NJ Capital Punishment?

Question

What do you think about the recent ending and the ban of capital punishment in New Jersey? Was it a good thing to do? Why or why not?

Answer 1

It is a very good thing. To cast this problem as just a liberal concern does a disservice to anyone who wants our criminal justice system to be as good as it can be, given that it is (and will always be) adminstered by human beings (who are, by nature, fallible.)

New Jersey did the right thing and in the right way. It instituted a year long study commission before taking up an abolition bill. Among the many witnesses before the commission were families of murder victims who do not support the death penalty. I have given a link to the commission report, below.

You don't have to sympathize with criminals or want them to avoid a terrible punishment to ask if the death penalty prevents or even reduces crime and to think about the risks of executing innocent people. Your question is much too important to settle without thinking about these.

125 people on death rows have been released with proof that they were wrongfully convicted. DNA is available in less than 10% of all homicides and isn’t a guarantee we won’t execute innocent people.

The death penalty doesn't prevent others from committing murder. No reputable study shows the death penalty to be a deterrent. To be a deterrent a punishment must be sure and swift. The death penalty is neither. Homicide rates are higher in states and regions that have it than in those that don’t.

We have a good alternative. Life without parole is now on the books in 48 states. It means what it says. It is sure and swift and rarely appealed. Life without parole is less expensive than the death penalty.

The death penalty costs much more than life in prison, mostly because of the legal process which is supposed to prevent executions of innocent people.

The death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. When is the last time a wealthy person was on death row, let alone executed?

The death penalty doesn't necessarily help families of murder victims. Murder victim family members across the country argue that the drawn-out death penalty process is painful for them and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

Problems with speeding up the process. Over 50 of the innocent people released from death row had already served over a decade. If the process is speeded up we are sure to execute an innocent person.

Answer 2

Since NJ years ago started to allow capital punishment 20 or so years ago, not one person had been killed. The reason is they were caught up in the extensive legal system that allowed capital punishment in the first place. All that allowing capital punishment did for NJ in the first place, was ring up extra legal bills while the inmate applied for appeal after appeal. So in that sense, it was the right thing to do. Why drain our justice system anymore than it is already being drained.

Answer 3

It made perfect sense, especially for NJ at this time. They hadn't executed anyone in many many years despite having capital punishment on the books, so why would they keep it? Besides, it does not work as a deterrent, and the appellate process in a capital case costs much more money in the long run than housing someone for life in prison. They did the right thing.

Answer 4

If they could guarantee absolutely, positively, 100% that EVERY person who is sentenced to Death actually comitted the crime, then I would be in favor of the Capital Punishment. But, even one life wrongly taken away by the State is too many.

And, what if that one person was your mother, or your father, or your child?

A Capital Execution is something that can't be undone.
.

Answer 5

I think the reason they ban justice is because of guilt. All Godless people are in the same boat, even if most don't commit murder, they know that they could.

Justice is justice. If a guy brutally murders a woman for her money, he deserves to die. If he was insane, maybe you say "guilty, but insane, so a life sentence to protect people, but killing him wouldn't really be right." That is a different issue. To eliminate the death sentence also eliminates THE MAIN DETERRENT from capital crimes.

Answer 6

I'm agin it. At least they should have whacked that pervert on death row who raped/killed little Megan before they abolished it. In fact, all of them. A major step backwards.

Answer 7

Unless they ban abortion too then they are just baby killing hypocrites.

Kill innocent babies but spare worthless people that deserve to die.

Makes a lot of sense.

Answer 8

it was good.....two wrongs dont make a right

Answer 9

Bad idea. I feel Capital Punishment should be expanded and used more often. Oh, and as for the woman whining about the cost...

