SCOTUS Ruling

[Davian93]

BREAKING NEWS: The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected using the death penalty for child rape.

Well, that limits the death penalty a bit more in an area where many people were okay with it being used for a non-murder crime.

[irerancincpkc]

I wish they would do away with the whole thing...

[Terez]

Shame, that...though I can understand the margin of error argument.

[Davian93]

I wish they would do away with the whole thing...

So do I...see Spammer, we agree on some things.

[Davian93]

Shame, that...though I can understand the margin of error argument.

Let's be honest here for a moment...a life sentence for a child rapist is just a quicker version of the death penalty when they're in with the general prison population.

EDIT: Here's More Info: SCOTUS Ruling (http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/25/scotus.child.rape/index.html)

[Ozymandias]

I'm an avid supporter of the death penalty... harsher punishments tend to prevent crime more than more lenient punishments do.

[Davian93]

I'm an avid supporter of the death penalty... harsher punishments tend to prevent crime more than more lenient punishments do.

Well, for one, no they don't and no evidence supports that statement. We have the highest violent crime rates in the world WITH the death penalty.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

Um, not the "world" Dav. Possibly the West, or even NATO, but not the world.

[Davian93]

Um, not the "world" Dav. Possibly the West, or even NATO, but not the world.

Sorry Gil...I meant the 1st world...i.e. Western Europe and Canada. I should have been more specific. I.E. civilized countries that have banned the death penalty.

[Ozymandias]

Well, for one, no they don't and no evidence supports that statement. We have the highest violent crime rates in the world WITH the death penalty.


Thats probably not true... but I've never seen the argument against the death penalty. Its not as if its dished out lightly... only people who are such violent or repeated offenders are punished so. And those really aren't members of society anyways; they work to disrupt and profit from a society we've all helped build.

[GonzoTheGreat]

Gil, be American and ignore that there's anything more than the USA, and then you can have the highest rates in the world.

[Davian93]

More Info on the Ruling: SCOTUS RULING (http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/25/scotus.child.rape/index.html)

In a stunner, Kennedy was the swing vote as he, Ginsberg, Breyer, Souter, and Stevens concurred on the ruling. Scalia, Alito, Roberts and Thomas opposed it. Good to see the court hasn't completely lost it on some things.

[Davian93]

Thats probably not true... but I've never seen the argument against the death penalty. Its not as if its dished out lightly... only people who are such violent or repeated offenders are punished so. And those really aren't members of society anyways; they work to disrupt and profit from a society we've all helped build.

So, the fact that the death penalty is applied far more often in minority cases doesn't concern you? Or the poorer you are, the more likely you are to get it in a murder case?

[Gilshalos Sedai]

Gonzo, I don't know whether to be insulted or flattered.


Ozy: In Texas alone, (you know the state with the express lane) we are still executing innocent people and people that have been rehabilitated, and most definitely, the mentally impaired. How many innocent and undeserving have to die just to get rid of the few bad apples? Not to mention, the death penalty is FAR more expensive than just throwing away the key.

[Davian93]

Professor Fagan of Columbia Law School's Testimony to Congress showing how it is not a deterrent: Testimony (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FaganTestimony.pdf)

Also, as Gil states, the costs of it are extraordinarily high compared to life sentences.

[Davian93]

and most definitely, the mentally impaired.

They're the easiest as they don't fight back too much.;)

[Davian93]

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?&did=1705

Study that show's that States with the death penalty are no safer than those without...they actually have higher murder rates ironically.

Also, studies have shown that states that have banned the death penalty show no increase in capital crime offenses.

[Ozymandias]

Gonzo, I don't know whether to be insulted or flattered.


Ozy: In Texas alone, (you know the state with the express lane) we are still executing innocent people and people that have been rehabilitated, and most definitely, the mentally impaired. How many innocent and undeserving have to die just to get rid of the few bad apples? Not to mention, the death penalty is FAR more expensive than just throwing away the key.

I'd like to see evidence of that. I know that the appeals system is what makes it expensive, but to be honest, I'm just never sure how thats the case.

Those prosecutors are on payroll anyways, and drawing a check whether they're in the courtroom or sitting behind a desk. And its not like people with life sentences don't appeal. Frankly I just don't buy that its more expensive, and won't until I see some sort of study which isolates that expense as compared to life imprisonment.

