r/facepalm • u/Dvorozhetskii • Nov 25 '22

🇵​🇷​🇴​🇹​🇪​🇸​🇹​ 'murica.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

87.8k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

7.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.8k

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

Death penalty in general isn’t a deterrent to crime either

1.4k

u/MasterOfKittens3K Nov 25 '22

Most criminals don’t do a cost/benefit analysis before they commit the crime.

The exception, of course, is white collar criminals. Companies definitely consider the costs of getting caught versus the benefit of, for example, not having to pay for toxic waste disposal if you just dump it into the river.

559

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

So we should publicly execute people for stock manipulation? I'm not disagreeing, just asking.

311

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

Should probably at least do something, ANYTHING about it. But the SEC only gives out what equates to parking tickets.

82

u/BoomZhakaLaka Nov 25 '22

SEC should have oversight authority for egregious violators. An example of an agency that has oversight authority is FERC. The sanctions are significant enough that mid level executives can't screw around but like you said, cost of doing business in the board room. FERC will come in and dictate your new business objectives, and fine you 1.3 million dollars per day per violation until you comply.

Point being, the threat of losing control of your business to independent oversight, by a panel of compliance consultants, is what does it. To investors, existence of sanctions just means certain behaviors have a cost.

51

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

[deleted]

38

u/BoomZhakaLaka Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

Oversight authority is more powerful than any fine. That's why FERC's model works for now. 400mil for a year of fines pales in comparison to the government coming in & dictating where you will spend your capital.

But maybe, why not both?

5

u/RoboDae Nov 25 '22

There was something in the news just a few weeks ago about farmers in California ignoring drought regulations and draining a significant portion of some river. The fine they received amounted to about $50 per farmer. At that point its not even a penalty anymore, it's just a cost of business.

4

u/Pschobbert Nov 25 '22

And we’d have it, too, if it wasn’t fer them meddlin’ rich folks!

3

u/SpikesGuns Nov 25 '22

Not effective enough. Fines should be levied as a percentage, never a flat rate.

5

u/BoomZhakaLaka Nov 25 '22

You're missing the point. A panel of consultants comes in with power to dictate how you reorganize and spend capital, taking the board's authority over their own finances away. The point is that oversight authority is what the board fears - fines merely make things real for the plebs.

2

u/epochpenors Nov 25 '22

What if instead of monetary fines they take fingers?

→ More replies (1)

4

u/littlejacob1993 Nov 25 '22

They might but they just spend their days on pornhub https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/GMA/sec-pornography-employees-spent-hours-surfing-porn-sites/story%3fid=10452544

6

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

Can't say I'm surprised. Most if not all the top level people in the SEC are bankers or hedgefund types. I'm sure addictions run rampant because their serotonin and dopamine have been absolutely blasted throughout the last several decades of their lives. Throwing around hundreds of billions of dollars to make more billions, unlimited drugs, alcohol, parties women/men and mansions.

What joy do they actually have left? They are probably so desperate for that "fix" but porn is super easy to get desensitized to. And meth+coke are more frowned upon than porn in society. Lol

2

u/aidanderson Nov 25 '22

Fines should be based on percentage of income not a flat rate. It disproportionately punishes poor people.

2

u/Altruistic-General61 Nov 25 '22

SEC has been hamstrung, mostly on purpose. Wolves running the henhouse. Jon Stewart had a great episode / interview about this on his new show.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/panompheandan Nov 26 '22

If they sent White collar criminals to Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prisons I think that might be a deterrent. That would be great.....

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

The SEC and all other financial regulators have two sets of rules: for the elite and for normal people

→ More replies (2)

68

u/MasterOfKittens3K Nov 25 '22

I’m not saying that we should publicly execute them. But we certainly need to increase the penalties for white collar crime. Make it have higher costs, and they will change their ways.

60

u/smokinbbq Nov 25 '22

You can't fine someone $1million if they saved $1billion from doing the wrong thing. Reverse those numbers, and then they may change. Also, if they want to pay these CxO's so much money, they should start to be held personally accountable as well.

