The Death Penalty

[lukertin]

double post Edited October 5, 2011 by lukertin

[lukertin]

If you get robbed, the person should have to pay you back. If you get assaulted, the person should have to pay for medical expenses.

You realize this already happens, right?

 

In a way, I agree with crimsonblade. Sometimes people should be forced to work to pay back the victim.

Yes, state-sanctioned slavery is a good alternative to the prison system.

 

If I was in charge, there would be no chilling in prison, there would be chain gangs doing public works projects, and growing/canning their own food on prison farms to alleviate some of the cost from the taxpayers. They would be kept too busy to be fighting each other in the yard and other random acts of prison violence. And they might even learn good work ethic in the process and have a chance in getting and keeping a job when they get out of prison.

Why should jobs be taken away from honest, hard-working residents of a state in favor of free prisoner labor?

 

remember, the death penalty is placed there by the state. at any time, people can attempt to get rid of it because that is the power the people hold in their government. if it fails, then more people wanted the death penalty then who didnt, and here majority rules. but its not the state killing their subjects. people have a voice, and the death penalty is enacted in certain states because the people there believe it should be, not because the government says it should be.

Not really. Very rarely will the people ever get a chance to vote on something like the abolishing the death penalty. And no, majority does not rule. The US Constitution is framed in a way to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. FYI The death penalty was never enacted in a state whose citizens actually wanted it, it simply existed since the creation of state governments (Every state's statute begins with something like "The law of this state shall be the common law as it exists [now] except as outlined as set forth below". The death penalty was a common law punishment for a variety of crimes, so it was never voted on by anyone, either the people or the state legislature.

[marharth]

If you get robbed, the person should have to pay you back. If you get assaulted, the person should have to pay for medical expenses.

You realize this already happens, right?

 

In a way, I agree with crimsonblade. Sometimes people should be forced to work to pay back the victim.

Yes, state-sanctioned slavery is a good alternative to the prison system.

No it doesn't. The court is not required to repay a victim with the money of the criminal. Most of the time the criminal is just locked away, and feeds off tax payer dollars.

 

Call it slavery if you want, but I would rather work for six hours a day then spend six hours a day in a tiny cell.

 

Jobs are not created by the government. People work for private corporations. It would not take any jobs away from citizens.

 

EDIT: You seem to be fairly new to the section so, welcome :biggrin:

Edited October 5, 2011 by marharth

[lukertin]

No it doesn't. The court is not required to repay a victim with the money of the criminal. Most of the time the criminal is just locked away, and feeds off tax payer dollars.

Of course a court is not required to do anything. The wrong doer is obligated to pay damages to the victim, every personal crime that exists also constitutes its equivalent under tort law, and the victim can sue the wrong doer to recover his damages. In fact, if the suspect has been convicted, the tort case is a done deal under the doctrine of res judicata and the only thing that needs to be proven is how big the medical bill is, and lost wages, etc.

 

Call it slavery if you want, but I would rather work for six hours a day then spend six hours a day in a tiny cell.

What you would rather do is not relevant to whether forcing prisoners to do work amounts to slavery. Having a voluntary labor system is not the same as forced labor; (implementing a voluntary labor system for prisoners in exchange for good conduct points leading to earlier release, or more privileges might be a good idea, though)

 

Jobs are not created by the government. People work for private corporations. It would not take any jobs away from citizens.

Governments create jobs all the time. Not only do governments hire private citizens to execute duties, if the government finds something for prisoners to do, it takes away jobs that would have been given to a private entity, or to employees of its ownagency. For example, if you have prisoners clean up the state highway, then that takes away jobs previously undertaken by the state's DoT, or subcontractors who would have been hired to clean up the state highway.

 

EDIT: You seem to be fairly new to the section so, welcome :biggrin:

:tongue: ty

[marharth]

No it doesn't. The court is not required to repay a victim with the money of the criminal. Most of the time the criminal is just locked away, and feeds off tax payer dollars.

