Death Penalty vs Life Imprisonment (fiscal breakdown question)

Is there somewhere that gives the fiscal breakdown of the costs between states that carry out Death Penalty executions and states that don't have the Death Penalty and instead give people life imprisonment?

What I mean is the cost of the full spectrum.

Death Penalty: cost of appeals and the complete execution process (including cost of execution staff as well as the materials used)

Life Imprisonment: annual cost of care of prisoner (including cost of prison staff)

I often hear from people that it's more expensive to carry out the Death Penalty than it is to give somebody life imprisonment.

I would like an explanation of this. It would seem that say if someone was found guilty at the age of 30 years-old, and they were given life imprisonment without parole and then they went on to live until they were 80 years-old...this would be 50 years in prison for ONE person...this would be care of the prisoner, food and beverages, recreation, cost of prison staff et al.

Now say that we multiply this by 100 people in one state...surely the cost of keeping 100 people in prison for life without parole for 50 years would be MORE expensive than carrying out the Death Penalty on those 100 people within say five years of their conviction.

Five years vs Fifty years.

This post isn't flame bait, so please don't misinterpret this post. I'm just genuinely interested in the fiscal breakdowns between states that have the Death Penalty and states that don't have the Death Penalty but instead have life imprisonment.

Thanks.

Unbiased one way or the other, is Death Penalty Info neither pro-Death Penalty nor anti-Death Penalty?

Obviously a completely unbiased site would be the best one to gauge the fiscal situation.

but the research on the site is pretty thorough. I trust the research, but not all of the editorial content.

Read over the fiscal breakdown then, thanks for the link.

that it cost my state close to $1 million per year per person to keep someone on death row. This included everything from lawyers to extra security in the prison.

To be totally honest this was the first item that began me turning from pro death penalty POV to now supporting life-in-prison which I am now!!! But every now & then there is some SOB that is such a horrible person that makes me second guess for a moment.

sours the debate. Naturally the rabid response is to eliminate the bleeding heart appeals process and cut corners on the executions. The economics of Auschwitz also posed a productivity dilemma to the Third Reich but it certainly didn't make life imprisonment a viable option.

Also when speaking of numbers the good life in prison, which is Abu Graib without the protesters, doesn't last all that long generally. Some speak of killing even the innocent prisoners as a mercy, and don't drag out the cruel false hopes for the death row designees.

It isn't about the money but if you get too far into that, ingenuity intent on revenge killing will find a way. All the logical and moral arguments are legitimizing the position of revenge killing by the state for the political rewards and distractions of blood lust by not simply stating that murder is wrong, and state murder is a crime against every citizen of the state.

This is like the nun naively trying to argue that helping the poor is cost effective. If that were an honest logic card we would be taking care of the poor, etc. But it isn't and pretending that a selfish and cruel minority intent on terrorizing and oppressing the populace- by its actions- has a point is a stupidity worthy of evil itself or a victim afraid to face its destiny under the hands of a malignant power.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Just like in health care regarding terminal patients. The mechanics of death should be left to run on their own accord. Not that you're doing or saying anything wrong, it's just that the cost is never the issue. People won't change their mind for against the death penalty based on cost, at least they shouldn't. It's an improper way to frame the debate, in my opinion. Besides, someone who changes their mind or reaches a decision regarding the death of another person, based on cost, is just scum. Remember that little law Bushy passed in Texas, that puts non cost effective patients out of their misery? I'm not really a fan of that one either.

However, if it helps, it costs an average of forty three thousand dollars a year to house an inmate in Michigan, in the penal system. My ex is a probation officer.

It's just downright ghoulish and in-human to reduce a life, no matter how dangerous to society that life is, to a simple dollar value. I do not get caught up in the "costs" of execution vs. imprisonment, because this is not why I am anti-death penalty. "You know. If we just execute all the prisoners now, they could lower taxes on us, and I could afford that flatscreen TV for the bedroom." Such a worthy argument to have.:eyes:

The only thing you should be arguing about is the morality of the death penalty, in my humble opinion.

On reducing human life to a dollar value. The insurance industry is but one example. I agree that it is somewhat of a morally repugnant arguement, but for some people it is an effective one, and quite frankly at this point it doesn't matter to me if a person opposes the death penalty for moral reasons or economic reasons, just that they oppose the death penalty. If economic arguements help speed the cessation of the death penalty, I'm all for it.

There's absolutely no need for you to have made the comment that you did.

..to look only at the financial cost - as though no moral issues are involved, which implies the premis that DP is acceptable.

But I've just been thinking out of interest about what all round this stuff costs states that have the Death Penalty and states that don't have the Death Penalty.

again that it's much more expensive to kill criminals than it is to house them for life.

I know this doesn't add up to your "common sense" but get over it.

I hate people bringing this up because the natural reaction to finding out this ghastly fact is to say cut out the appeals and just kill them immediately. Of course none of us would ever be wrongfully convicted of a heinous crime so what's the big deal, right?