[quote=“rowland”]Seeing as rehabilitation has been given a fair shot and fallen short…
Not at taxpayer expense. Also, if they escape and commit crimes, the camp counselors are legally liable.
Go ahead and set up a Kickstarter. I expect the first generous donation should be from yourself. Put your money where your mouth is.
Let those who claim to believe in utopian scemes be the ones to fund them.
(And on the same note, let those who raise the alarm about global warming be the first to reduce their own carbon footprints.)[/quote]
And those who demand tougher responses to terrorism be the first to volunteer for military service- no, shouting “Hoo-rah” in a darkened theater during “American Sniper” doesn’t count.
Yes Rowland, at tax payers expense. Last I checked we live in a society. You don’t just get to plug into it and reap the rewards, you also have to share the negatives. Of course everybody should be striving to do good and help the community, that goes without saying. But in my opinion society also means we have to take responsibility for those who have slipped through the cracks. Many aspects of our societies are just plain fucked up, and we all share in the blame at some level. There’s a million examples, but just one off the top of my head would be spending billions to go to a useless war instead of fixing up the ghetto’s at home. Bottom line is, we don’t choose where we were born, what circumstances we are raised in, and we don’t build our own brains. We are all thrust into a world at very different starting points.
I already said I’m not suggesting criminals shouldn’t be responsible for their actions, of course they should. And clearly the only thing we can do is separate them from the rest of us law abiding citizens. That’s what jails are for. But that doesn’t mean jails have to be as messed up as they are, and it certainly doesn’t mean we should be killing people for their crimes that are likely the result of a very unfortunate and complicated string of events leading to a criminal mind, or possibly just the result of neurology or biological imbalances. The death penalty doesn’t seem to fit in any version of a civilized society. It’s called progress. Sure there was a time when people actually thought killing someone for their crimes made sense, but there was also a time when people thought it was ok to buy and sell human beings. I never understand why people like to be the last standout on social issues. The last guy to say it’s ok that woman can vote. The last guy to say slavery is wrong. The last guy to say gay people can get married. The last guy to say killing people for crimes we all share responsibility in is wrong.
No, not at taxpayer expense. There is nothing in the social contract that requires sensible people involuntarily fund farfetched experiments.
You believe you can build a clockwork orange? You come up with the funding. Just because some guy thinks he knows it all doesn’t mean the taxpayer owes him anything at all.
No dollars for ego-tripping eutopianists. People with that mentality are bad investments.
How taxpayers in the US (and Greece) feel toward the government:
Which far fetched experiment would that be? Jails, or the death penalty? Both require tax payer money, so it seems as always you’re speaking words without actually saying anything.
As far as society goes, it’s really a pretty basic concept so I don’t know why you’re missing it. We ALL pay for things, even though we ALL only use SOME of them. See how that works? We all share expenses, and sometimes that means you pay for stuff you don’t want. Fortunately it also sometimes means you get discounts on things you do want. It balances out. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t scrutinize the governments budget because of course we should. But your way of thinking directly contradicts the concept of a society. Fortunately for you, you’re in it whether you acknowledge it or not. You got a cheaper education because the money is pooled and subsidized by tax payer money. You get cheapER health care, you to have access to roads, bridges, telecommunications, police services, mail services, clean water facilities, protection services, etc etc… Society isn’t a personal menu. You take the good with the bad, and cast a vote every chance you get. You want to take it a step further? Get active. Don’t hide behind a fake name and a keyboard, get out there, make a difference.
You could of course move up to the mountains and pay for all of that yourself Rowland. You may find it’s a little more expensive than you budgeted for
And giving out money indiscriminately has the opposite effect.
I’ve known some beggars in my time. The worst are the ones who think society owes them that money. The only difference between them and muggers is that muggers have recourse to force.
I’ve also known some con men, and some preachers, and some con men who were preachers. The worst con man preachers are the ones preaching secular utopianism. Social justice warriors are the second most dangerous sect of fanatics on the planet, right behind the jihadists. The jihad boys have the decency to kill you quick. The progressives want to bleed us all to death slowly. When they say “civic responsibility” what they really mean is “how dare you question our motives!”
Never trust anyone who goes on and on about how much more moral he is than you, and much you should pay him because of it. It’s a con. It’s a baldfaced lie bigger than Al Gore’s carbon footprint.
In sort-of-unrelated news the Federal Reserve is refusing to be audited, and various government agencies are still stonewalling attempts to hold them accountable for what they’re actually doing with all that tax money.
[quote]While many prosecutors are still reluctant to admit that finances play a role in their decisions about the death penalty, some of them—especially in small, rural counties—have been increasingly frank in wondering whether capital punishment is worth the price to their communities. “You have to be very responsible in selecting where you want to spend your money,” said Stephen Taylor, a prosecutor in Liberty County, Texas. “You never know how long a case is going to take.”
