• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Executions Should Be Televised

T

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,312
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
EARLIER this month, Georgia conducted its third execution this year. This would have passed relatively unnoticed if not for a controversy surrounding its videotaping. Lawyers for the condemned inmate, Andrew Grant DeYoung, had persuaded a judge to allow the recording of his last moments as part of an effort to obtain evidence on whether lethal injection caused unnecessary suffering.

Though he argued for videotaping, one of Mr. DeYoung’s defense lawyers, Brian Kammer, spoke out against releasing the footage to the public. “It’s a horrible thing that Andrew DeYoung had to go through,” Mr. Kammer said, “and it’s not for the public to see that.”

We respectfully disagree. Executions in the United States ought to be made public.

Right now, executions are generally open only to the press and a few select witnesses. For the rest of us, the vague contours are provided in the morning paper. Yet a functioning democracy demands maximum accountability and transparency. As long as executions remain behind closed doors, those are impossible. The people should have the right to see what is being done in their name and with their tax dollars.

This is particularly relevant given the current debate on whether specific methods of lethal injection constitute cruel and unusual punishment and therefore violate the Constitution.

There is a dramatic difference between reading or hearing of such an event and observing it through image and sound. (This is obvious to those who saw the footage of Saddam Hussein’s hanging in 2006 or the death of Neda Agha-Soltan during the protests in Iran in 2009.) We are not calling for opening executions completely to the public — conducting them before a live crowd — but rather for broadcasting them live or recording them for future release, on the Web or TV.

Rest of article/opinion piece @: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/opinion/sunday/executions-should-be-televised.html?_r=1


What are your guys thoughts of this?
You think we should be able to view this kind of subject?
Thoughts?
Comments?
Response?
 
I don't support videotaping anything with the intention of showing the public - it's not a gawk-fest.

But I actually oppose the death sentence completely seeing as how our system is so corrupt we're killing innocent individuals left and right.
 
The USA has a highly violent society. Desensitising it further with regular snuff movies would not be a positive thing.
 
I'm against the death penalty because IMO nobody has the right to take another life (except for self defense). I have no qualms with violent criminals suffering though. (Not that they actually do with lethal injections)
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I don't support videotaping anything with the intention of showing the public - it's not a gawk-fest.

But I actually oppose the death sentence completely seeing as how our system is so corrupt we're killing innocent individuals left and right.
Click to expand...

Agreed about opposing the death sentence since I have doubts about the guilt of some people who have been executed. Better to do life without parole. Cheaper too.

As for making executions public, I disagree. If "We, the People" are going to support executions, in part, as a deterrent to crime then hiding the "deterrent" behind a veil of secrecy seems to defeat the purpose.
 
Last edited:
Pro-death penalty, anti-publically televised executions. I'm fine with the executions being recorded and reviewed by an independent, unbiased review panel or something similiar, but I don't like the idea of having my kid flipping through channels and landing on a live execution. I also think buying the air-time, overriding pre-existing television schedules, and providing a traveling film crew (or crews) to attend these executions would be far more expensive than submitting the security video to a panel for review.

Of course, my views on "cruel and unusual punishment" for the murderers and rapists and those convicted of treason are probably much more loosely defined than the views of others. I believe your rights ends when you malicious strip away the life of somebody else without just cause (i.e. self-defense, death penalty), or when you cause significant damage to another or your country. On the same note, with any sort of reasonable doubt I could not convict somebody and then recommend a death penalty...I'd have to be more than 99% sure of their guilt based on the evidence, not the emotional appeals.
 
Divine Wind said:
Agreed about opposing the death sentence since I have doubts about the guilt of some people who have been executed. Better to do life without parole. Cheaper too.
As for making executions public, I disagree. If "We, the People" are going to support executions, in part, as a deterrent to crime then hiding the "deterrent" behind a veil of secrecy seems to defeat the purpose.
Click to expand...

How is it cheaper to keep somebody alive, well-fed, clothed, and medically looked-after for 30, 40, or 50 years when they could be maintained for 15-20 (appeals processes, typically) and then put to death? I'd be curious to see some statistics on that.
 
tessaesque said:
How is it cheaper to keep somebody alive, well-fed, clothed, and medically looked-after for 30, 40, or 50 years when they could be maintained for 15-20 (appeals processes, typically) and then put to death? I'd be curious to see some statistics on that.
Click to expand...
That's it, the cost of the appeals process prior to execution shoots the costs well over what it takes to incarcerate them for life.

