I am ambivalent about death penalty nowadays, but more inclined towards opposing it. Just before his retirement, former Illinois Republican Governor George Ryan issued a moratorium on the state's death penalty and commuted the sentences of all death row inmates on grounds that capital punishment system is full of errors. It was a huge controversy at the time. I didn't know much about Ryan, but I've had a favorable opinion of him because of this since then. Texas leads the nation in executing death row inmates. I am not a Texan, and I didn't know Texas doesn't have the "life without parole" option. Among other things, I think Texas' image will forever be changed should this bill get passed. Interesting enough, one of the co-sponsors is also a Republican. Am I safe to assume if George W Bush were still the Texas Governor, this bill would never get signed? EDIT: I would like to hear in particular what you religious people out there have to say on this, since you all have the penchant to argue about life, forgiveness, and redemption. Here's the article. Texas ponders life without parole Saturday, May 21, 2005 Posted: 11:17 PM EDT (0317 GMT) AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- In Texas, the state that leads the nation in executions, lawmakers are considering an option already available in all but one other death penalty state: life without parole. Death penalty opponents think a sentence that would ensure murderers never get back on the streets would make a death sentence less appealing. Currently, juries in Texas capital murder cases here have two choices -- death or life in prison with the possibility of parole after 40 years. A measure approving life without parole passed the Senate last month but has stalled in the House, with the session set to end May 30. "It's frustrating to see something so important to the criminal justice system not move forward," said Sen. Eddie Lucio, who has sponsored a life-without-parole bill for the past four sessions. But many lawmakers and prosecutors are skeptical of life without parole, saying it would decrease the number of death sentences and their ability to deter crime. "If you take away the ultimate penalty, maybe it's not enough of an incentive to stay out of trouble," said Rep. Beverly Woolley, a Houston Republican. The Legislature took a hard look at Texas criminal justice after former governor Gov. George Bush's presidential campaign, but a life-without-parole measure that passed the Senate in 2001 narrowly failed in the House. Bill sponsors felt their case was bolstered by the Supreme Court ruling in March that banned the execution of murderers who kill when they are younger than 18. In 2002, the courts also struck down executions of mentally r****ded inmates. Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C., said juries who have the option of life without parole are less likely to choose the death penalty. Of the 38 states with the death penalty, only Texas and New Mexico don't have the life-without-parole option. "Virtually every other jurisdiction in America has life without parole," said Steve Hall, a member of Stand Down Texas, which supports a moratorium on the death penalty. Texas has put eight inmates to death so far this year for a total of 344 since the state resumed executions in 1982, the most of any state. Lucio, a Democrat, said he plans to meet with House leaders in the next few days to try to push the bill along. He said there are enough votes to pass it and send it on to Republican Gov. Rick Perry for his consideration. "I don't understand why at this time of the session, with the support this bill has, why it would be on hold," Lucio said. Seventy-five percent of Texans support the death penalty, but 78 percent favor giving juries the life without parole option, according to a Scripps-Howard poll in October. Tony Goolsby, a Republican sponsor of the House bill, said life in prison is a harsh enough penalty. "If you want to punish a person who violated the law, you let them go to bed every night and wake up and see steel bars, a cold concrete floor and a stainless steel potty. That's their life until they die," Goolsby said. Dianne Clements, a member of the Houston-based victims rights group Justice For All, said she trusts juries to choose the death penalty when appropriate, even if given the option of life without parole. "I believe juries will still look at cases that deserve death and vote for death," she said.
I'm not particularly religious but I am against the death penalty. I think there's too much of a chance of error leading to killing an innocent person. Since the state is executing someone in my name I would feel somewhat responsible for that. I also primarily believe the Justice system is to provide for the safety of society and not vengeance.
I am not completely against the death penalty, but do believe that Texas juries should have the option of life without parole.
I whole-heartedly agree with you on this. It's really mind-boggling to see people who argue passionately for "culture of life" are on the other hand staunch death penalty advocates. I can't help but have to take another jab at George W. Bush. To quote from Roger Ebert from his zero-star review of the movie The Life of David Gale: "...Texas, which in a good year all by itself carries out half the executions in America. Death Row in Texas is like the Roach Motel: Roach checks in, doesn't check out. When George W. Bush was Texas governor, he claimed to carefully consider each and every execution, although a study of his office calendar shows he budgeted 15 minutes per condemned man (we cannot guess how many of these minutes were devoted to pouring himself a cup of coffee before settling down to the job). Still, when you're killing someone every other week and there's an average of 400 more waiting their turn, you have to move right along."
Against death penalty so I'm for life imprisonment w/o parole. "It's really mind-boggling to see people who argue passionately for "culture of life" are on the other hand staunch death penalty advocates. " I've always thought this was mind-boggling both ways.
I am against the death penalty, but I can see how people care less about killing convicted murderers than innocent babies.
I've always found it mind-boggling in neither way. The two bear little relation to one another, in my mind. I don't see it as a contradiction for either camp. As for life without parole, I like the bill because I feel like our legislature is trying to bully our juries to mete out death penalties when they don't really want to. Not sure how well they've succeeded -- 40 years without parole is a long time -- but I don't appreciate the attempt. On the flip side, I do see reasons to not have a life without parole option, if it were not so intimately entwined with the death penalty. Forty years from now, a guy you put away for life may genuinely merit parole, but no, the parole board's hands are tied (the same is true, and moreso, with the death penalty, of course). I don't think that's what the legislature is thinking about though.
