A manager of a state agency has a common-sense solution for saving Virginia a few million dollars in this grim economy: Sentence killers - those found to have committed premeditated murder - to spend the rest of their lives in prison, with no chance ever of getting out.
Doing away with the option of a death sentence makes sense on several levels. It would save the state from having to pay fees associated with lengthy trials and years of appeals. It would end the agony of repeated court hearings for the families of victims. It would eliminate the four perpetually understaffed capital defender's offices, whose attorneys handle appeals automatically generated when people are sentenced to death row.
When prosecutors decide not to pursue a punishment of death, defendants are more likely to plead guilty, The Pilot's Shawn Day reported this week. Even if defendants go to trial, the court costs, borne by taxpayers, are much less expensive, the hearings less likely to be delayed.
At the moment, more than a dozen capital murder cases are under way across Virginia. The fees for the defendants' legal representation during a capital trial - $150 per hour out of court, $200 per hour in court - routinely reach six figures, and that doesn't include other court costs, including the prosecution's.
Given the $3.5 billion gap in the state's budget, David Baugh, who has managed the Richmond-area capital defender's office for 18 months, told Day that Virginia "ought to give serious thought to a moratorium on the death penalty until the budget gets straight."
A moratorium would be a good start. Eliminating the penalty altogether would be better. Besides other valid reasons for ending the practice, including the most compelling - that it would keep the state from killing someone later found to be innocent - getting rid of the penalty would free up money at a time the state is seeing so many needs.
If lawmakers won't listen to the moral arguments for abolishing the death penalty, they should consider the economic benefits. For what it costs to execute one person - in North Carolina, the most recent estimate is more than $2 million - Virginia could educate hundreds of children. It could fill potholes. It could shore up public safety and crime prevention efforts.
Is the cost of an execution really worth it when, for less than half the price, we could put a killer in a prison cell, locked away from society for life?
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
is it worth it?
NO! Providing they will never get out of jail.
Gertz Point ...
. . . why am I not surpraised at your view? So, what is it that you feel is unjust about a convicted murderer having to surrender their life because they took life away from another person?
because
For the majority it's more about revenge than justice.
I disagree ...
... but I'm willing to consider your proof of your statement. Do you have any?
it goes like this
I have stated my opinion. It is MY opinion, and no matter what you or anyone else has to say, I'm sticking to MY opinion so you can keep asking for proof, of My opinion all you want. How I process information constitues MY opinion. How you process it is up to you. You can't provided any proof to off set MY opinion. You are fighting a loosing battle.
Stated as a fact, not opinion.
Gertz, you did not state that the "majority" that support the death penalty do so for revenge instead of justice - as an opinion. You stated it as a fact. To express an opinion you would need to begin with, "In my opinion ...", or, "I believe ...", or, "I think ...", something like that. Since I now know that is your opinion, fine. In my opinion, you are wrong about that. More over, you did not answer the question of your views of justice for those that murder others. I'm pleased that you admit that your view on this matter is not based on any study, facts, or documented evidence - but rather your views are simply the way you "process" information. Of course we all "process information" and draw our own conclusions on all matter of issue. Nothing unusual there. I have read many posts you have made and now I better understand that you are offering your opinions, even when you state them as if they are facts. That's helpful for me to understand where you are coing from.
Hummm
Not to mention the one time use of a tremendous amount of electricity saved, no, that is still less than the electricity required for life imprisonment, or even better...
Life with hard labor, I am sure there is a granite quarry someplace in the commonwealth with large chunks of stone that need to be broken into small chunks of stone, than carried over to a empty airplane hold.
Then, back to breaking more granite, then carry, then break... I think you get the picture.
What does this do for crimes
What does this do for crimes that now warrant life without parole... do those and all lesser crimes get reduced sentences as a result of this action (domino affect)? If the sentence for the most heinous crimes is reduced so it must be for all lesser offenses.
If this happens, the same argument will eventually be made opposing life in prison without parole... it is too costly, the maximum sentence should to be reduced to “X”.
Why not do away with accountability all together... Socialism and anarchy, what a handsome pair!
aww what would you do
What would you do without that socialism word?
