Hm.... That's an interesting idea. But no, I was mostly saying it for those who think the death penalty is inhumane. I feel like the way I put it could be taken harshly by them... But I guess you're right, I'll remove it.
Last edited:
Connecticut Supreme Court: Death Penalty ruled unconstitutional
- Thread starter Livewire
- Start date
Hm.... That's an interesting idea. But no, I was mostly saying it for those who think the death penalty is inhumane. I feel like the way I put it could be taken harshly by them... But I guess you're right, I'll remove it.
Nononononononono don't remove it there was nothing wrong with it!
That was just me making an anti-death penalty point xD
CoffeeDrink
GET WHILE THE GETTIN'S GOOD
- 1,250
- Posts
- 10
- Years
- Lootin' Your Poké's
- Seen Dec 5, 2016
Your statement needs work. No, in all honesty and all truth: it is not cheaper to keep them alive. The statement above by itself is false and needs more substance to try and prove itself to be true. How much money does it cost to beat someone to death? None. I am not saying to beat them to death, but there are more ways to skin a cat. (Edit: Appeals happen even in life sentences. I felt the need to add this to the front of my post to avoid the skimming confusion. That is all)
The drugs currently used are arterial in their use and can become unreliable due to the perpetrator's health, size, weight, height and a myriad of other factors that cannot be accounted for. However, it is a well known fact that the human body cannot function without it's brain.
A captive bolt pistol is a viable alternative. They cost bordering around $2,000 and destroy the brain of a cow. The captive bolt pistol eliminates the bone and brain matter in our bovine friends and it isn't a secret that cow bone is far denser and resilient than human bone. To claim that the bolt pistol causes severe trauma in the subject before death is very sketchy to say the least; it's death, and they know it comes for them. Of course their heart rates will go up.
Further more, the drugs currently in use are not as effective as initially thought. Recent news has that the poor drugs didn't kill as effectively as they were supposed to (hence this thread). The reason why killing inmates on death row is so expensive (besides appeals. There will always be appeals, even for life sentences. Manson puts one in at least once every year if I remember correctly) the drugs are so expensive because there are only a select few companies that sell them and they are patented and protected so only they can sell and manufacture them (unless I'm thinking of another drug article that is the reason). Anesthesia is also another option, but it has not been explored to a satisfying degree.
Bare hands: free. Murderers don't spend hundreds of thousands of dollars killing people, I assure you. Also, to put the expenditure of the government in perspective here's an article on their poor shopping: http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/pentagon-purchases-millions-in-markups/.
Don't fall victim to what someone else tells you. Don't even believe me. Do the work yourself. Do some research, get involved. Just don't regurgitate to me that stupid, cow-eyed cockameme response: "It costs just as much to keep someone alive as it does to end them". No, not true, and people across the planet prove the statement wrong every day.
shadowmoon522
Master of Darkness & Light
- 1,005
- Posts
- 11
- Years
- Age 33
- PA
- Seen May 7, 2024
or you could go old fashion with it. still cheeper then keeping the alive, but sadly it leaves a huge mess
Your statement needs work. No, in all honesty and all truth: it is not cheaper to keep them alive. The statement above by itself is false and needs more substance to try and prove itself to be true. How much money does it cost to beat someone to death? None. I am not saying to beat them to death, but there are more ways to skin a cat. (Edit: Appeals happen even in life sentences. I felt the need to add this to the front of my post to avoid the skimming confusion. That is all)
The drugs currently used are arterial in their use and can become unreliable due to the perpetrator's health, size, weight, height and a myriad of other factors that cannot be accounted for. However, it is a well known fact that the human body cannot function without it's brain.
A captive bolt pistol is a viable alternative. They cost bordering around $2,000 and destroy the brain of a cow. The captive bolt pistol eliminates the bone and brain matter in our bovine friends and it isn't a secret that cow bone is far denser and resilient than human bone. To claim that the bolt pistol causes severe trauma in the subject before death is very sketchy to say the least; it's death, and they know it comes for them. Of course their heart rates will go up.
Further more, the drugs currently in use are not as effective as initially thought. Recent news has that the poor drugs didn't kill as effectively as they were supposed to (hence this thread). The reason why killing inmates on death row is so expensive (besides appeals. There will always be appeals, even for life sentences. Manson puts one in at least once every year if I remember correctly) the drugs are so expensive because there are only a select few companies that sell them and they are patented and protected so only they can sell and manufacture them (unless I'm thinking of another drug article that is the reason). Anesthesia is also another option, but it has not been explored to a satisfying degree.
Bare hands: free. Murderers don't spend hundreds of thousands of dollars killing people, I assure you. Also, to put the expenditure of the government in perspective here's an article on their poor shopping: http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/pentagon-purchases-millions-in-markups/.
Don't fall victim to what someone else tells you. Don't even believe me. Do the work yourself. Do some research, get involved. Just don't regurgitate to me that stupid, cow-eyed cockameme response: "It costs just as much to keep someone alive as it does to end them". No, not true, and people across the planet prove the statement wrong every day.
- 22,953
- Posts
- 19
- Years
- Age 33
- 'cause it get cold like Minnesota
- Seen May 6, 2024
I have done the research for a paper as well as for a debate in the past (was assigned to the pro-death penalty side). And you've completely disregarded where I point out that the appeals are what make the death penalty so costly. And, no, I will not entertain the idea of eliminating appeals. Appeals are a critical part of any modern and fair judicial system.
CoffeeDrink
GET WHILE THE GETTIN'S GOOD
- 1,250
- Posts
- 10
- Years
- Lootin' Your Poké's
- Seen Dec 5, 2016
Did you just read the parts you wanted to read or. . .
You know what? Forget it. Why do I even bother. If you won't bother to read what I spent on time on than why should I even bother with you? You've made it clear to me that you've done nil on the research side and just regurgitate what you see on the news. I do not wish to discuss this any further for personnel reasons. Thank you, and goodnight.
shadowmoon522
Master of Darkness & Light
- 1,005
- Posts
- 11
- Years
- Age 33
- PA
- Seen May 7, 2024
regardless, attorneys get paid way to much to be lying manipulators who on occasion turn on the one their tasked to defend. its not even just the regular attorneys that are corrupted.
cocaine stealing judges
attorney general conspiracies
and it is still possible to get exiled from the USA
then we got public defender's which are quite simply doing nothing but filtering people though as fast as they can thx to their work overload. it leads to quite a few of them pressuring their clients into taking guilty pleas just to be done with that case