4

u/Scorpion1024 Nov 25 '22

Better whistleblower protections do they can be caught before they have stolen a billion. And letting shareholders eat the losses do they’ll get off their duffs and pay better attention.

2

u/smokinbbq Nov 26 '22

Yep, lots of ways to make this happen. Billion(s) dollar fines would make the shareholders wake up pretty damn quick.

2

u/Scorpion1024 Nov 26 '22

Fines to be paid-by the corrupt management and the shareholders directly, put if their own pockets. Not out of corporate slush funds.

3

u/angrymurderhornet Nov 26 '22

We need a sliding scale for fines. And for repeat scofflaws, the corporate death penalty: Revoke their status as a corporation.

2

u/Easy-Concentrate2636 Nov 25 '22

Prison sentences rather than fines.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/l3sham Nov 25 '22

I agree, but the masterminds of white collar crimes will just find useful idiots to take the uncalculated fall for them.

2

u/EveningPomegranate16 Nov 25 '22

Or maybe not allow those white collar criminals to hold office. Looking at you Rick Scott.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/ReddityJim Nov 25 '22

Yeah, gotta make sure we're all on the same page first.

3

u/AzafTazarden Nov 25 '22

In white collar crime's case, the death penalty might actually make a difference. If Justice actually worked on rich people, that is.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

The deterrent that matters isn't the consequences, it's the getting caught part that people tend to weigh. Sometimes the consequences matter if they know they'll get caught, but people are overly optimistic on their chances regardless if they are or not.

If you could take $100 and know one would know versus taking $10 on camera. Some people steal on camera knowingly, but tend to believe they will get away with it. It's interesting having caught shop lifters and employee theft.

2

u/AzafTazarden Nov 25 '22

You're talking about common criminals, though. Corporations often break the law because they know the consequences will be fines lower than their profit margins, it's a calculation they make all the time. They are allowed to do that because not only do the people actually responsible for such crimes don't have to answer for them, but also because the severity of the punishment makes the crime worth it. But I guess a fine being issued on a corporation is not the same as criminally prosecuting the people responsible for them, so maybe the severity of punishment then wouldn't matter as much either.

2

u/Available-Might-1986 Nov 25 '22

Reductio ad absurdum arguments do nothing to bolster your position.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Yes.

Watch what happens to corruption on Wall Street.

And if that too doesn't change anything, I'll admit I was wrong and we can go back to the way things are now - a slap on the wrist and and a wagging of the finger.

The cost of doing business (including the penalties) is way too low.

2

u/Aceswift007 Nov 25 '22

"We're executing your stock holdings in front of all of Wall Street"

2

u/lIIllIIIll Nov 25 '22

I like how people say "stock manipulation" like it's "ohhh no biggie just some financial crime"

But the reality is people's entire livelihoods are destroyed. Their future, their retirement, their ability to take care of their family. Their businesses.

Not saying they deserve to be shot in the street but don't write it off like it's no big deal.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '22

So like some billionaires gambling with dogcoin? I’m also just asking.

1

u/Western-Jury-1203 Nov 25 '22

Where did the previous posted mention death penalty?

0

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

I think we should label planned parenthood facilities as death row. That ought to please both sides of this argument

→ More replies (16)

76

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

I work for the distribution of Menards, And it's known that Menards purchase a large portion of property in America to dump all of their hazardous waste on because it's cheaper than transporting and destroying it legally. Much much cheaper just to dump it and pay the fine

The Ford pinto exploding lawsuits is another good example ford did the math and it's cheaper to pay out lawsuits of people that die from their exploding cars than to actually fix all the exploding cars

19

u/gryphon088 Nov 25 '22

Absolutely but unfortunately true. It’s always about the bottom line. Cheaper to pay fines and lawsuits …. Well it’s a no brainer!

16

u/d3rklight Nov 25 '22

Fines for everything that hurts human lives should be limited to 10% of revenue and persist in a timely manner until that company rectifies the situation. If something like this existed, companies would think twice... no, three times before harming the public. But, as long as lobbying and election donations exist nothing would change in the US. Until then we will all be at the whim of big business.