And its more like "are one or two innocent people worth the thousands of bad apples we can do away with," not the other way around. The number of guilty people executed far exceeds the number of innocents.

[Davian93]

And its more like "are one or two innocent people worth the thousands of bad apples we can do away with," not the other way around. The number of guilty people executed far exceeds the number of innocents.

Its kind of hard to clear someone's record of a wrongful conviction when it involves using a shovel to dig them back up Ozy. Even the possibility of one mistake should be enough to ban the use of the death penalty.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

And its more like "are one or two innocent people worth the thousands of bad apples we can do away with," not the other way around. The number of guilty people executed far exceeds the number of innocents.


Um, no. You've apparently never heard about the problems with Houston's Crime Lab (http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/special/03/crimelab/index.html).


And, as far as the life sentencers appealing... not as often, no. Frankly, THEY have to pay for it. In death penalty cases, the appeal is automatic and the state pays for it on BOTH sides, usually. It's a rare murder defendant that can afford a private attorney.

[Davian93]

I'd like to see evidence of that. I know that the appeals system is what makes it expensive, but to be honest, I'm just never sure how thats the case.



Ask and ye shall receive: Cost of Death Penalty (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108)

[Ozymandias]

I saw a photo of an underfunded crime lab, not a lab that decides to incarcerate and kill innocent victims on whim.

I have faith in our legal system. Mistakes will be made, yes, and thats called human error. Don't blame the crime lab, blame the juries which convict people. I'm willing to accept a few mistakes to preserve the rule of law.

And the death penalty is applied to sparingly and with so little effect, in the sense that appeals can drag on for decades, that its little wonder we don't see an effect from it. Tighten up the system, and you'll see results.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

The Houston Crime Lab is NOT underfunded. And you didn't look far enough down that page at the LONG list of articles detailing the problems with the Houston Crime Lab. Tampering with evidence and improper evidenciary procedures were only a couple charges brought against the lab.


And the death penalty is applied to sparingly and with so little effect, in the sense that appeals can drag on for decades, that its little wonder we don't see an effect from it. Tighten up the system, and you'll see results.

Looks like a lot to me. (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/scheduledexecutions.htm) Here (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm) are the ones that we've already executed. Here (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/annual.htm) are the executions by year. Here (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/racial.htm) are the executions by race.

And if you'd notice, the years leading up to an election for Governor (last was 2006), the executions increase.

[Ozymandias]

More than a quarter billion dollars on a capital punishment system that has executed no one," the report concluded. Since 1982, there have been 197 capital trials in New Jersey and 60 death sentences, of which 50 were reversed. There have been no executions, and 10 men are housed on the state's death row

What I see here is a system that doesn't even execute anyone. So its not a death penalty system, its a system in which there is a hypothetical death penalty that is never applied, as almost all of the inmates well know. The incarceration expenses, which make up a significant portion of death penalty expenses, probably shouldn't even be counted as death penalty expenses as supposed to life imprisonment.

All I saw in those sources was a great deal of fact twisting, and a great deal of waste not necessarily related to the death penalty.

costs $90,000 more a year to house one inmate on death row, where each person has a private cell and extra guards

[Davian93]

I would assume from those numbers that Texas is 70% Black or Hispanic. Correct Gil?

[Davian93]

costs $90,000 more a year to house one inmate on death row, where each person has a private cell and extra guards

That would be a cost directed related to the Death Penalty Ozy as death row inmates are kept isolated. Increasing the death penatly would only increase that type of cost.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

Are you talking about prison population or general?

[Davian93]

Both of course.;)

[Gilshalos Sedai]

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48000.html


I'll have to find the prison info in a bit.

[Ozymandias]

Looks like a lot to me. (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/scheduledexecutions.htm) Here (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm) are the ones that we've already executed. Here (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/annual.htm) are the executions by year. Here (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/racial.htm) are the executions by race.

And if you'd notice, the years leading up to an election for Governor (last was 2006), the executions increase.


Approximately 32% of convicted criminals in Texas are white. 38% are black. 30% are hispanic. Roughly speaking, thats a 2% margin of error, which in no way is adequate to say there is any discrimination in the courtroom, which seems to be a major argument against the death penalty (or at least one of your major arguments, Gil).