Of course a court is not required to do anything. The wrong doer is obligated to pay damages to the victim, every personal crime that exists also constitutes its equivalent under tort law, and the victim can sue the wrong doer to recover his damages. In fact, if the suspect has been convicted, the tort case is a done deal under the doctrine of res judicata and the only thing that needs to be proven is how big the medical bill is, and lost wages, etc.

 

Call it slavery if you want, but I would rather work for six hours a day then spend six hours a day in a tiny cell.

What you would rather do is not relevant to whether forcing prisoners to do work amounts to slavery. Having a voluntary labor system is not the same as forced labor; (implementing a voluntary labor system for prisoners in exchange for good conduct points leading to earlier release, or more privileges might be a good idea, though)

 

Jobs are not created by the government. People work for private corporations. It would not take any jobs away from citizens.

Governments create jobs all the time. Not only do governments hire private citizens to execute duties, if the government finds something for prisoners to do, it takes away jobs that would have been given to a private entity, or to employees of its ownagency. For example, if you have prisoners clean up the state highway, then that takes away jobs previously undertaken by the state's DoT, or subcontractors who would have been hired to clean up the state highway.

 

EDIT: You seem to be fairly new to the section so, welcome :biggrin:

:tongue: ty

1. Right, but that doesn't always work out.

 

2. Fair enough. A optional system would probably work.

 

3. I was thinking more of jobs in the prison system. Something that can generate profit for the prison besides tax dollars.

[lukertin]

1. Right, but that doesn't always work out.

Well, no, because in most cases people who commit low end crimes like assault and theft tend to be poor and couldn't afford to pay the cost of replacement. But when they are able to pay such costs, they certainly do, and victims tend to get money more often than not because the standard of proof in a civil case for tort is much lower than the standard in a criminal case for the same offense.

 

3. I was thinking more of jobs in the prison system. Something that can generate profit for the prison besides tax dollars.

 

Yea, but then you might get things like this happening:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/25/china-prisoners-internet-gaming-scam

 

But i'm still not entirely sure what you mean by 'jobs in the prison system'. Do you mean making prisoners do things like their laundry and cleaning the prison and cooking? Because I'm pretty sure a lot of prisons make their inmates do that sort of stuff to begin with.

Edited October 5, 2011 by lukertin

[Aurielius]

Yea, but then you might get things like this happening:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/25/china-prisoners-internet-gaming-scam

Followed your link and had to admit that it was a strange twist of realties, a World of Warcraft chain gang..go figure.

[lukertin]

Yea, but then you might get things like this happening:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/25/china-prisoners-internet-gaming-scam

Followed your link and had to admit that it was a strange twist of realties, a World of Warcraft chain gang..go figure.

LOL the humor and absurdity of the story aside, the deeper facts associated with the story are troubling...the correctional officers basically exploiting the prisoners for their own financial gain. If you thought state government corruption was bad, how worse do you think it will be if prisons begin to offer their inmates as potential labor outsourcing for various companies? If a manufacturer had to pay 100 employees $50k a year to make some crappy product they now can save upwards of $10 million a year by making prisoners do it...and where do you think a couple million of that is going to go? into state treasuries? dream on...

[stars2heaven]

I can't remember if I posted here or not already. I seem to remember posting on a similar topic somewhere. In any-case, I favor the state sponsored slavery option that has been mentioned as an alternative to execution. I feel it is much more humane, avoids the possibility of executing innocent people, and allows for some sort of compensation to society.

[Aurielius]

I can't remember if I posted here or not already. I seem to remember posting on a similar topic somewhere. In any-case, I favor the state sponsored slavery option that has been mentioned as an alternative to execution. I feel it is much more humane, avoids the possibility of executing innocent people, and allows for some sort of compensation to society.

I am going to have to assume that this is a droll take on the Death Penalty, but if you are serious how you would propose getting around the 13th Amendment?