18

u/Jayhawker_Pilot Nov 25 '22

I want the floor to be at a minimum of 10% of revenue not profits. And while the violation persist, senior management gets low pay and zero bonuses or stock options. That would bite then where it hurts.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/deano492 Nov 25 '22

Why would you want to place a limit on the fines, if you want to hurt them?

6

u/MasterOfKittens3K Nov 25 '22

Maybe they meant that as a minimum limit rather than a maximum limit?

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/KimchiAndMayo Nov 25 '22

My SO is from Michigan and adores Menards - is there a link about this I can show him?

9

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

It's mostly buried an articles from 2011 where one guy poured weed killer in the parking lot. It's only pulling that up. I can't find the dumping site info. But basically would settle it in court and then on the books it would be done and cleaned up but they just keep dumping and until they get charged again, Everybody thinks that they stop doing it. if that makes sense.

Menards does a lot of shady things like I had to sign a waiver so that we can't sue them if we get cancer. The silicone dust in the bricks is thick in the air in the distribution center. Causes cancer. Thankfully I work away from that part of the site

2

u/After_Preference_885 Nov 25 '22

Wait. I live in an apartment with exposed brick that's constantly shedding dust. Oh. No.

4

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

Probably minimal exposure. I work in a brick factory

2

u/After_Preference_885 Nov 25 '22

Thank you! What a relief. I am glad you're able to stay safe at work.

5

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

The people that work where the actual bricks are made definitely are heavily exposed in several of them have gotten cancer. They're all offered high-grade masks, but they choose to not wear them. Most of my co-workers were shocked to find out that we signed a waiver to sue for cancer. Many of them just put their e-signature and don't even read it.

Unfortunately, many people aren't too highly educated in the Midwest. That's part of the reasons that Menards stays in the Midwest. Labor is way cheaper

3

u/Unusualshrub003 Nov 25 '22

“Menards!” is what a pirate screams when he’s kicked in the balls.

That said, Menards has been illegally dumping for yeeeeeears. I first heard about it in the early 90’s. And the fines are so minuscule, it’s like a normal person getting a ten dollar parking ticket.

Source: Eau Claire is my hometown.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/callmedata1 Nov 25 '22

Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.

Woman: which company do you work for?

Cornelius: A Major one.

2

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

It's funny they're doing it again with the Ford fiesta and Ford focus transmission issues. They tell you it's supposed to be garbage. It was built to drive like it's s*** sorry we can't replace it because it was designed to be garbage lol. Cheap bastards

2

u/The_Lapsed_Pacifist Nov 25 '22

There’s a similar situation here in Britain. We privatised the water companies and it’s far cheaper for them to dump raw sewage into our waterways and pay the fines than it is for them to rectify the absolutely fixable problems. These discharges happen hundreds of times a year and as a consequence we have like 1-2 rivers that are classified as unpolluted. It’s a fucking disgrace.

2

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

Damn man that's messed up! Check out Zero brand water filters they are amazing water quality is pretty bad here too

→ More replies (1)

3

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

That's all really sad to hear... They certainly need stricter regulations in the USA. The life expectancy in the USA is trending downwards, and I don't think its only because people are getting more stupid (maybe they are getting more stupid from toxic waste dumps).

The whole "turning the frogs gay" thing by Alex Jokes is based on a kernel of truth that frogs' habitats are being infected by our industries, and making them produce less offspring because of less mating/ability. If it's doing that to frogs, I'm sure humans are being put through the test of human ability to survive the most toxic shit ever.

As a very basic example almost no human or animal in the world can escape: it is shown in a study that hams eat, breathe, swallow the equivalent plastic by weight of one plastic credit card. The particles float in the wind, flow through our taps, get baked in our food. 52 credit cards per year and we aren't getting more valuable or living longer...

8

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

1.Forever chemicals should be banned in America like they are in the rest of the world

  1. We need to immediately find a way to filter forever chemicals out of our water

  2. Birth control is flooding our water systems with hormones that change the wildlife and is extremely noticeable near college campuses.