And thats how politics work. You'll notice that all sorts of wasteful, useless spending ramps up in preparation for an election.

[Davian93]

I was able to find some of it...like cool facts that 7 times as many blacks are incarcerated in Texas compared to Whites or that Texas has more people behind bars than live in my State...by about 100K.

[Ozymandias]

That would be a cost directed related to the Death Penalty Ozy as death row inmates are kept isolated. Increasing the death penatly would only increase that type of cost.

I understand... and its a ridiculous cost. If your argument against the death penalty is cost, then there seem to plenty of areas you can prune and save millions, and still retain the exact same punishment.

[Ozymandias]

I was able to find some of it...like cool facts that 7 times as many blacks are incarcerated in Texas compared to Whites or that Texas has more people behind bars than live in my State...by about 100K.

http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/publications/executive/FY_2006_Statistical_Report.pdf

Davian... find other sources. And I'm not sure where you live... but I don't think there are ANY states with only 50k people.

[Davian93]

http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/publications/executive/FY_2006_Statistical_Report.pdf

Davian... find other sources. And I'm not sure where you live... but I don't think there are ANY states with only 50k people.

Count everyone invovled in the corrections system including parole, probation, jails and prisons and its much higher.

[Ozymandias]

Count everyone invovled in the corrections system including parole, probation, jails and prisons and its much higher.

Excluding the jails and prisons (which were counted), you have parole and probation... people no longer being paid for by the prison system, except for their parole officer's salary.

So no... I really won't count all those people, they're not a particular financial burden on the taxpayer, in fact they likely pay for their own parole through their taxes, and they're not incarcerated prisoners any more.

[GonzoTheGreat]

Gonzo, I don't know whether to be insulted or flattered.
I graciously allow you to feel flattered.
I was able to find some of it...like cool facts that 7 times as many blacks are incarcerated in Texas compared to Whites or that Texas has more people behind bars than live in my State...by about 100K.
Well, duh. Everyone in Texas is a criminal, they just haven't all been caught, yet.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

which seems to be a major argument against the death penalty (or at least one of your major arguments, Gil).


I never mentioned race. Dav might have, but I never did. Texas is an equal opportunity executer.


Dav, your state is also smaller than Harris County. (Houston's county)

[Sinistrum]

A. The ruling isn't surprising as the Supreme Court has already ruled that you can't execute rapists, or mere murders. There has to be some sort of aggravating factor to the murder to incur the death penalty in order to avoid a violation of the 8th Amendment.

B. I support the death penalty regardless of the deterent effect or cost. I really don't care if it makes people stop and consider whether to commit a crime and I really don't care how much it costs to carry it out. I think retribution is a completely legitimate goal in the criminal justice system. To put it in Texas vernacular, some people just need killin.

[Weird Harold]

Ask and ye shall receive: Cost of Death Penalty (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108)
A fair and unbiased site to be sure. :rolleyes:

In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases.

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.
The costs of carrying out (i.e. incarceration and/or execution) a death sentence were about half the costs of carrying out a non-death sentence in a comparable case.

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

My question here is, just what constitutes a "comparable non-death penalty case?"

It seems to me that Kansas is saying they aren't being diligent in investigating and prosecuting serious crimes unless they decide to seek the death penalty where the ACLU and Supreme Court are watching every jot and tittle of the process.

The only valid comparison in this list is the cost of appeals the rest of the differences are a matter of the State's choice to skimp on lesser investigations and prosecutions.

And therin lies the problem with the entire judicial system in America -- too many prosecuters are politicians looking to win a few big cases regardless of the facts so they can get re-elected instead of seeking justice for everyone regardless of notoriety and/or finances.

The Death Penalty in the US is mis-applied far too often and not applied whenit should be evenmore often. That doesn't meanthe Death Penatly should be banned, it means that the flaws in the system need to be fixed so that the Death Penalty is applied when appropriate -- with no plea bargains or lesser charges -- and is NOT applied when it is NOT appropriate -- like for "child rape."

The Death Penalty should be reserved as the Ultimate Sanction for incorrigible, violent offeneders -- kill someone in prison because, "I'm already serving multiple life sentences, what else are they going to do to me" and move directly into the gas chamber.

