The cost of prison is about the same as education. I have heard the
figure as $30,000. but maybe it has gone up.

What about abortion? That saves money.

What about the final costs of health care for the aged? Should we just
send them a cyanide capsule?

The history of mankind is violent punctuated with periods of peace/
altruism. Beyond resources, wealth and power what is the spur?

On May 19, 11:22 am, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Yep I think that the cost of appeals is proably what helps whack the
> overall cost up.
>
> But you take a strange stance here for a person  who has previously
> said that you disagree with the dealth penalty because you can't trust
> the judicial system to get it right.
>
> Now you say that the appeals process should be scrapped in certian
> cases, isn't that a little bit contradictory?
>
> On May 19, 4:29 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I notice that the cost of lifetime imprisonment is folded into the cost of
> > the death penalty in cases where it's overturned. I would guess that this
> > probably counts for a large portion of the money attributed to overall cost.
>
> > In addition, I don't know how it is in other countries but in the US
> > convicts can stall the death penalty almost indefinitely with appeals. This
> > also adds huge costs. In cases where the evidence is incontrovertible I
> > think the appeals process should be constrained to mitigate costs.
>
> > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:08 AM, [email protected] <
>
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > This from one source:
>
> > >http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-pena...
>
> > > And to counteract any bias from this source:
>
> > > This from Fox?!
>
> > >http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/03/27/just-cost-death-penalty-killer-s...
>
> > > Myself I'm not sure, so as I say the jury is still outon this
> > > question  as far as I'm concerend.
>
> > > On May 19, 2:41 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > I don't know what the current cost is but 10 years ago the cost of
> > > housing
> > > > an inmate was over $50,000 a year. Assuming a 40 year life sentence that
> > > > would be over 2 million. I'm pretty sure you can kill someone for less.
> > > > Hell, I'd do it for half that...
>
> > > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:41 AM, [email protected] <
>
> > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > Sorry Chuck totaly missed this one:
>
> > > > > I disagree. Killing a killer has value.
>
> > > > > It removes a threat from society.
> > > > > It frees up resources needed to protect the society from that killer.
> > > > > It provides a deterrent against other killings.
>
> > > > > So does life in prision.
> > > > > The jury is still out on that one as to cost re lifes imprisioment and
> > > > > cost of the dealth penalty.
> > > > > For that single indivdual yes.
>
> > > > > On May 19, 1:12 am, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:23 AM, [email protected] <
>
> > > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > Why should we not?
>
> > > > > > Why should we not what?
>
> > > > > > > Should we instead make our selfs guilty of the same behaviour that
> > > > > > > seems universal reprehensabile?  Should we then sink to that level
> > > > > > > ourselves?  Two wrongs don't make a right and all that.
>
> > > > > > My original point was that life is cheap. We don't kill because it's
> > > > > right
> > > > > > or wrong. We kill for expediency.
>
> > > > > > > The point is to maintian that moral superiority.  If a man steals
> > > from
> > > > > > > me, can I then steal from him?  Wouldn't that make me also a 
> > > > > > > theif?
>
> > > > > > Personally I don't claim any kind of superiority - moral or
> > > otherwise. If
> > > > > > somebody steals from me I'll try to steal back my property and
> > > possibly
> > > > > > anything else that happens to be lying around. I may even give the
> > > guy a
> > > > > > punch in the nose on the way out the door. If you want to call me a
> > > thief
> > > > > > for it go ahead.
>
> > > > > > > revenge killings as we know only lead to further revenge killings.
> > >  We
> > > > > > > have here in the UK a growing youth gang problem, with kids 
> > > > > > > killing
> > > > > > > other kids for slights imagined or otherwise, and then in turn the
> > > > > > > other gang of kids killing members of the ther other gang.  Is 
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > right, it is the correct behaviour?
>
> > > > > > This just leads into the whole argument - is war right or wrong. Is
> > > it
> > > > > wrong
> > > > > > for a street gang to retaliate when it's territory is breached by a
> > > rival
> > > > > > gang? If no then why is it right for nations to do the same thing?
>
> > > > > > > Killing a killer makes no logical sense.
>
> > > > > > I disagree. Killing a killer has value.
>
> > > > > > It removes a threat from society.
> > > > > > It frees up resources needed to protect the society from that 
> > > > > > killer.
> > > > > > It provides a deterrent against other killings.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Reply via email to