So, its up to the country. They will choose either hanging mercilessly within 24 hours or normal process of court hearing.
First, lets suppose they choose that merciless procedure. In this case, their expenditure is negligible. BUT the fact remains that this method is not realistic for every country. So, in case you havent noticed your ratio will only apply to a few arabian countries not for the majority. Because people of most other countries will not support this method.
In case a country choose court proceedings, the real problem arises here.
Yes, it’s up to the country. Whatever method the countries choose, it’s THEIR own preference. And the FACT is that every method has its own advantages and costs.
The execution within 24 hours policy is a cost effective, swift and quick punishment. The normal court hearing process is done to ensure to the maximum that innocents are not punished. Appeals to courts are
deliberately extended for death penalty cases to make sure that innocents are not put to death. And these appeals are provided by the law itself. Logically court appeals are not extended for life imprisonment causes because THIS would be too cost inefficient, considering the fact that basic facilities are provided to these criminals. In general, life imprisonment cases are allowed only one appeal. All of this to tell you that many more innocents tend to be condemned to punishment in life imprisonment supporting countries.
Now to the facts, figures and historical examples…
Your research states that the DP (Death Penalty) cases cost dramatically more than the LI (Life Imprisonment) cases. This is because of loopholes in comparison. TIME Magazine’s research found that the average cell cost is $ 24 000/yr and the maximum security cell cost is $ 75 000/yr. DP opposers claim that DP should be replaced by LI. Therefore, any cost calculations should be based specifically on cell costs for criminals who have committed the exact same category of offence. In other words, cost comparisons are valid only if you compare the costs of LI equivalent DP cases to the cost of DP cases. LI equivalent DP cases would reasonably be occupying cells with the maximum security, the most expensive ones, that is $ 75 000/yr (while the figure taken is $ 34 200/yr). Comparisons are improper because the cost of all LI cases are compared to DP cases (which is unrealistically misleading) when only the DP equivalent LI cases are relevant.
DP equivalent LI cases include extremely heinous crimes such as murder, drug trafficking and high treason.
You say DP cases reside mainly in appeal costs. The fact is that life without parole (temporary or permanent release on the promise of good behavior, before the expiry date of a sentence) prisoners make the same appeals and should be considered to bear the same costs. Justice for All estimates that life without parole cases will cost $ 1.2 million- $ 3.6 million more than equivalent DP cases.
“The appeals do play a significant part in the fees, but the majority of it is the chemicals required for the termination and the preparation. Another major part of the expenses is paying the men who have the unfortunate duty of pulling the plug,” a Criminal Justice major says.
As illustrated above, the method plays a big role in the costs for DP cases. That’s another loophole when comparing percentages. Cheap executions? Go for firing squads. You’ll easily find many volunteers who would provide their own guns and ammunition. Or hang them and re-use the rope. 3 states in America allow firing squad and 2 states allow hanging.
Here, I would like to cite.
Edwin Sutherland, PhD, late President of the American Sociological Society, and Donald R. Cressey, PhD, late Professor of Sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara, in the 1974 revised edition of their book titled Criminology, wrote:
"[The] cost is not inherent in the [death] penalty, but imposed by judges. It is not cheaper to keep a criminal confined, because most of the time he will appeal just as much causing as many costs as a convict under death sentence. Being alive and having nothing better to do, he will spend his time in prison conceiving of ever-new habeas corpus petitions, which being unlimited, in effect cannot be rejected as res judicata. The cost is higher.”The DP, remember, is a SUPPLEMENT--- it adds variety to punishments. It is not the only punishment.
A third loophole in comparisons: they account for short term costs, not the long term ones. 6 states in America have the DP, but they have never had to use it since 1976. Is then the DP not a deterrent?
Capital punishment was suspended in Britain for 5 years. Statistics showed a 125% rise in murders that would have attracted a death sentence. What statistics cannot show is how society has changed over the years with many more criminals still alive.
The murder rate in the U.S. dropped from 24 562 in 1993 to 18 209 in 1997, the lowest for years (a 26% reduction)--- during a period of increased use of the DP.
Countries like Singapore that almost always carry out death sentences have been able to reduce serious crimes near to nil. Violent crimes are virtually extinct in Arabic cultures.
For those who still think the DP is not a deterrent to crime, it is the BEST way for society to ensure zero recidivism.
Besides, let me tell you that LI is a punishment that tends to deteriorate over time. “Life imprisonment” over the years means only a short time in prison, criminals find easy or crooked ways to escape from prison when they get time to think behind jail bars.
I can guess that you have absolutely no idea how much a mere visit to a lawyer costs. Take this as an example in real life.
One of my family members had an extortion case filed against him. The normal penalty for this is imprisonment for 12 years. This was back in 2008. At present the court has given the verdict of no punishment. But his expenditures till now on lawyers and others were 600000 tk or 8000 usd. This is excluding the bribes he had to pay.
Now suppose the penalty was death and his crime have been proved. In this case, he would have tried to save himself in any way possible. He would have appealed many times in the court. If his expenditure for one year is this much, imagine if the case dragged on for 5 years due to appeal.
Let’s analyse the example you gave:
If he wanted to avoid wasting his money in court trials, he shouldn’t have broken the law in the first place itself.
“Normal penalty is imprisonment for 12 years.” It is NOT a DP equivalent LI case. For your comparison to be valid, the penalty should be imprisonment for life.
Thus your expenditure would be greater on the death side. And most hardcore criminals are usually rich.
The fact remains that expenditures are greater on the death side compared to life imprisonment.
If a criminal gets life imprisonment penalty he is less likely to appeal. Thus the expenditures get lower. But in death sentence, he would certainly appeal and expenditures get higher due to this. And higher than life imprisonment.
It does not matter whether criminals are poor or rich. In most cases, the jurisdiction pays for the appeals to make sure that, as far as possible, innocents are not condemned.
You were saying something about America donating 28 billion to poor countries. This is a very unrealistic assumption. America would never donate this because this would go against its interest. If it does, it will surely demand something in return or pursue its objectives indirectly which YOU are not capable of understanding at this level. This is logical. Because I would do the same if I was in control of US.
Americans do not agree to give their money earned through hard work to feed those criminals who kill their children. This goes against THEIR interest. To pass on it very briefly, a country helps through donations to improve diplomatic relationships, so that it can expect help from others when the need arises. And
this is in their interest.
I take business studies, ict, economics and computing in A level.
Your assumption about the percentage figure is thus a mere assumption. Its not reality.
GDP figures tend to fluctuate while the expenditure on prisons normally remains the same--- this is reality. A country faces economic booms and depressions. Take the expenditure on prisons and compare it to a GDP figure during an economic boom and make the same comparison for a depression or slump--- this should be enough to understand how the percentage method is unrealistically misleading.
You said somewhere before that people will not support the DP because it is too cruel. Well, here’s what America says:
Polls show the majority of Americans support the death penalty for convicted murderers. And Lubbock County’s top prosecutor said he never considers cost when deciding whether to pursue the death penalty.“I don’t dispute that it’s more expensive. The people who say that’s a viable argument, please look at a mother in the eye who has lost a son and say ‘you know what, I could have stopped him and I didn’t because it costs too much,’” Lubbock County Criminal District Attorney Matt Powell said.
Some nations believe they do not have to sympathize with criminals and pay for the three square meals that they get for the rest of their lives, so that later, when these convicted criminals manage to get free, they attack the children of the peoples. Somebody who has already crossed the threshold of morality and murdered someone does not find it difficult to kill again.
Capital punishment
permanently removes the worst criminals from society. It provides a much safer life for all of us. A criminal who kills must pay by losing his life---
that is justice. How ironical, the justice system in some countries shows more sympathy for the criminals than it does to the victims. How can life in prison not mean
life?