Top 10 Pros and Cons - Death Penalty - ProCon.org

Does the death penalty cost less than life in prison without parole? - Death Penalty - ProCon.org

If we believe "life is priceless", then as Christians, how could we execute or risk executing an innocent person just to nab the other 9 or 90 guilty ones?
 
Divine Wind said:
That's it, the cost of the appeals process prior to execution shoots the costs well over what it takes to incarcerate them for life.

Top 10 Pros and Cons - Death Penalty - ProCon.org

Does the death penalty cost less than life in prison without parole? - Death Penalty - ProCon.org

If we believe "life is priceless", then as Christians, how could we execute or risk executing an innocent person just to nab the other 9 or 90 guilty ones?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't life-sentence prisoners also file appeals? I find it hard to believe that only death penalty convicts would be given access and take advantage of appeals. That's...odd.

As for the the last sentence, I am not religious and do not necessarily align with the moral pretexts of religion. My rules are different than those who would reference God's word in their defense of stopping the death penalty. I certainly understand the implications of religious text and respect the argument, but it simply doesn't apply to the construct of my own moral code.

I recognize the challenge, though, of avoiding the execution of an innocent party. I think that we will never have a system that convicts or acquits correctly 100% of the time. Eye witnesses are unreliable, DNA can be tainted, corrupted, or misleading, etc. All we can do is try our best to get it right, and then give the system time to double-check itself before we follow through with the ultimate ends of the sentence.

I think we can respectfully agree to disagree on the issue, as I would hope neither one of us is ever on a jury to convict and sentence the other :).
 
tessaesque said:
Wouldn't life-sentence prisoners also file appeals?
Click to expand...

Yes, but not as nearly in depth as the automatic appeals process associated with death penalty cases. Again, it's not the cost which is the main issue. It's the Justice. Not only is there doubt all of those executed were guilty, but there is a racial disparity in handing out death sentences as opposed to life sentences. This is not just either.

Racial Discrimination in Implementing the Death Penalty

Racial Bias | Equal Justice Initiative

tessaesque said:
I think we can respectfully agree to disagree on the issue, as I would hope neither one of us is ever on a jury to convict and sentence the other :).
Click to expand...
Agreed!
 
On February 15, 1933 the Mayor of Chicago - Anton Cermak - was shot and killed by Guisippi Zangara in a botched attempt to assassinate President elect Franklin Roosevelt in Florida.

Zangara was arrested, tried and convicted and executed on March 20, 1933. Five weeks had passed.

There is no reason why a person convicted of a capital offense cannot be tried and convicted and his appeal heard within a reasonable time ....... and that is not a decade or more.
 
Divine Wind said:
Agreed about opposing the death sentence since I have doubts about the guilt of some people who have been executed. Better to do life without parole. Cheaper too.

As for making executions public, I disagree. If "We, the People" are going to support executions, in part, as a deterrent to crime then hiding the "deterrent" behind a veil of secrecy seems to defeat the purpose.
Click to expand...

The majority of people on death row will never face execution, rather, they will either be proven innocent (to the tune of 400+ individuals a year) or die in prison.
 
I honestly don't care if we have the death penalty or not, but if we do use it I think we need to try and be more effective with it. If people just decide the reasons why someone would be killed (death penalty for murder and serial rape, for example) and then just do it upon their conviction, this could be fast, easy, and cheap. I'm pretty sure most people who think that just giving a general anesthetic then slitting someone's wrist with a sharp knife doesn't cost more than $3,000. Keeping someone alive and comfy will cost, say $20 a meal, 20*365=$7,300. That's just one year. Therefore, I would argue that the death penalty can be cost effective. The problem is we treat them too well, too nicely- they're going to die for committing a crime against humanity. We can keep them in relatively poor conditions without feeling too guilty. It shouldn't take more than 48 hours to set up the anesthetic and the room, so the execution should be able to take place within 48 hours after the conviction. I believe the process should be televised, because Americans should know and accept what their country is doing. If we find our own countries actions too repulsive to watch, maybe we should take a second look at whether those actions are acceptable.
 
