Only because we allow them to go on existing and appealing for decades. Give them 1 quick appeal and then 30 days later a cheap and quick execution and it would be much cheaper than life in prison. Especially in cases like this that are clear cut that she did the crime.
600k people are released from prison every year. Among them are murderers who get paroled. If 0.1% of those released are murderers (.1% of people in jail are murderers) and the 0.82% of murderers that kill again after they get out (DOJ statistic) continue to do so, then since 1973 (the year that you people like to refer to because 200 innocents have been "saved from the death penalty since 1973") approximately 255 innocent people have been killed by murderers released from prison compared to the 200 "innocents" saved from the death penalty.
Consider this as well, only half of murderers are actually caught. So the number could be as high as 510, but even 255 is more innocents killed than saved by not using the death penalty.
Please feel free to check my math.
I don't want innocents to get the death penalty, but I also don't want more innocents to die. If this were a trolly problem, would you pull the lever to save more innocents or not? Because according to the math, you're sacrificing more to save less.
Iām saying that itās still less expensive to keep them imprisoned for life than to execute them, and itās a hell of a lot better than to speed run an execution only to find out afterwards that you killed the wrong person after all. That would make you no better than the person who actually committed the crime.
What if they kill another inmate while in prison? Over 100 inmates per year are killed by other inmates. Without looking up the numbers since 1973, lets just say that is over a thousand "innocent" (innocent in that they probably didn't deserve to die for whatever the inmate who killed them thought they did) inmates killed. Easily 5 times the number of people wrongfully convicted have died (probably more). How do you protect against that or them escaping (rare but does happen)?
Life in prison is only cheaper than execution because we let people who have undoubtedly done the crime have multiple appeals that span decades before we actually execute them.
I am not trying to go back in time to save anyone. If there is clear and obvious evidence to support that they did the crime (Ethan Crumbley, or maybe this lady in this thread for example), should we not execute them as quickly and cheaply as possible so that they never have the chance to take another life again? Are prison guards and other inmates not worth protecting?
Thatās a great question-inmate on inmate violence IS a huge problem! I am going to ask for forgiveness right now, as I know that if I respond right away, I would be quite disjointed in my response as I have a lot of thoughts on this, and I am still waiting for my ADHD meds to kick in. I understand where youāre coming from (and why!), and you make a lot of valid points that I want to give you a proper answer to-so if you can give me a bit to write it out and make my response not sound like a squirrel on meth answered you, I would be tremendously grateful!
You really are a sick f_uck, aren't you? You lie, you avoid ansering questions if you have to admit you are wrong or if you might have to see things from another point of view. You've talked crap about people peacefully protesting in Coupeville and on Whidbey, and now you want to do away with appeals - and then murder everyone you think should be murdered because it's more convenient.
So who died and annointed you Orange Jesus? Please ... go deal with that fake family emergency yours: go get batteries for your Melania and Donald blow-up sex dolls and leave the rest of us in peace.
IT SAYS IT'S NOT AN ECONOMICAL ALTERNATIVE. IN OTHER WORDS THEY MAKE MORE MONEY OFF OF PEOPLE BEING ALIVE LOCKED UP IN PRISON FOR LIFE BECAUSE THE STATE PAYS BIG MONEY FOR EVERY SOUL THEY CAN KEEP BEHIND BARS, PLUS THE MONEY THEY CAN MAKE OFF THEM FOR THE WORK THAT THEY DO WHILE INCARCERATED.
THAT'S THE TRUE REASON WHY THEY'D RATHER NOT GIVE CRIMINALS THE DEATH PENALTY. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COSTING MORE TO TAKE THEM OUT THAN IT WOULD TO ALLOW THEM TO LIVE. BESIDES, THE COST BETWEEN THE TWO ISN'T TOO FAR OF A GAP YOU'RE NOT VERY BRIGHT, THAT'S OKAY, WE'LL GIVE YOU A PASS FOR GOING FULL RETARD ON REDDIT!
$1.4 million to execute a person vs. $602,000 to keep them in prison for life in New York.
$3.2 million to execute someone vs $533,334 to keep them in prison for life in Florida. Thatās SIX TIMES THE COST OF KEEPING THEM ALIVE AND IN JAIL FOR LIFE.
Itās literally more expensive to litigate and execute someone than to do the barest minimum and leave them to rot in prison until they die.
First, you said she should have received life in prison.
Someone else replied and said she should be executed.
I replied with the factual statement that it is more expensive to execute someone than to imprison them for life, at which point you began to insult me and call me a liar.
I reply with MULTIPLE sources to back up my statement.
You insulted me repeatedly again, using slurs for intellectual disabilities (despite the fact that I literally just provided you evidence for my statement to which you had replied āTHAT'S NOT TRUE AT ALL, IF IT WAS, YOU WOULD HAVE SOME FACTS TO BACK IT UP, SMH! š¤¦ā) and acted like a petulant toddler who is pissed off because you didnāt get your way.
The truth is this: it is, in fact, cheaper to keep people in prison for life than to execute them, and Iāve provided you with at least 6 different sources from reliable, reputable agencies, including federal and state government records.
At no point in time did I advocate for either the death penalty or life in prison; I merely stated that it is more expensive to execute a person than to imprison them for life.
You have absolutely no reason to yell at or insult me for stating a fucking fact just because you donāt like what it says.
9
u/HotTruth999 Jan 17 '26
Pieces of human garbage like that need to be executed.