The Left . .
I'd like to know what those that live on The Left would do without Socialism? Now THAT is a far more interesting question to ponder.
Which?
I also feel the death penalty can be the only answer to some crimes, but there is one question people should ask themselves. "Am I looking for justice or revenge?"
Justice is a moral imperative and is attributed to society who determines whether it is warranted and demanded. Revenge is a personal reaction to a perceived wrong, and can be as destructive to society as the original crime. It's up to each of us to determine which is directing our thoughts and words.
it's revenge
It's clearly revenge. All you have to do is read comments not only on this board but many others and society as a whole loves revenge. I don't think they could survive without it.
Confused about justice.
Gertz Point, what is not just about a jury reviewing the evidence and following the law and then convicting a person that took the life from others to have the same fate applied to the murderer? The murderer took the life of someone else. That person - or persons - are now dead. Gone. No longer breathing. Justice is fair and equal - by definition. You appear to be confused about what Justice means. Instead you appear to want to focus on revenge and ignore justice. In order for a civilized society to exist, JUSTICE mush exist. Without faith that society will stand and enforce JUSTICE, all we would have is revenge. Revenge is often enacted without the benefit of reason, all of the facts, and in haste. Haste makes waste, right? Justice is blind - perhaps that is the reason you seem to oppose Justice? Perhaps being on The Left so long you feel that Justice should always "see" the color of one's skin and take that into account no matter what a person has done? How do YOU define the difference between Justice and Revenge?
Actions of courts/due process vs. victims & families/friends
Courts administer justice requiring suitable punishment to fit the crime. Victims, their families, and their friends that take it upon themselves to punish criminals outside of the courts and the law enforcement system would be exacting revenege. Yet, should the courts and law enforcement fail to mediate true justice then victims, their families, and their friends might also be acting as a force for ensuring that justice prevails. It is difficult for a victim to seperate their personal need for revenge from a dispassionate and objective role in exacting fair justice.
Another "common-sense solution"
Following the "solution" of reducing the sentence to save money, why not just sentence them to time served and just let them go free. That's right, let them out. Think of the money we'll save!
I'm sure they will see the light and leave their life of crime behind.
Who Decides What is "Justice"?
Thankfully, it is we as a society, and not the annointed members of the V-P editorial board, who get to determine the scope and limits of justice.
Is cost even a relevant factor? I suppose it is. But I've got to believe that the V-P editorial board would be justifiably appalled if the proponents of the death penalty made the counter-argument -- citing some competing report indicating that life imprisonment is the more expensive alternative.
If we as a society think that the state should be in the business of executing the worst predators among us -- which I do, then I am pleased to know that we as a society will invest the necessary resources to make certain that the life we put down unquestionably deserves it.
Cost is no object? Well ... sometimes.
Why is cost to the taxpayer no object when it comes to things like health care plans, cap and trade, and other "green" foolishness, but all of a sudden important when it comes to executing cold-blooded murderers?
Costs...
What does it cost to keep an 20 year old who should have been executed alive for the next 40+ years? To provide meals, and tv, exercise, clothes, medical care, education, and all the other stuff inmates are "entitled" to receive?
Maybe we should instead look at the judicial system that is allowing the long drawn out and costly appeals process!
Excepting Republican Criminals.....
Once again the Pilot Editorial Staff comes riding to the rescue of the Criminals. If it was up to them there would be absolutely no penalty for any crime whatsoever. This runs the gamut from Drunken Drivers all the way up to Cold Blooded KILLERS.
Are you serious????!!!
[A moratorium would be a good start. Eliminating the penalty altogether would be better.]
Publishing this position is a death knell (pun NOT intended) to the Estate to which Mr. Batten lent his grace and dignity. Your twisted "moral" and "budgetary" grounds are an insult to the citizens of the Commonwealth. If I were a staffer at the Pilot I would be dusting off resume`s and looking to move on. The new digs at Town Center are going to get awfully expensive with no readership or advertising.
So, I guess my answer to your question, "Is it worth it?", is a specific and emphatic YES.