Andrew Brannan clemency denied

[Gasser64]

Death doesn't stop new people from choosing crime. It's an issue of opportunity cost.

And you don't think that witnessing someone swing from the end of a rope is a strong deterrent?

[YALE]

And you don't think that witnessing someone swing from the end of a rope is a strong deterrent?

Not always. Again, the issue is opportunity cost, which is what you have to give up to do something. Where that is basically nothing, crime is an attractive choice. It's even more attractive where there is already violence. Stupid people will ignore the possibility, and smart(er) people will see the message as "don't get caught," not, "don't do crime."

[Gasser64]

So you're thinking that giving up your life, is basically nothing to these people. I'm sure a lot of them about to get the needle would beg to differ. I get it, you dont like the death penalty. Lots of people agree with you. Lots of people dont

What about the instant death penalty? What are your thoughts on that one? Where someone breaks into your house and is trying to kill you, and blah blah etc etc. The whole deal. What are your thoughts on them catching a bullet? No trial necessary, they're guilty as sin with the only witness necessary being the victims. Should that guy get the instant "death penalty"? Or would it be better to just let him finish, and give him a fair trial?

[YALE]

So you're thinking that giving up your life, is basically nothing to these people. I'm sure a lot of them about to get the needle would beg to differ. I get it, you dont like the death penalty. Lots of people agree with you. Lots of people dont

What about the instant death penalty? What are your thoughts on that one? Where someone breaks into your house and is trying to kill you, and blah blah etc etc. The whole deal. What are your thoughts on them catching a bullet? No trial necessary, they're guilty as sin with the only witness necessary being the victims. Should that guy get the instant "death penalty"? Or would it be better to just let him finish, and give him a fair trial?

I'm not saying I don't like the death penalty, so no, you don't get it. I'm saying that given our modern legal system's requirements for a death penalty prosecution, capital punishment is wasteful, compared to imprisoning someone for their entire life. The attempted red herring about people breaking into my house is irrelevant.

[Gasser64]

That's exactly what ive been saying; waste. End the waste, and break out all the ropes. The red herring is relevant because the only difference for him is time. If he gets the bullet now, or the death penalty later, the end result is the exact same. There certainly wont be any reform, you cant let someone like that back out to possibly do it again.

[Craizie]

So you're thinking that giving up your life, is basically nothing to these people. I'm sure a lot of them about to get the needle would beg to differ. I get it, you dont like the death penalty. Lots of people agree with you. Lots of people dont

What about the instant death penalty? What are your thoughts on that one? Where someone breaks into your house and is trying to kill you, and blah blah etc etc. The whole deal. What are your thoughts on them catching a bullet? No trial necessary, they're guilty as sin with the only witness necessary being the victims. Should that guy get the instant "death penalty"? Or would it be better to just let him finish, and give him a fair trial?

*Most* criminals do not think of the punishment when committing a crime. The death penalty may make them regret what they did, but I doubt it does little to stop actual crime.

[YALE]

That's exactly what ive been saying; waste. End the waste, and break out all the ropes. The red herring is relevant because the only difference for him is time. If he gets the bullet now, or the death penalty later, the end result is the exact same. There certainly wont be any reform, you cant let someone like that back out to possibly do it again.

Ah, so you don't regret moving the goalpost.

[Gasser64]

*Most* criminals do not think of the punishment when committing a crime. The death penalty may make them regret what they did, but I doubt it does little to stop actual crime.

Well we must also have justice. So making them regret what they did is part of it, even if its not a preventative measure.

[YALE]

Well we must also have justice. So making them regret what they did is part of it, even if its not a preventative measure.

Justice doesn't have to be retributive, exclusively. It also has the potential to be restorative.

[Cooter]

Well we must also have justice. So making them regret what they did is part of it, even if its not a preventative measure.

and life in prison won't make somebody have regrets!?

[CJ]

No mercy for that piece of shit.

[Gasser64]

Justice doesn't have to be retributive, exclusively. It also has the potential to be restorative.

It needs to be both at the same time. Swift retribution against the criminal, and the restoration of... really all kinds of things. The victims' families sense of.. well all kinds of things yet again. They get a lot out of knowing that justice was served. Restoring public order. And if any faith was lost in the "authority", then that too would be restored at that time. Letting them live out their days well taken care of, and in comfort, isn't justice. All you've done is move them to another physical location where they can't commit those crimes on people who aren't also convicted criminals.

Granted we're talking about only the violent criminals here. The game changes some when it didn't hurt anybody. Although I would say that irreversible financial ruin and other types of ruin might come close enough to warrant the death penalty. People have certainly been tried, convicted, and put to death for less in the past in countries like this one where a fair trial is a right.