The standrads of evidence in Death Penalty cases is far too low. Nobody, no matter how heinous the crime, should be executed on circumstantial evidence. On the other hand, where there is no doubt about guilt then stop dragging the process out over technicalities and get the execution over with. That eliminates the years of special security costs that death penalty opponents complain about.

I'm an avid supporter of the death penalty... harsher punishments tend to prevent crime more than more lenient punishments do.

Ozy, even the most ardent supporters of Capital Punishment know that's a myth. The Death Penalty is no deterent to the commission of a capital crime except to prevent recidivism.

History shows that swift, consistent, and appropriate punishment is a better deterent than randomly applied harsh sentences.

But the Death Penalty is not -- or at least should not be --about venegeance, deterence, or anything else except Public Safety; It is, or should be, the surgeons scalpel removing a cancer, so that the convict poses no possible threat to any memeber of society, including the prison guards who would have to interact with the convict during a life sentence.

[Davian93]

A. The ruling isn't surprising as the Supreme Court has already ruled that you can't execute rapists, or mere murders. There has to be some sort of aggravating factor to the murder to incur the death penalty in order to avoid a violation of the 8th Amendment.

B. I support the death penalty regardless of the deterent effect or cost. I really don't care if it makes people stop and consider whether to commit a crime and I really don't care how much it costs to carry it out. I think retribution is a completely legitimate goal in the criminal justice system. To put it in Texas vernacular, some people just need killin.

You know Sini...I completely disagree with the above statement (Part B at least) but I respect your stance.

WH...as always you bring logic and reasoning to the discussion.

[Ozymandias]

WH - I agree that it needs to be a consistent and fairly applied punishment. I pointed out already that its tough to gauge the effect of the death penalty on crime rates because as a punishment, the death penalty is applied more or less at random and sparingly enough that it really isn't a true threat for most violent offenders.

If most of the people who deserved the death punishment received it in an efficient manner, then it would probably deter crime.

And even if it didn't, it would still make the law abiding citizens of this country feel like something was actually being done, other than sticking a bunch of guys in a concrete block together to get 3 hot meals and a roof over their head.

And buttsex. Probably shouldn't forget the fringe benefits.

[Weird Harold]

If most of the people who deserved the death punishment received it in an efficient manner, then it would probably deter crime.

History says differently. Even the Roman's ruthless application of crucifixion didn't deter "crime." First of all, no criminal ever thinks they'll be caught, so punishment is a non-consideration as a deteremnt for most criminals.

What deters crime is consistent arrest and conviction. If it's obvious to potential criminals that they will NOT get away with it, they do think twice. The punishment after conviction is not particularly relevant to the deterent effect -- although the typical current level of non-punishment associated with conviction is little more than "the cost of doing business" to most career criminals.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

And even if it didn't, it would still make the law abiding citizens of this country feel like something was actually being done, other than sticking a bunch of guys in a concrete block together to get 3 hot meals and a roof over their head.


Dunno 'bout you, but I don't need reassurance.


Don't get me wrong, I'm for the death penalty in most cases. I just don't like my state's rather cavalier attitude about it, nor do I think that we're doing a good enough job to fix the system under which we incarcerate people. Hence that list of articles on the HPD crime lab.

[Yuri33]

I think the other thing that's being forgotten is this: if the death penalty were to apply to child rape, doesn't that create an incentive for the criminal to kill the child afterwards? I mean, once it escalates to the death penalty, why leave a witness?

[Davian93]

I think the other thing that's being forgotten is this: if the death penalty were to apply to child rape, doesn't that create an incentive for the criminal to kill the child afterwards? I mean, once it escalates to the death penalty, why leave a witness?

I would assume that that consideration probably went into the SCOTUS ruling...that and not wanting to apply the death penalty in non-murder cases.

[JSUCamel]

Ask OJ if he thought about going to jail when he killed Nicole.

Okay, unfair question.

Ask any murderer if they thought of the death penalty before they committed a murder. I can almost guarantee you that they didn't. They were thinking of how angry they were at this person, or upset at that person, or how life is so unfair, how how big of an adrenaline rush they're getting.

It's a fact of life that people don't consider the negative consequences when they do things.

I'm not against the death penalty, but I don't think it's a deterrent either.

[Weird Harold]

I think the other thing that's being forgotten is this: if the death penalty were to apply to child rape, doesn't that create an incentive for the criminal to kill the child afterwards? I mean, once it escalates to the death penalty, why leave a witness?
I child rapists thought they were going to get caught, they would not leave a witness regardless of the penalty.

It is fallacious to try to manipulate behavior by legislation, because History shows that it doesn't work -- any number of examples, starting with Prohibiton.

The only provable deterent effect of any arrest, prosecution or judicial sentence is that no person ever executed has committed another crime of any sort -- although I'm sure a few cases can be turned up of people being convicted post-humously, the crimes all occured before the execution took place.

[Yuri33]

Yes, the deterrent issue is rather moot.

Consider the majority of kinds of people who end up on death row--drug dealers, gang members, etc. These people operate in a world where death hangs over them every day. And their executions don't take place after a jury convicts them and they've exhausted all appeals.

[Yuri33]

The only provable deterent effect of any arrest, prosecution or judicial sentence is that no person ever executed has committed another crime of any sort -- although I'm sure a few cases can be turned up of people being convicted post-humously, the crimes all occured before the execution took place.

No person ever sentenced to life without possibility of parole ever committed another crime as well--unless you count crimes within prison, and I'm not sure many care about those.

[Weird Harold]

No person ever sentenced to life without possibility of parole ever committed another crime as well--unless you count crimes within prison, and I'm not sure many care about those.
Putting a contract on the prosecutor who convicted you is a crime -- in some states a capital crime whether the contract is carried out or not -- and keeping a prisnoer completely incommunicado is unconsititutional. Mob bosses have been convicted of conspiracy to commit murder for just such abuses of a prisoner's right to communicate with the outside world (and lawyer/client confidentiality.)

Prison Guards care about lifers who commit crimes in prison, because they are often the victims when prisoners riot. Other prisoners care about hard-core lifers serving "multiple consecutive life sentences" because they have nothing left to lose -- without the death penealty there is no sanction to be applied other than tacking on yeat another another consecutive LWOP sentence.

Life Without Possibility of Parole is no guarantee that some softheaded politician won't commute the sentence or pardont he convict completely. As several past political campaigns have revealed, "Without Possiblilty of Parole" also doesn't seem to be a bar to participation in work release programs or (compassionate) furloughs to attend a funeral (and then slip away into the crowd to commit more heinous crimes.)

Life Without Parole is also no protection against prisoners staging an escape -- even the most secure prison isn't proof against natural disaters creating the opportunity for escape.

The only possible sentence to compare to the Death Penalty is Total Solitary Confinement -- which has rightly been deemed "cruel and unusual" because it is a sentence of insanity.

If you're going to destroy someones personality, then "man up" and do it quickly and cleanly.

[Yuri33]

Contract killings take place before the conviction. If the sentence has already been handed down, the hit accomplishes nothing. If you're just talking about revenge, the same can happen when someone is on death row as well.

Prison guard safety, political intervention, escape: these all apply to those on death row as well, maybe more so.

If you're going to destroy someones personality, then "man up" and do it quickly and cleanly.

There's nothing "manly" about putting down an unarmed, completely confined person. This is the civilian justice system, not the battlefield.

[Sinistrum]

No person ever sentenced to life without possibility of parole ever committed another crime as well--unless you count crimes within prison, and I'm not sure many care about those.

Oh really...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_7

Prison guard safety, political intervention, escape: these all apply to those on death row as well, maybe more so.

Except they don't apply to death row inmates who, yanno, have already been executed...

[Yuri33]

Death row inmates have escaped (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9922969/) as well. Fortunately, this one was caught before he did anything as bad as the Texas 7, but that's beside the point.

Except they don't apply to death row inmates who, yanno, have already been executed...

This really isn't an debate on the efficiency of capital punishment. I think that was settled long ago.

[irerancincpkc]

So do I...see Spammer, we agree on some things.
Yes. The death penalty, some Dennis Quaid movies... :D

[Weird Harold]

If you're just talking about revenge, the same can happen when someone is on death row as well.

Prison guard safety, political intervention, escape: these all apply to those on death row as well, maybe more so.

I never said that those on death row weren't capable of committing further crimes or escaping, I said "no convict who has been executed has commited any further crime.

A sentence of Death is nothing more than an expensive life sentence with a private cell if the execution never takes place.