I'm pro-death penalty, anti-televising it but would compromise and make the execution "public" meaning no cameras, video, etc... but any and all who would want to watch the execution could / would be free to do so given the facility and how many people could safely fit into that facility.

Also, this should be a state issue and each state should continue to manage this type of thing - the Feds stay out of it. For cases like treason which is a Federal Case where execution is mandated, I would guess it would be up to the government to work with the State the execution will take place, and to either adopt the States position or go off on their own with the States agreement.
 
Killing helpless harmless people is wrong and sets a bad example of how to deal with life's problems.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
The majority of people on death row will never face execution, rather, they will either be proven innocent (to the tune of 400+ individuals a year) or die in prison.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Being released does not equate with being proven innocent any more than O.J. Simpsom's acquital or Casey Anthony's acquital certified their innocence. A man in Illinois was released because two police officers arrested him without, what a court later said, was sufficient cause. That meant the bloody clothes and bloody knife would not be admissible in evidence and neither would his confession. So, he was released and killed another woman. Innocent?
 
Maybe we can have paid preview channel. Or just like blue channels, a channel dedicated to Executions..24/7...they can start with background, and trial, then a last minute or hour interview (of soon to be electrocuted convict).

Maybe a bar on the bottom of the screen showing numbers of rich vs poor, white vs colors. It'll be great...I tell you nothing denotes The American values like executing an Autistic kid by the state in a good'ol fashion execution.

We are the only Western country who still conducts executions...So why be shy about it. Lets show Other countries who we really are as a nation.

Diving Mullah
 
Diving Mullah said:
Maybe we can have paid preview channel. Or just like blue channels, a channel dedicated to Executions..24/7...they can start with background, and trial, then a last minute or hour interview (of soon to be electrocuted convict).
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure we don't have enough executions for that. There were 85 executions in 2010...not nearly enough to keep a channel running 24/7.
 
Divine Wind said:
Agreed about opposing the death sentence since I have doubts about the guilt of some people who have been executed. Better to do life without parole. Cheaper too.

As for making executions public, I disagree. If "We, the People" are going to support executions, in part, as a deterrent to crime then hiding the "deterrent" behind a veil of secrecy seems to defeat the purpose.
Click to expand...

I'm completely in agreement with you, with one addition:

I think the prison system in general could do with some public exposure. I'm not saying it's the worst in the world -- far from it -- but at the same time I don't think it's rehabilitating criminals so much as acting as a Dumpster. We throw people in and forget about them until they crawl back out again and rejoin society -- then, when criminals reoffend, we change our laws to throw MORE people in for LONGER and call that being "tough on crime."

If we really want our prison system to do more than act as a holding pen, if we want it to recondition criminals so that they can come out and be useful, contributing citizens, we need to make some major changes. Showing people what being "tough on crime" gets us is a good start.
 
tessaesque said:
How is it cheaper to keep somebody alive, well-fed, clothed, and medically looked-after for 30, 40, or 50 years when they could be maintained for 15-20 (appeals processes, typically) and then put to death? I'd be curious to see some statistics on that.
Click to expand...
lawyers


012
 
It costs more in appeals than to just give them a life sentence. Fact.

We need those appeals to ensure that the potentially innocent have exhausted every chance to survive the capital punishment system. Fact.

Innocent people have died and will continue to die from the death penalty. Fact.

This archaic system has to be tossed out.
 
Temporal said:
It costs more in appeals than to just give them a life sentence. Fact.

We need those appeals to ensure that the potentially innocent have exhausted every chance to survive the capital punishment system. Fact.

Innocent people have died and will continue to die from the death penalty. Fact.

This archaic system has to be tossed out.
Click to expand...

I agree that if it really takes that much effort and money to get the lawyers to do that work, we need to get rid of the death penalty. I think, however, that we should develop time travel and then we could go back and find out for sure who committed the crime. d(^.^)b
 
Belgarath said:
I'm pretty sure we don't have enough executions for that. There were 85 executions in 2010...not nearly enough to keep a channel running 24/7.
Click to expand...

you could always do repeats. if that doesn't satisfy the savages you can just start showing some from Yemen, North Korea, Iran and China. afterall, you guys are the top 5.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom