ($508,000 for death case; $32,000 for non-death case).

The appeal costs for death cases were 21 times greater.

Trials involving a death sentence averaged 34 days, including jury selection; non-death trials averaged about 9 days.

Capital cases burden county budgets with large unexpected costs, according to a report released by the National Bureau of Economic Research, "The Budgetary Repercussions of Capital Convictions," by Katherine Baicker. Counties manage these high costs by decreasing funding for highways and police and by increasing taxes. The report estimates that between 1982-1997 the extra cost of capital trials was $1.6 billion. (NBER Working Paper No. w8382, Issued in July 2001)

North Carolina spends more per execution than on a non-death penalty murder case
The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than the a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment (Duke University, May 1993). On a national basis, these figures translate to an extra cost of over $1 billion spent since 1976 on the death penalty. The study,"The Costs of Processing Murder Cases in North Carolina" is available on line at

Florida spends millions extra per year on death penalty
Florida would save $51 million each year by punishing all first-degree murderers with life in prison without parole, according to estimates by the Palm Beach Post. Based on the 44 executions Florida has carried out since 1976, that amounts to an approximate cost of $24 million for each execution. This finding takes into account the relatively few inmates who are actually executed, as well as the time and effort expended on capital defendants who are tried but convicted of a lesser murder charge, and those whose deathe sentences are overturned on appeal. (Palm Beach Post, January 4, 2000)

California spends $90 Million dollars annually above and beyond the ordinary costs of the justice system on capital cases. $78 million of that total is incurred at the trial level

According to state and federal records obtained by The Los Angeles Times, maintaining the California death penalty system costs taxpayers more than $114 million a year beyond the cost of simply keeping the convicts locked up for life. This figure does not count the millions more spent on court costs to prosecute capital cases. The Times concluded that Californians and federal taxpayers have paid more than a quarter of a billion dollars for each of the state's 11 executions, and that it costs $90,000 more a year to house one inmate on death row, where each person has a private cell and extra guards, than in general prison population. This additional cost per prisoner adds up to $57.5 million in annual spending.

Looks like you lose. Sorry.

 

[Disarmonia_Mundi]

Oh shit. Seriously, you are fucking clueless.

Hey, everyone? If you secretley want to punch that slow cashier in the face, it's because you are stupid and you need to get yourself to a good school.

Thanks you filling us in, hibernal_dream!

HAHAHA, yes Hibernal is one hell of a nutjob

Please save yourself some time Hibernal and stop caring so much what other people think THAT YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW, plus education is about learning (schools) and expanding your knowledge, its not about teaching you right and wrong, that comes from your PARENTS. Your clueless hibernal lol.

 

[Hell Awaits Us All]

you forgot [/pwnage]

@ evil

 

[hibernal_dream]

HAHAHA, yes Hibernal is one hell of a nutjob

Please save yourself some time Hibernal and stop caring so much what other people think THAT YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW, plus education is about learning (schools) and expanding your knowledge, its not about teaching you right and wrong, that comes from your PARENTS. Your clueless hibernal lol.

What the hell are you guys talking about? I'm just not going to bother, because you haven't understood a word i've said. It's not about the FACT of wanting to punch someone, it's about the reasons for not doing it. Assume the law against assault was repealed. Now there will be 3 types of people: the ones that are not inclined to assault, the ones that are so inclined but do not do so because it is wrong, and the ones that are so inclined but did not do so previously because of the existence of the law. It's the latest category i'm worried about, and they are the ones in need of education. Now do you see my point?

 

[Disarmonia_Mundi]

Ok, you have to take into consideration more than just the actual execution.

Yea, you are probably right in that respect. Though I would be "very" interested where they obtained their info for how much it costs to house a prisoner per year and what they calculated in. Would you bother to come up with that?

 

[Evil?]

I could try.

 

[Disarmonia_Mundi]

What the hell are you guys talking about? I'm just not going to bother, because you haven't understood a word i've said. It's not about the FACT of wanting to punch someone, it's about the reasons for not doing it. Assume the law against assault was repealed. Now there will be 3 types of people: the ones that are not inclined to assault, the ones that are so inclined but do not do so because it is wrong, and the ones that are so inclined but did not do so previously because of the existence of the law. It's the latest category i'm worried about, and they are the ones in need of education. Now do you see my point?

No, because ITS DOING ITS JOB. ITS DETERRING PEOPLE FROM DOING THE CRIME.

Do you not understand that?

(Please stop this hypothetical shit if X law was repealed then X would happen, because none of the laws will ever get repealed. Your living in one hell of a fantasy world)

 

[hibernal_dream]

No, because ITS DOING ITS JOB. ITS DETERRING PEOPLE FROM DOING THE CRIME.

Do you not understand that?

(Please stop this hypothetical shit if X law was repealed then X would happen, because none of the laws will ever get repealed. Your living in one hell of a fantasy world)

Ok. Get back to me in 10 years when you finish school and understand how arguments are used.

 

[ThisIsACoolName]

What the hell are you guys talking about? I'm just not going to bother, because you haven't understood a word i've said. It's not about the FACT of wanting to punch someone, it's about the reasons for not doing it. Assume the law against assault was repealed. Now there will be 3 types of people: the ones that are not inclined to assault, the ones that are so inclined but do not do so because it is wrong, and the ones that are so inclined but did not do so previously because of the existence of the law. It's the latest category i'm worried about, and they are the ones in need of education. Now do you see my point?

People aren't understanding you because you're point doesn't make sense. Before you implied that most people don't commit violent, so I'll assume that you still think that (even though that's retarded). You say that these people lack education- in other words, that they are unintelligent. So you seem to be saying that you're smarter than almost everyone. Well, pretty everyone in the world has or will want to do serious harm to someone else at some point and they don't because they know it's wrong- and they know it's wrong because there is a punishment for it. You know it's wrong to leave you're things on the floor because when you were a kid your parents punished you for doing so. You know it's wrong to punch someone on the street because the police will arrest you for it. What's the problem? You think it would be better if there were no punishments in place- that we all should just learn in school that it's wrong to kill and steal, and that if we do, it'll all be fine? Newsflash, buddy: That's essentially what religion is, and it obviously doesn't prevent crime.

Repealing the laws against assault, murder, theft, etc. would lead to lots and lots of people committing those crimes. You're right. And that's exactly why those laws are in place. People are taught the difference between right and wrong for their whole lives. And guess what! It doesn't completley prevent crime like you seem to think it does.

And your whole "point" still does not have anything to do with why capital punishment is wrong.

 

[hibernal_dream]

Well, pretty everyone in the world has or will want to do serious harm to someone else at some point and they don't because they know it's wrong- and they know it's wrong because there is a punishment for it. You know it's wrong to leave you're things on the floor because when you were a kid your parents punished you for doing so. You know it's wrong to punch someone on the street because the police will arrest you for it.

That's absolutely ridiculous. You both belong in the Gestapo

People are taught the difference between right and wrong for their whole lives. And guess what! It doesn't completley prevent crime like you seem to think it does.

Some people aren't taught that. I would think that is obvious.

 

[Disarmonia_Mundi]

Ok. Get back to me in 10 years when you finish school and understand how arguments are used.

What? How about instead of insulting me you respond to my post with some sort of intellectual debate.

You said, your worried about the people who think its ok to do X crime if there were no law, but because there is a law that they don't do it.

My point : THE SYSTEM IS WORKING AS INTENDED. Said people are not doing said crime because of said punishment/consequences, thus, why in the fuck do you care what hes thinking... Obviously..so obvious to us all, but you, is that the system in place is WORKING, you even ADMITTED that it is, yet, you want to go further, and FORCE people to not ever think about doing something that is against the law, even though they do not act upon it. Your insane.

I want to punch you in the face right now, the only thing standing in the way is the distance for being so retarded. Huh..I guess I need help or I'm in some way less-intelligent than you, even though I'm in my second year in College and have a 3.8GPA, and my MAJOR is CRIMINAL JUSTICE. Goddamn I'm one hell of a dumbass aren't I?

 

[ThisIsACoolName]

That's absolutely ridiculous. You both belong in the Gestapo



Some people aren't taught that. I would think that is obvious.

What the hell is the matter with you? You have no idea what you're talking about, so now you're just resorting to flames (you also don't know what the Gestapo was, apparently).

You claim to have never wanted to hit someone or hurt someone? You never been angry that someone cut you off on the highway and wanted to rear-end them? You've never wanted to slug the guy who did a half-assed, sloppy job making your sandwhich at the deli? Yeah, that's bullshit. You're a liar if you claim to have never wanted to physically take out your frustration on the person who caused it. Climb down off that pedastal of yours.

And the vast (vast) majority of people are taught right and wrong from the moment they begin to interact socially with others. The only ones who aren't are the people who for some reason are unable to interact socially or the people who grow up never seeing another human being. So I guess you're point would make sense if everyone was autistic and / or raised by wolves.

 

[hibernal_dream]

What the hell is the matter with you? You have no idea what you're talking about, so now you're just resorting to flames (you also don't know what the Gestapo was, apparently).

You claim to have never wanted to hit someone or hurt someone? You never been angry that someone cut you off on the highway and wanted to rear-end them? You've never wanted to slug the guy who did a half-assed, sloppy job making your sandwhich at the deli? Yeah, that's bullshit. You're a liar if you claim to have never wanted to physically take out your frustration on the person who caused it. Climb down off that pedastal of yours.

I have nothing to do with my argument. Let me just quote what you said.

Well, pretty everyone in the world has or will want to do serious harm to someone else at some point and they don't because they know it's wrong- and they know it's wrong because there is a punishment for it. You know it's wrong to leave you're things on the floor because when you were a kid your parents punished you for doing so. You know it's wrong to punch someone on the street because the police will arrest you for it. What's the problem? You think it would be better if there were no punishments in place- that we all should just learn in school that it's wrong to kill and steal, and that if we do, it'll all be fine? Newsflash, buddy: That's essentially what religion is, and it obviously doesn't prevent crime.

Even our criminal justice major friend here knows that legislatures make bad laws, parents dish out unjustified punishments, and police are often a law unto themselves. I don't want a society of drones who obey laws simply because they are there - I want a thinking, breathing society who create universal law through their will.

Lets assume for a moment Congress enacted a law punishing anyone for listening to metal. As your reasoning would have it, anyone listening to metal knows they are doing wrong simply due to the fact that they are punished because of it. What we end up with is a place where what is legal=okay and what is illegal=bad. You don't find that a little disturbing? No! Let's not think about whether metal might NOT actually be bad - it's illegal, so it must be, right?

It is only when someone has a choice to take an action they can be considered good - capital punishment give no such choice - it is violence directed to corrective conduct with no interest in actually making the world better.

And the vast (vast) majority of people are taught right and wrong from the moment they begin to interact socially with others. The only ones who aren't are the people who for some reason are unable to interact socially or the people who grow up never seeing another human being. So I guess you're point would make sense if everyone was autistic and / or raised by wolves.

This is inconsistent with you saying those people might want to commit a crime but don't because it's illegal.

 

[Disarmonia_Mundi]

I find it funny hibernal you just skipped over my response.

 

[hibernal_dream]

I find it funny hibernal you just skipped over my response.

I already dealt with most of that stuff.

You said, your worried about the people who think its ok to do X crime if there were no law, but because there is a law that they don't do it.

My point : THE SYSTEM IS WORKING AS INTENDED. Said people are not doing said crime because of said punishment/consequences, thus, why in the fuck do you care what hes thinking... Obviously..so obvious to us all, but you, is that the system in place is WORKING, you even ADMITTED that it is, yet, you want to go further, and FORCE people to not ever think about doing something that is against the law, even though they do not act upon it. Your insane.

I never said that. I said people should refrain from harmful actions because it's right, not because they are obeying law. Please don't ask me this again.

I want to punch you in the face right now, the only thing standing in the way is the distance for being so retarded. Huh..I guess I need help or I'm in some way less-intelligent than you, even though I'm in my second year in College and have a 3.8GPA, and my MAJOR is CRIMINAL JUSTICE. Goddamn I'm one hell of a dumbass aren't I?

Same applies as above. Wanting to punch isn't the bad thing in itself.

 

[Cythraul]

I like to eat.

 

[metal_wrath]

lol

wtf @ the last two pages of this thread, lets change the topic plz, kthnx

 

[Mort Divine]

Yea, you are probably right in that respect. Though I would be "very" interested where they obtained their info for how much it costs to house a prisoner per year and what they calculated in. Would you bother to come up with that?

ALSO take into consideration that when someone is sentenced to death they will most likely sit in prison for YEARS until they have the punishment carried out.