There's nothing "manly" about putting down an unarmed, completely confined person. This is the civilian justice system, not the battlefield.

So it is more humane (manly) to drive someone insane by locking them away from all human contact than it is to just kill them and be done with it? Is the civilian justice system less humane than a battle field under the Geneva Convention?

I was talking about the alternative method of not sentencing the prison guards to associate with cannibals, serial killers, and other despicable people -- Total Solitary Confinement. Which the SCOTUS has deemed cruel and unusual and the Geneva Convention also bans.

Society treats mad dogs with more humanity that it does serial killers and cannibals; we put them to sleep so their sickness and suffering are over with and nobody has to worrry about being infected by daily contact with them.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25379987/

Apparently, our Presidential candidates aren't fans of the Constitution in this instance.

[Davian93]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25379987/

Apparently, our Presidential candidates aren't fans of the Constitution in this instance.

Its the expedient thing to say as around 75% of the populace disagrees with the decision as its popular to say that rapists should get to visit Ol' Sparky...typical mob mentality.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

And God forbid one of them comes across as "soft on crime."

[Davian93]

And God forbid one of them comes across as "soft on crime."

Soft on crime...SOFT ON CRIME!!!?!!?!

I smell blood in the water!!!

[Gilshalos Sedai]

I could buy that crap from a mayor or maybe even a governor... but other than the occasional Presidential Pardon, exactly WHAT does a President have to do with the criminal justice system?

[Davian93]

I could buy that crap from a mayor or maybe even a governor... but other than the occasional Presidential Pardon, exactly WHAT does a President have to do with the criminal justice system?

Appoints Attorney General, FBI director, SCOTUS Justices, other judges etc etc I suppose.

I see your point though...kinda far up in the chain to do so. Its like my brother who supports Obama because his wife is a teacher and Obama said he wants higher wages for teachers...as if that's something the President controls.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

Especially since teachers' wages are set BY THE STATES.

[Davian93]

Especially since teachers' wages are set BY THE STATES.

Trust me, I know that and you'd think he would too. He's almost as annoying as Spammer (nothing personal;)) when it comes to Obama.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

Well, Laura's being a librarian certainly helped out public libraries!

[Sei'taer]

First, it looks like Jindal is going to keep the SCOTUS (http://www.kalb.com/index.php/news/article/governor-bobby-jindal-signs-chemical-castration-bill/9539/) busy for a while. He is going to challenge them over and over again.


Second, to sound very clintonesque here, the term is cruel and unusual. The French used the guillotine on into the 20th century. So, although it was cruel, it was not unusual. The guillotine remained the official method of execution in France until France abolished the death penalty in 1981. The last guillotining was of Hamida Djandoubi in 1977. While I am not for treating people cruelly, I do find it interesting that it was written this way in the constitution, leaving you 2 points that had to be met, it had to be cruel, and, it had to be unusual, instead of saying cruel or unusual. Just an oddity that has always stood out to me.

I also support the death penalty, in much the same way Sini does.

[Sinistrum]

Well I think the idea of the language is that pretty much all serious punishments in our penal system have en element of cruelty to them. Locking someone up in a 6 by 8 cell and totally stripping them of their freedom is pretty cruel by most standards. That cruelty just doesn't bother that many people, hence it isn't unusual. That's why the SCOTUS has allowed for evolving senses of societal morality to be an element of what is cruel and unusual. That way, it remains a flexible term in legal jurisprudence.

[the silent speaker]

I have never understood the "cost" argument. If your justice system answers to the prices involved, rather than to justice being served, it is bought, and has no moral authority to issue fines much less prison or death sentences.

If the death penalty is justice in the particular case, it cannot be afforded to avoid, no matter which way is "cheaper". If it is not justice in the particular case, no expense is too much to avoid it.

I also disagree with SCOTUS's position that a crime not involving a homicide cannot be justly punished with death. We don't require commensuracy for any other punishments; if we did, nothing short of kidnapping could be punished with prison.

I do agree, however, that before executing someone you make damn sure that you have the guy what did it and he really does need killin'. To that end I would support mandatory DNA tests of anyone being put on trial for capital, life-in-prison or sexual offenses; not every time will a test be positive or relevant, but at least we won't put an innocent man on Death Row if it's negative.

[Frenzy]

Nothing to add that WH hasn't said.