One of the most seemingly persuasive arguments against the death penalty in the United States is the notion that it is far more expensive to taxpayers for the Criminal Justice System to execute a condemned criminal than it would be for the same individual to serve a sentence of life without parole. According to Studentabolition.org, a prominent anti-death penalty website, it is stated, “A death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years.” I will take this information, couple it with additional statistics, and explain exactly why this is incorrect.
First, let us look at the $2.3 million figure. This figure originated from an anti-death penalty article printed in the March 8, 1992 edition of the Dallas Morning News entitled, “Executions Cost Millions.” The article cited that most of the costs incurred in a death penalty case were based on the trial and sentencing hearings. I concur with the cost analysis for the moment and believe it to be a fair representation of the actual cost of a death penalty case.
Now, we will look at the cost of life without parole. Again, Studentabolition.org states that the cost of imposing the death penalty is, “…three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years.” We must look carefully at this. The author of this article means for his readers to infer that a life without parole case costs only $766,666.66; which is one third the cost of a case where the death penalty is a possibility. The $2.3 million figure accounts for all aspects of a death penalty case according to the Dallas Morning News article, however Studentabolition.org accounts ONLY for the cost of imprisonment of the individual who receives a sentence of life without parole. Manipulation of numbers is how the anti-death penalty movement has fabricated the cost claim against Capital Punishment. So, let’s try to get a feel for what the real numbers should look like.
We need to consider the costs of the trial and appeals in both death penalty and life without parole cases. The Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), another anti-death penalty organization, has concluded that the costs of trials and appeals for death penalty cases is twenty-one times that of a life in prison without parole case. Although some estimates are much higher, let’s just say that a fair estimate of the cost for the trial and appeals for an individual being sentenced to life without parole is $70,000. According to DPIC, this would mean that the same case, if brought to trial for the death penalty, would cost $1.47 million. I will give the DPIC the benefit of the doubt and keep these numbers.
Cost so far:
Life Without Parole: $70,000 vs. Death Penalty: $1,470,000

We now need to take into consideration the cost of imprisonment for both death penalty and life without parole cases. Looking back at the Studentabolition.org estimates for the cost of imprisonment over 40 years, we find that $766,666.66 divided by 40 equals $19,166.65. This indicates that the cost of incarcerating one person sentenced to life without parole is only $19,166.65. This figure is inaccurate when compared to the actual costs of incarceration. For Fiscal Year 2001, the Bureau of Justice Statistics found that on average, it costs $27,025 per year to incarcerate one inmate ($22,650.00/yr for facility operations plus $4,375/yr medical care, food service, and utilities). This is up from a little over $20,000 in the Bureau’s Fiscal Year 1996 report.
Before we factor this amount into the total costs of the death penalty and life without parole, we must address another flaw that Studentabolition.org has with its figures. The cost of imprisonment will not remain the same every year over a forty year period. We must take into account economic inflation, rising healthcare costs, rising maintenance and construction costs, etc. For this reason, the Bureau of Justice Statistics in the same survey cited above, detailed that the cost of imprisonment rises by an average of 3% year-to-year. Also, another problem exists with using the figure of $27,025 in that this number represents the AVERAGE cost calculated with all inmates in consideration. We must remember however that the AVERAGE inmate is not serving a sentence of life without parole. The largest populations of inmates serving life sentences for violent crimes, which are comparable to death penalty cases, are in maximum security prisons and therefore incur a cost much higher than $27,025. Since that data is unavailable to me however, we will use the said figure. Likewise, I will do the same in calculating the cost of incarceration on death row.
To calculate the cost of life without parole, we take $27,025; multiply it by 40 years and factor in an increase of 3% each year. This yields that the cost to incarcerate one inmate serving a sentence of life without parole amounts to $2,187,007.19. We can now compare this to the amount required to incarcerate a death row inmate. Antideathpenalty.org presents the statistic that the average time an inmate spends on death row is eleven years. So again, in order to give the anti-death penalty authors the benefit of the doubt, I will use that information. Now, we will take $27,025; multiply it by 11 years and factor in an increase of 3% each year, which yields an amount of $393,923.52.
Cost of trial, appeals, and incarceration:
Life Without Parole: $ 2,257,007.19 vs. Death Penalty: $1,863,923.52
I find it to be interesting how different the numbers are when both sides of the argument are held to the same standards. Actually, I feel that I have been very generous to the abolitionist argument as I have neglected to try to account for the many hidden additional costs of incarceration. Think about the increase in population of inmates with Hepatitis C, HIV, and AIDS who will require additional, more expensive medical care. What about geriatric care of inmates as they reach the end of their lives (and prison terms)? These factors and others have the potential to add substantial amounts of money to the already high cost of life without parole.
The truth is, a comprehensive study on the costs of the death penalty versus the cost of life without parole has never been completed and I am not attempting to pass my number-crunch off as such. My purpose however was to prove that the anti-death penalty movement’s claim that capital punishment comes with a higher price tag is shaky at best and to give an example showing why, when dealing with politics, things aren’t always as they seem. The attempt to provide false information and to manipulate statistics in order to cause changes in policy should be discrediting to the authors of the articles I have referenced The fact that such measures were even taken should have people question the validity of any other arguments other members of similar organizations have made.