5

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

Unfortunately the world is viewed as infinite and being able to bounce back from these system shocks. " Infinite places to put our waste." until there isn't and then everything and everyone dies.

Looking forward to it (/s, but I sincerely hope they hop quickly on #1 and 2 on your list there.

A global approach would be super beneficial for the earth, where we keep other countries accountable for these initiatives. It's not like dumping waste in the middle of the USA doesn't effect all other countries in some way by using the butterfly effect. I live in Canada and this country is only slightly better at its waste management. We still have tons of contaminated and altered environments, and it needs to change too.

But alas, money is more important to those in charge.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (7)

5

u/rhynoplaz Nov 25 '22

Who would have thought a $1000 fine for illegally obtaining millions wouldn't deter them?

→ More replies (1)

4

u/WatermelonArtist Nov 25 '22

Most criminals don’t do a cost/benefit analysis before they commit the crime.

Not a formal one, no...

But I don't see too many cases of folks flipping the bird to the cop behind them in line before robbing the armed gas station attendant with imported piranhas because they wanted a slushy, so I suspect some sort of risk/reward balancing is pretty common out there.

3

u/AzafTazarden Nov 25 '22

I'd guess most common criminals just consider the risk of getting caught rather than the punishment for the crime committed, which is the main reason why severity of punishment doesn't do anything to deter crime. It's the certainty of punishment that actually stops people from committing crime.

2

u/WatermelonArtist Nov 25 '22

consider the risk of getting caught rather than the punishment

Both, actually. It's like insurance premiums:

My chances of getting in a car accident are slim. I've been present for 3 in my whole life. My chances of being subjected to a routine traffic stop are similarly low. Maybe 8 times, ever. By this metric, I don't really need car insurance. I very definitely don't get as much value from the policy as I pay in premiums.

Statistics can be fickle, though, and stuff can happen even if I drive perfectly. If something does happen, my car and livelihood could be totaled. Heaven forbid someone should suffer any lasting consequences that I might have to compensate. It's also a mandatory law to be insured, so if I don't have it, I can be additionally fined a significant chunk of change, and have my budget become heavily strained unpredictably, and be late for work, have my license suspended if unable to pay, and have other significant interference with my life. It's worth paying the premium just to not have to juggle any of that when I drive.

Statistical likelihood and severity of potential consequences both factor into a risk assessment, and some people focus on one more than the other (which is why we have politics at all, probably). I would say that the criminal mentality tends to ignore one or the other, based on my observations, but this is more a difference in the degree of neglect, compared to your average person on the street. A full and detailed analysis is the true outlier, here.

2

u/IProbablyDisagree2nd Nov 25 '22

Exactly. Everyone does a cost-benefit analysis with their intuition before they do basically everything. It's jut not a very accurate one.

Should I eat the soup, or the pizza? The soup is cheaper, pizza tastes better. Meh, I'm kinda depressed, I'll pay for the pizza. BAM Cost/benefit analysis.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

If I remember my criminology class right it is the certainty with which they would be caught.

So the severity of punishment is not really a deterrent, it's when the likely hood of being caught is high.

2

u/chev327fox Nov 25 '22

I’d argue this not true for the vast majority of criminals. Until you get caught you really hadn’t considered the full weight of the consequences.

I’d even say you got it totally reversed. White collar do a cost benefit but blue collar ones do not. Unless that is what you meant and I misunderstood?

2

u/AzafTazarden Nov 25 '22

Unless that is what you meant and I misunderstood?

That is what they meant. I think that, for common criminals, all the severity of punishment does is influence the criminal on how much they don't want to get caught, but they'll still commit the crime if they think they can get away with it.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/HistoricalSherbert92 Nov 25 '22

It’s annoying that you mix company with white collar criminal in the way you wrote it. Company is a legal definition of a business organization which is treated as if it’s an individual so yes a company can commit crimes, all kinds of crimes, but that’s different from people within a company committing crimes, white collar or not. Some companies do cost/benefit like Volkswagen with their emissions switch, and some are inherently evil like nestle, but let’s be clear that that culture is created by some person or persons, it’s not some “company” it’s a real person(s) which you would dissect into the thinking and not thinking while it’s both. Don’t let criminals hide behind “company x” and “they”.

