It actually costs more to execute a criminal than to house him for life in prison. Death Penalty trials and the appeal process are extremely costly. Don't take my word for it; research it and you will see that it is not in question which costs more.

I am against the death penalty. I haven't always been but I am now and don't believe that will ever change. I was a criminal justice major and I've heard both sides of the issue argued to death (no pun intended). As punishment, I do not find it immoral. Quite the opposite as I believe those that murder do deserve to die themselves. But the single point that's impossible for me to ignore is that of false positives. Sometimes the system gets it wrong and innocent people have been executed.

Regardless of how compelling the evidence is, regardless of how certain we are that we have the right person, there is no way we can be sure. When the state (or nation) executes an innocent person, then the state has become a murderer themself. That is unacceptable to me. As horrible as it would be to lock up an innocent person for years or even life, should the mistake ever be revealed, we can give them at least a piece of their life back. That unfortunately would not be the case with capital punishment.

As long as the potential for even one wrongful execution exists (and the death penalty is such a political issue, there will always be that potential), I believe none should be carried out.

This guy is as guilty as it gets.Bystanders tackled him with the gun still in his hand."The smoking gun" applies here.

I remember when someone on death row got executed within a month or two of their conviction.States didn't spend all that money on appeals.Seemed to work out well.But today we have to do all this politically correct B.S.

Don

We're not in the Good Ol' 1950's anymore. People are wrongly convicted all the time, the guy released from Dallas last week was imprisoned for 30 years and they just now figured out he was innocent. And he's #21 that's gotten overturned in this city alone.

A smoking gun being the exception, anyone about to be executed needs some reviewing before inserting the needle.

(Note the smoking gun exception)

That's great then. Apparently we don't need to grant him a trial or even let him speak at all then since apparently newspaper, tv, and internet reports seem to be enough to execute him. I mean due process sure is a silly little annoyance that we get caught up on. Forget the fact that it's in place to protect us all. Let's identify the bad guy as quickly as possible and pull the trigger.

I'm glad you look fondly on the days of lynch mob justice. But considering that innocents are executed today, even with the exhaustive appeals process that's in place now, how many innocent people do you think were executed in those days? Do you really believe that's acceptable?

No, I don't really doubt this guy is guilty, but there is no such thing as a smoking gun in the criminal justice system. Eye witness testimony can be faulty, manipulated, coerced or outright lies, photos and video can be doctored, evidence and DNA can be planted. Do I think this happens often or even at all? No, not particularly. But that doesn't mean the possibility isn't there. I don't care how small that possibility is. For me, being on the right side of justice means showing you understand the value of human life, even if it means allowing an underserving human life to continue.

[canadian]
I'm just gonna chime my little Canadian mind into here and say that no matter what he did, I don't think he deserves to be killed.

[/canadian]

I wish we had the Chinese system. If a person is found guilty of a capital crime, the judge sentences him to death. He is then escorted from the court taken outside and shot. His family receives a bill for 26 cents, the cost of the bullet. They really don't have many executions in China because criminals KNOW the penalty will be carried out. May seem a little harsh but it cuts down on crime. I remember in 1958 my uncle was a prison guard in Montana, he got laid off because they had to close down part of the prison do to low prison population. Well now you can be caught like this guy and get a prison term and get paroled in a few years. Stupidity runs amok

Yeah communism would rock...

Not.

Imagine a person is convicted of a crime, found guilty, and shot. Then there is an innocent dead man, a grieving family out 26 cents, and a criminal running free.

[American who lives in Canada]Even in Canada they put down dogs that bite people. A bite from a dog doesn't kill (often), where as a gunman on a spree does kill.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that he should have a trial and get his due process. I just don't think we should be so quick to say who deserves or doesn't deserve what until we have further facts about the situation.

Even if you are against the death penalty you should agree that he should get at the very least a life sentence - where as he truely spends the rest of his life in prison. Keep in mind also that Canada does offer parole possibilities for both first and second degree murder convicts. Some 'Life sentences' can only last fivteen years! Surely our sociopaths deserve better [/American who lives in Canada]

I find the comparison of dogs to human similar of that to apples and oranges..


I do agree that he should be punished and sentenced in whichever way is deemed appropriate [minus death]. I don't agree with everything in Canada, but I do believe some people can be rehabilitated. So I'm not against parole for what you mentioned, just i wouldn't give it out every case. Parole is suppose to be given only when appropriate. . . the question is when is appropriate! (probably not often at all)

I understand dogs and people are different, Fair enough. Many bleeding hearts would argue that animals should never be put to death for any reason, the exact same sympathy that some have for humans/offenders. To that I say: To each his own.

For me personally, I feel little to no sympathy for someone who murders in cold blood. I don't care what happens to them, just so long as they don't hurt anyone anymore, and answer for what they have done (in whatever mannor).

No offense towards Canada intended in my comments, I just find the whole country to be a little 'overtollerant' of criminals especially (In Ontario at least).

I did NOT say that!! We have the best form of government in the world, and it will continue to be as soon as B.O. is out of office. He is trying to socialize America with his death panels.

What I did say was the Chinese way of dealing with criminals DEALS with them. We, on the other hand, coddle them. West Side Story had a line in it that says how we look at it today "I'm depraved because I'm deprived!!"

To show you, here in the Cincinnati Oh area it was on the news that a woman that shot her husband in 2007 while he slept, was convicted of murder and is now up for parole. She has spent 46 months in prison for murder and will most likely be free by May. For MURDER.

Well, its not as simple as being convicted of murder and shot. I would in no way fathom discussing that and all of its different paths on here but I will say that in the case of the original story, I have no problem if he is put down like the animal he is.

Saying that crime is lower in China compared to the U.S. due to a harsh and swift death penalty is an assumption. There is no data to back up that statement and implentation of the death penalty in the U.S. has been shown not to be a deterrent to capital offenses (in other words the occurences of capital offenses wasn't lessened at all regardless of whether or not the death penalty was an option). There are hundreds if not thousands of other factors that could be responsible for China (or any other country) having a lower crime rate than our own. Correlation does not equal causation and it is often dangerous to assume otherwise when there is no evidence to back up a theory.

I'm curious, if a convict is executed in the manner described above and later proven to be innocent, is the family reimbursed the 26 cents? In your opinion, how many innocent people would be acceptable sacrifices to implement a method that I remind you has in no way been PROVEN to cut down on crime in general? 1 in a 1,000? 1 in 10,000? 1 in a million?? I'm sure I sound like a broken record, but we're talking about human life here. To me any of those figures is unacceptable.

I'd also like to add that there is a whole lot of middle ground between coddling and killing. I agree the criminal justice system in the U.S. is flawed. Here in Massachusetts a recent parole with a laundry list of violent offenses shot and killed a cop in Woburn shortly after being released. Heads rolled on that one and the whole parole system in our state is under fire. I have no issue with life in prison without the possibility of parole for certain offenses. The difference between that and death is that if a mistake is found to have been made, you can give a person back part of their life. Killing someone is a bell you can't unring.

McDog, yes I am oversimplifying things and I do know that. I will admit to doing a bit of trolling by doing that, however, I do believe in the death penalty and I believe we should revamp the way it is administered. Now, in the U.S. it can take YEARS from being sentenced to actually being executed, the exception was Tim McVeigh (spelling?) in the OK bombing case. He was executed in a much shorter period of time, The crime happened in 1995 and he was executed in 2001. Most live on death row for 20 years or so. We have to speed up the time between sentencing and carrying out said sentence. BTW the death row inmates live very well, they can have anything they want except for women for the rest of their lives. Meals, warm or cool depending on the season, place to live, TV, no work, and YOU pay for it.