Durr hurr death penalty costs more dumbfuck.

'Gainst it, costs too much and doesn't really do anything.

>>8016057
Only due to the cost of appeals.

>>8016050
i think the death penalty should be reserved for people who are unlikely to rehabilitate and who are unwilling to add value to society from inside the pen, i.e. labor for their keep

Against it. Against the entire American jail system, actually.

1/10

Are you chucklefucks even trying anymore?

We should build a catapult that just fires criminals out to sea. Much cheaper.

They need to bring back forced manual labour.
If every prison was turned into a giant sweatshop, win:win situation.

If someone is a danger to society without a chance of psychiatric rehabilitation (serial killers, pedophiles) I think chemical sterilization should do the trick. What works for animals should be good enough for wackos.

>>8016057
But it doesn't.

In Britain the average prisoner costs 40,000 GBP a year and it is estimated each new prison place costs 120,000 GBP. For candidates of the death penalty it is far higher (i.e. the cost of keeping Ian Huntley secure behind bars costs millions).

It doesn't cost that much to kill someone.

Derp Herp, it costs 1000 times more to kill someone then it does to keep them in prison for life.

>>8016109
It could be cheaper without due process, you're right.

Killing somebody is cheap. Capital punishment for the sake of proper justice is extremely expensive.

I'm against it, because I'd pick a noose ending in quick death over 40 years hard time ending in slow death. Why pay extra money to give a serial killer that benefit?

I'm for it. We should use it far more often.

I'm for it, but I think the process needs to be changed.

-One appeal, unless you can REALLY prove there was a HUGE procedural blunder in the second trial.
-Execution within one year of final conviction.

I'm for the death penalty. But I have some questions about the technique...

The standard procedure in almost every state now is lethal injection, but they use some esoteric sequence of chemicals to paralyze the condemned then two other drugs to arrest breathing and then stop the heart. It seems superfluous to use three drugs, and there are more chances to botch the execution and have the condemned suffer. Why not use one cheap narcotic, like morphine or any of a multitude of artificial narcotics, in a full open IV drip? The condemned would fall asleep and not wake up.

>>8016119
>implying it costs $750 million to kill somebody.

Against

why I should I give a jury of my peers the right to kill somebody?

think of who your peers are

Why they just don't shoot them? You will be executed blablabla, and then just shoot the fucker.

Bring back the gallows...it's fun family entertainment...

a civilised society can only protect people from harm, not seek vengence, because there's always a chance the accused was framed

I'm for it, in fact it should be public and carried out straight after the guilty verdict/ sentance has been passed. Also the death penalty should not only be handed out for murder but for really low level crimes such as downloading music from peer to peer sites.

>life has no value
>legal homicide

>>8016578

It does in America.

I am for the death penalty, but it needs to be revamped into an efficient well oiled death machine. The best thing to do right now would be to liquidate all minority prisoners though.

Why can't we drop them off in africa?

How about the condemed gets to play a game show like quiz to try to win the chance of not being executed? I think it would be a TV hit. I'd watch it.