I know, this is a really old thread. But, this Chron article takes a look back at the effect allowing life-without-parole has had on the death penalty in Texas. The change seems pretty remarkable. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6776573.html [rquoter]Report: Death sentences decline; death rows shrink By MARK SHERMAN Associated Press Writer © 2009 The Associated Press Dec. 17, 2009, 11:26PM WASHINGTON — Texas and other states that lead the nation in executions are sentencing many fewer inmates to death, a trend that slowly is reducing the death row population in the United States, a report from an anti-capital punishment group says. There were 106 death sentences imposed in 2009, the Death Penalty Information Center estimated in its annual report released Friday. That number is the smallest since capital punishment was reinstated in 1976 and compares with an annual average of 295 death sentences during the 1990s. Fifty-two people were put to death in 11 states this year, nearly half as many executions as 10 years ago. The center, which opposes capital punishment, attributes the drop in both executions and new death sentences to fears of executing the innocent, concerns about the high cost of the death penalty and laws that allow inmates to be sentenced to life in prison without parole. Nine men who had been sentenced to death were exonerated and freed in 2009, the second highest-number of exonerations since the death penalty was reinstated, the report said. Texas, which continues to far outpace other states in executions, has seen its death row population decline by more than a quarter in 10 years, mainly because of the decrease in death sentences. Harris County, Texas, which includes Houston and all by itself has put more people to death than any state other than Texas, has had no new death sentences for the past two years. Statewide, nine people were sentenced to death in Texas in 2009, compared with 48 in 1999 and an annual average of 34 in the 1990s. Ohio and Virginia — other states among the annual leaders in executions each year — recorded just one new death sentence each, although another Ohio inmate was resentenced to death by a three-judge panel after his sentence was twice overturned. Robin Piper, prosecuting attorney in Butler County in conservative southwest Ohio, said horrific cases that appear to demand a death sentence often become more complicated as the facts of the case emerge. "For those jurors who are potentially squeamish or reluctant to sit in judgment or to exercise the death penalty, life in prison without parole becomes a very viable option they can feel safe and secure with," Piper said. James Alan Fox, a criminology professor at Northeastern University in Boston, said two other factors probably are at work, the historically low crime rate and the Supreme Court's decisions to keep juveniles and the mentally disabled from being executed. "The potential pool of offenders who are eligible for execution is smaller," Fox said. Money, especially during the economic downturn, also is playing a role in states' consideration of the death penalty, the report said. New Mexico became the 15th state to abolish the death penalty and 10 other states at least considered repealing it. In Connecticut, the legislature approved repeal, but Gov. Jodi Rell vetoed the measure. "The death penalty is a wasteful program. It is very inefficient," said Richard Dieter, the center's executive director and the report's author. "These are the sorts of things you become wiser about when you go through an economic crisis." Everything about a death case — the trial, the appeals, the imprisonment — costs more than the average criminal prosecution. The nationwide death row population has shrunk by nearly 10 percent in the past 10 years, but still tops 3,000. Even in Texas, around 330 people remain on death row and the state already has scheduled six executions for 2010. Ohio, with roughly 175 inmates on death row, has six executions scheduled. Two other states with large death row populations — California and Pennsylvania — have abandoned executions, at least temporarily. California has roughly 690 inmates and Pennsylvania, 225. California last carried out an execution in 2006, after which a federal judge ordered changes to the death chamber and better training for the team of executioners that is charged with injecting inmates with a lethal dose of drugs. The state spends $137 million a year on new capital trials, a thoroughly backlogged appeals process and security for the inmates. Roughly 75 have lived on death row for more than 25 years and roughly the same number are 60 or older. Pennsylvania hasn't executed anyone in 10 years. The three inmates it has put to death since 1976 all gave up appeals that would have extended their lives by years, if not blocked their executions altogether.[/rquoter]
It should be called free room and board for life, plus unlimited healthcare. I think we should kick them out of the prisons as soon as they get sick with a life threatening illness. Use the savings to reduce taxes. The criminal can die a faster death without healthcare.
At least you're consistent! And yeah, I was like "whoa, Sishir sighting," and then I was all like "oh." Prisons are still growing at a disgusting rate. What in the heck can we do about it? And rates of the paroled ending back up in prison are pretty bad too, so the "correctional" aspect is just not very functional (or maybe it has never, in human history, really been practical.) Gives me many headaches.
I've always hated the fact that my taxes go to pay for someone to live in prison. Someone commits a crime, and they get free food and shelter. Many repeat offenders would probably rather be in prison than on the outside. I'm not in favor of life without parole in most cases. If they're going to live their life and die in prison anyway, I don't see the point of not putting these people to death. The death penalty saves prison space and taxpayer money.
As was pointed out in the article, for a variety of reasons, the death penalty is more expensive than life-in-prison for the taxpayer. And of course, that ignores the fact that people keep getting exonerated and freed, which isn't possible if the person is killed. 109 people were sentenced to death last year, while 9 were exonerated from previous life sentences. That's a horrible error rate.
That should be from previous death sentences. Who knows how many people have been put to death wrongly already that could have been freed.
My grandfather was a Marine in Tientsin, China at the end of the second world war, and he said that was the prevailing philosophy governing criminals at the time. Since everyone was starving anyway, the Nationalists felt beheading people in a public square was far more humane, since they couldn't afford to feed them anyway. As things got worse that applied to people shoplifting and stealing food. I think it's a safe argument that reforming drug laws would save a lot more space and a lot more money.
