Dylann Roof Sentenced to Death for Charleston Church Shooting

st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Do you think that's true in this particular case? He is very young and the verdict came quick.
Click to expand...
Just looked up a few stats. It costs the state of North Carolina, on average, 2.16 million more to prosecute a death penalty case than it does a case that is not seeking death. The average cost per year in North Carolina to house an inmate is around $30k. So, as long as he doesn't live 72 years or longer behind bars it would be cheaper to give him life in prison.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
Just looked up a few stats. It costs the state of North Carolina, on average, 2.16 million more to prosecute a death penalty case than it does a case that is not seeking death. The average cost per year in North Carolina to house an inmate is around $30k. So, as long as he doesn't live 72 years or longer behind bars it would be cheaper to give him life in prison.
Click to expand...

Interesting stats on monetary costs. I don't think forcing uninvolved and disinterested parties to pay to house a criminal can be justified.

In fact, it contradicts the point of justice, which is that people are held responsible for the things they create, but not the things they aren't involved in.

Dylan Roof's maintenance shouldn't be a burden to others, ironically some of his victims relatives would end paying for him to be housed and eat etc. if he were imprisoned for life.
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Interesting stats on monetary costs. I don't think forcing uninvolved and disinterested parties to pay to house a criminal can be justified.

In fact, it contradicts the point of justice, which is that people are held responsible for the things they create, but not the things they aren't involved in.

Dylan Roof's maintenance shouldn't be a burden to others, ironically some of his victims relatives would end paying for him to be housed and eat etc. if he were imprisoned for life.
Click to expand...

Your two hundred year old philosophies are a bit out dated, professor dip shit:-)
 
st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Interesting stats on monetary costs. I don't think forcing uninvolved and disinterested parties to pay to house a criminal can be justified.

In fact, it contradicts the point of justice, which is that people are held responsible for the things they create, but not the things they aren't involved in.

Dylan Roof's maintenance shouldn't be a burden to others, ironically some of his victims relatives would end paying for him to be housed and eat etc. if he were imprisoned for life.
Click to expand...
So what should we do with serial killers, pedophiles, rapists, etc? Let them live among us?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
So what should we do with serial killers, pedophiles, rapists, etc? Let them live among us?
Click to expand...
Justice and restitution (if possible) should be proportionate to the crime. Forcing disinterested parties or worse, the surviving members of the victims family, to pay to house a murderer is a crime in and of itself. So I don't think life in prison solves anything if it is paid for by disinterested parties.

Dylan Roof could be exiled. He could be forced to labor to pay for his upkeep and the surviving victims (children of the people he killed etc.) and then set free or then killed.

He could be executed summarily. He could be forgiven. It's not a "we" choice though. The decision should be the domain of those victimized, or closest to the victims, it's not up to me. If he had murdered a loved one of mine, I'd have a hard time forgiving him.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I agree with you that capital punishment in a system like ours is not justice for all. And so life in prison without chance of parole should be the maximum penalty. Same goes for pedos and rapists.
Click to expand...

Is it a crime to force others to pay for the upkeep of a murderer ?
 
st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The decision should be the domain of those victimized, or closest to the victims, it's not up to me.
Click to expand...
So in this case, if the victims families were all the forgiving type, and their wishes were that he be set free and he has to move in next door to Rob Roy, you'd be OK with that?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
So in this case, if the victims families were all the forgiving type, and their wishes were that he be set free and he has to move in next door to Rob Roy, you'd be OK with that?
Click to expand...

Good question and interesting scenario.

I wouldn't want him for a neighbor, and suspect many people wouldn't. I don't see how my wishes about property which isn't mine can be expanded to the point I have any right to tell him he can't be there though.

As an aside, I think if his crimes were known to many people, he might be susceptible to an unfortunate accident.

What do you suggest happen in a case where a criminal has been forgiven by his victim ? Is it my duty to intervene to punish somebody for a loss I didn't suffer and where the victim has forgiven the criminal ?
 
st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Good question and interesting scenario.

I wouldn't want him for a neighbor, and suspect many people wouldn't. I don't see how my wishes about property which isn't mine can be expanded to the point I have any right to tell him he can't be there though.

As an aside, I think if his crimes were known to many people, he might be susceptible to an unfortunate accident.

What do you suggest happen in a case where a criminal has been forgiven by his victim ? Is it my duty to intervene to punish somebody for a loss I didn't suffer and where the victim has forgiven the criminal ?
Click to expand...
I side with the greater good in most cases. If someone is a clear threat to society, and is not capable of rehabilitation, then I have no problem locking them away for life.

I don't trust our criminal justice system, but in a case like this it seems pretty cut and dry.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
I side with the greater good in most cases. If someone is a clear threat to society, and is not capable of rehabilitation, then I have no problem locking them away for life.

I don't trust our criminal justice system, but in a case like this it seems pretty cut and dry.
Click to expand...


If you don't like threats to "society" I assume you are against forcing people to pay for the
maintenance of people imprisoned for life ?


The "criminal justice system" focuses more on punishing people for disobedience than it does on providing a place where justice can be found. It is wise not to trust it.
 
st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
If you don't like threats to "society" I assume you are against forcing people to pay for the
maintenance of people imprisoned for life ?
Click to expand...
I don't view a threat to my life and my wallet being a little lighter as equal threats. Taxes are a part of living in a civilized society. I don't always agree with how my tax dollars are spent, but I have no problem with paying them.

We will have to agree to disagree...
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
Just looked up a few stats. It costs the state of North Carolina, on average, 2.16 million more to prosecute a death penalty case than it does a case that is not seeking death. The average cost per year in North Carolina to house an inmate is around $30k. So, as long as he doesn't live 72 years or longer behind bars it would be cheaper to give him life in prison.
Click to expand...
Why would North Carolina bear any prosecution or housing costs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top