Some prosecutors are far more blunt, and even hyperbolic, as they lament the state of affairs. “I know now that if I file a capital murder case and don’t seek the death penalty, the expense is much less,” said James Farren, the district attorney of Randall County in the Texas panhandle. “While I know that justice is not for sale, if I bankrupt the county, and we simply don’t have any money, and the next day someone goes into a day care and guns down five kids, what do I say? Sorry?”
Since capital punishment was reinstated by the Supreme Court in 1976, the cost of carrying out a death penalty trial has risen steadily. Increasing legal protections for defendants has translated into more and more hours of preparatory work by both sides. Fees for court-appointed attorneys and expert witnesses have climbed. Where once psychiatrists considered an IQ test and a quick interview sufficient to establish the mental state of a defendant, now it is routine to obtain an entire mental-health history. Lab tests have become more numerous and elaborate. Defense teams now routinely employ mitigation experts, who comb through a defendant’s life history for evidence that might sway a jury toward leniency at the sentencing phase. Capital defendants are automatically entitled to appeals, which often last for years. Throughout those years, the defendant lives on death row, which tends to cost more due to heightened security.[/quote]
[quote]While many prosecutors are still reluctant to admit that finances play a role in their decisions about the death penalty, some of them—especially in small, rural counties—have been increasingly frank in wondering whether capital punishment is worth the price to their communities. “You have to be very responsible in selecting where you want to spend your money,” said Stephen Taylor, a prosecutor in Liberty County, Texas. “You never know how long a case is going to take.”
Some prosecutors are far more blunt, and even hyperbolic, as they lament the state of affairs. “I know now that if I file a capital murder case and don’t seek the death penalty, the expense is much less,” said James Farren, the district attorney of Randall County in the Texas panhandle. “While I know that justice is not for sale, if I bankrupt the county, and we simply don’t have any money, and the next day someone goes into a day care and guns down five kids, what do I say? Sorry?”
Since capital punishment was reinstated by the Supreme Court in 1976, the cost of carrying out a death penalty trial has risen steadily. Increasing legal protections for defendants has translated into more and more hours of preparatory work by both sides. Fees for court-appointed attorneys and expert witnesses have climbed. Where once psychiatrists considered an IQ test and a quick interview sufficient to establish the mental state of a defendant, now it is routine to obtain an entire mental-health history. Lab tests have become more numerous and elaborate. Defense teams now routinely employ mitigation experts, who comb through a defendant’s life history for evidence that might sway a jury toward leniency at the sentencing phase. Capital defendants are automatically entitled to appeals, which often last for years. Throughout those years, the defendant lives on death row, which tends to cost more due to heightened security.[/quote][/quote]
Most people believe that it’s more costly to keep someone in prison for life than executing him/her. But I have heard that before, that sentencing someone to death and carrying out the execution does cost more.
That article says county public prosecutors are not seeking the death penalty because of the enormous expense of a death penalty trial on a county’s yearly budget. It’s not comparing the cost of trials and appeals and life imprisonment with trials and appeals and executions. County governments in the United States are simply deciding they cannot afford to prosecute capital cases (and they almost always need to pay for the defense, too, because defendants are typically ‘indigent’).
I think what many people don’t realize is that people sentenced to death often spend more than a decade in prison before being executed, and at a higher cost than other inmates.
I don’t have the link handy (will try and dig it up tomorrow) but in the USA since the death penalty was reinstated in the 70’s, on average 1 in 7 that have received the penalty have later been found to be innocent. The lucky ones have that found before the sentence is carried out.
Even if it was one in 70, or one in 700, this is the death knell for the death penalty in my mind. I couldn’t support it morally outside of 100% certainty, and that is normally unachievable.
On the other hand, I think it is safe to say that those who suffer the death penalty display a 0% recidivism rate in the future Of course the same is true in larger society for those who receive the natural alternative of life without possibility of parole.
I think what many people don’t realize is that people sentenced to death often spend more than a decade in prison before being executed, and at a higher cost than other inmates.[/quote]
Makes perfect sense actually and it’s why I think the death penalty is suitable for mass murder/especially heinous crimes, but prefer supermax senetences/life imprisonment for run-of-the-mill murder cases. All the legal expenses for appeals etc. make capital cases super expensive and more expensive than housing an inmate for life. I don’t agree with eliminating capital punishment because it reduces policy flexibility (in very heinous crimes I fully believe in capital punishment), but supermax is worse than death! The complete isolation, three showers a week, exercising in handcuffs for an hour a week etc. It is hard time.
Of course the same is true in larger society for those who receive the natural alternative of life without possibility of parole.
The complete isolation, three showers a week, exercising in handcuffs for an hour a week etc. It is hard time.