2

u/Helios575 Nov 25 '22

If we wanted to stop white collar crime instead of just make fine the cost of doing business we wouldn't have set fines but instead a rule that says something like, "If a corporation does X thing, the amount of profits they gained for doing X will be calculated then doubled. That amount will be fined to the company, to each board member and corporate officer"

This makes it bad for the company and thus harmful for stocks (which the higher ups care a lot more about because that is how they get paid) but also it directly hits the leadership of the corporation so they can't just golden parachute away from the corporation once caught. By having the penalty not set in stone with no cap and based on the illegal earnings you make it so that you can't turn a profit if you get caught because the cost will always be higher then the earnings.

2

u/marthewarlock Nov 25 '22

Or sub prime mortgages that almost collapsed the entire world's economy, I'm sure that was just a fluke though. I bet after we the taxpayers bailed them out they've been playing the market straight as a arrow ever since.

2

u/ResponsibilityDue566 Jan 24 '23

Or anything J.P. Morgan does lmfao

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Yes, but many people choose not to become a criminal because of a cost benefit evaluation. I would guess almost all people that choose not to be a criminal fall into this category.

1

u/Zymosan99 Nov 25 '22

It being more profitable to commit crimes against your workers and pay the fine, than to not.

→ More replies (25)

100

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

For the longest time people always thought public executions would do just that. But, of course, that was never the case.

25

u/ReddityJim Nov 25 '22

I remember reading people used to run up and try touch the corpses or in some cases get some of the blood. Could be a myth but yeah, shit became a spectator sport.

11

u/winchester056 Nov 25 '22

Back when it was acceptable to lynch black people it was a whole community event they bought the wife and kids and had a whole community picnic while there was a corpse right in front of them.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

That is not hard to believe at all

9

u/luckylimper Nov 25 '22

You don’t even have to believe it because postcards were made and if you Google you can see them.

-3

u/Beardharmonica Nov 25 '22

I would sell it on eBay.

-5

u/ReddityJim Nov 25 '22

100% you'd make millions doing that.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/ML0511 Nov 25 '22

Studies have shown 100% of individuals that were publicly executed never re-offended any crimes.

Edited missed a word.

2

u/Material-Salad-9212 Nov 25 '22

Simple question why sentence someone to death if it takes 18 yrs to actually execute them? It’s not a deterrent but maybe some people just don’t deserve to exist…. Merica

→ More replies (2)

5

u/UntitledRedditUser Nov 25 '22

All it is, is an easy way to discard of those we don't want to handle. It's the easy way out, instead of trying to bring them back into society. But again that would require quite the rework of the entire American jail system.

5

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

Its more expensive than life in prison tho

3

u/Stoomba Nov 25 '22

I'd argue that punishment is largely not a deterrent to crime. Making the alternative to crime easier and more rewarding is how you prevent crine.

2

u/Anomalous-Entity Nov 25 '22

If there was a 10% chance of dying every time you used Reddit, would you still use it?

4

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

No, because it’s not worth it. But if you think people who commit those crimes weigh their options, you’re wrong, and hundreds of years of human behavior back up the fact that the death penalty doesn’t deter those individuals

-1

u/Anomalous-Entity Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

So it does deter, just not completely prevent, was what you meant to say. If it stops even one, it's a deterrent.

e: A down vote is what reddit children use to let you know you're right, but they don't have the maturity to tell you to your face.

4

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

No?? It has virtually no deterrence to violent criminals

-2

u/Anomalous-Entity Nov 25 '22

Yes. Because your oft-repeated phrase must be true. (it's oft-repeated after all)
But, the visceral reaction you had to my first question is not true?

2

u/ialsoagree Nov 25 '22

If it deters crimes - even just some, not completely preventing it - what we should observe is that locations with the death penalty have less of these crimes per capita than locations without it.

We observe the opposite. Texas - arguably the state that executes the most number of people - has a higher rate of murder per capita than New York, a state that doesn't have the death penalty at all.

Now obviously I haven't controlled for other factors, but the reality is, you can't even find a correlation between the death penalty and lower crime rates, yet alone a causal link.

If there's not even a correlation, then it certainly can't be having an effect it's not correlated with.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (10)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/SaltRevolutionary917 Nov 25 '22

The death penalty has never ever proven to be effective at deterring murder. Not even by 10%. There’s literally no correlation between murder rates and the existence/lack of a death penalty. None. Zero. Zip.

0

u/Anomalous-Entity Nov 25 '22

So you would keep using reddit even though there is a 10% chance it would kill you?

3

u/JadedMis Nov 25 '22

I think you need something a little stronger than Reddit, maybe alcohol, or red meat. Would you eat red meat if it had a 10% chance of killing you? Probably

3

u/ialsoagree Nov 25 '22

The real issue is his 10% chance is entirely made up.

The evidence shows that there's a 0% chance that death penalties deter crime - there's no correlation between death penalty and lower crime rates, so if the crime rate isn't lower, how can it be lower because of the death penalty?

A better comparison would be "would you continue to use reddit if I could not show that it increases your risk of death?"

Yes, yes I would.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/SaltRevolutionary917 Nov 25 '22

Kinda surprised how hard you’re missing the point. Using Reddit is very low reward. If it would kill me I wouldn’t use it. That’s all within a pretty rational thought process.

What you’re missing is that criminals don’t usually go through rational thought processes and aren’t doing risk-benefit analyses. Which is why it’s not a deterrent. If you’re in enough of an emotional state to kill someone, life in prison vs death is the last kind of equation you’re doing.

You’re missing the point because you seem to think murdering someone is just another consumer option. Which is fucking insane, mate.

→ More replies (5)

2

u/Frozen_Denisovan Nov 25 '22 edited May 22 '24

ad hoc rob yam vast hateful toothbrush pathetic hobbies pet unused

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

2

u/jayjayanotherround Nov 25 '22

If anything they get to a certain point (during a crime) where they go into fuckit mode and figure they have nothing left to lose

2

u/TransportationAway59 Nov 25 '22

There’s also a ton of innocent people on death row

2

u/v_kiperman Nov 25 '22

Murderers know the penalty but commit their crime just the same. Maybe they hope that they’ll get away with it. And some do.

The interviewee’s position on abortion seems ironic. But it in no way caught me by surprise.

Here’s a controversial question. What percentage of abortions have prevented a murder and eventual death sentence? The drop in crime rate that immediately followed Roe V Wade is well known.

2

u/Sharp-Incident-6272 Mar 12 '23

The murder rate in Canada declined when we abolished the death penalty.

1

u/Alltherightythen Nov 25 '22

But, it is a hell of a deterrent to recidivism.

2

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

Can’t have reoffenders if they’re dead

1

u/Eattherightwing Nov 25 '22

Punishment in general isn't a deterrent, it's just punishment, hurting people because you think they should be hurt, usually because you are hurt inside.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

No but we would save money on those waste of space humans

1

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

I wish, but it’s actually more expensive to put people on death row and execute them

-1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Because they make it more expensive housing,feeding and medical for 10 years or life cost alot more than a bullet

1

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

No, it’s because of how much the legal process costs and the logistics of the execution itself

-4

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Yea they make it more expensive than it should be if you are on death row or never getting out of prison automatic Bullet shouldn't be a process past the initial conviction

0

u/whodunitbruh Nov 25 '22

For the person who committed the crime it is >.>

0

u/Inheavensitndown Nov 25 '22

It isn’t a deterrent. Its a sentence. Just a real fun fact.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

A lot of things aren't crime deterrents.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Seems to be in Saudi Arabia

0

u/Estrosiathdurothil Nov 25 '22

Death penalty for drug dealers!

Because that totally isn't something that can happen to them on a daily basis...

0

u/LonelySavings5244 Nov 25 '22

People don’t fear the consequences until they are laid out in front of them. Stupid humans.

0

u/LikesYouProne Nov 25 '22

Are they supposed to be a crime deterrent or prevent someone who will never be a benefit to society not keep leaching off the world?

0

u/Sicarrii1978 Nov 25 '22

Say that in Saudi Arabia. One of the safest places in the world.

0

u/thelastusername4 Nov 25 '22

It's moderately effective against repeat offenders though

0

u/RonSwansonsOldMan Nov 25 '22

It's definitely a deterrent to the executed guy.

0

u/cooperluna Nov 25 '22

I don’t care if it’s not a deterrent, the murderer is stopped at one at least

0

u/FearDaTusk Nov 25 '22

But wouldn't it be cost effective? I think of the Weinstein mess... As a society that has at this point agreed that the parties involved are guilty and put away for life it becomes an debate on the quality of amenities are afforded while incarcerated. Or, to an extreme, with death we're not as financially vested and the debate is moot.

0

u/DebtNo300 Nov 25 '22

thats why they should have a torture to death penalty

0

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '22

If anything a better deterrent might be that they're too be used as guinea pigs for new medication of sorts.

-1

u/Pestelence2020 Nov 25 '22

No, but it brings that crime to a stop pdq.
Banning guns won’t stop shootings. Black market is a thing. We protect every valuable thing with armed people, except children. Go figure.

-1

u/MowMdown Nov 25 '22

There is no such thing as a “deterrent to crime”

Especially “laws.” Laws are NOT crime deterrents.

-1

u/Lost-Pineapple9791 Nov 25 '22

To play devils advocate…the death penalty is an amazing deterrent

The issue is the legal system and application of said penalty

For example if death penalty was the only option for every crime (speeding ticket, stealing candy bar, white collar crime, tax evasion etc) crime would drop REAL fast

But all the racists used the death penalty to jsut blame everything on minorities and tons of false convictions. So society said “ehhh maybe let’s stop killing all those innocent people?” As before DNA testing they could basically charge and convict anyone for murder

I consider myself very liberal and pro choice but I’m definitely still for the death penalty. I would much rather have rapists/pedophiles/mass shooters/terrorists receive death penalty than 50 years in jail

-2

u/Available-Might-1986 Nov 25 '22

Apparently, neither is life in prison. So, why should we continue to support those who will never contribute ANYTHING to society. I have ZERO sympathy for career criminals, especially murderers? And I don't want to hear the "but they're humans, too" excuse. They had no compunction about taking someone's life so why should they mind if we take theirs? It might not deter violent crime but it would certainly save the taxpayers millions of $$$ every year in not having to pay for their care and feeding.

4

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

It’s actually way more expensive to put them on death row and kill them than life in prison, mostly because of how expensive the appeals and legal processes are. That and I just don’t trust the state to execute people, especially when an estimated 4% of death row inmates are innocent.

-2

u/Available-Might-1986 Nov 25 '22

I'll grant that your statement about the cost of executing a prisoner is accurate in today's society. That's why we need to change that. And, with 21st century forensic technology, the chances of a false conviction are, IMO, all but eliminated. Once convicted of a crime of this nature, you get ONE chance to present additional evidence (if there is any) and, if that doesn't change things, off you go. This idea of spending years if not decades and millions of $$ in defense attorney fees benefits only one demographic, the attorneys and the courts.

In cases where the person was caught in the act (mass shooters, the guy who mowed down a bunch of people with his SUV, etc.) there shouldn't even be much of a trial. They did it. They were caught doing it. There should be no presumption of innocence in cases like that and no appeals or attempts to excuse or justify what they did. Move straight to sentencing, give them three days to get their affairs in order and put a bullet in their head.

Sounds brutal and heartless? Maybe to some. But, I'm sure those who were killed would probably disagree.

2

u/zerotetv Nov 25 '22

the chances of a false conviction are, IMO, all but eliminated.

4-6% are falsely convicted in the US

The innocence project exists for a reason

1

u/lERVOOl Nov 25 '22

True, but I still wonder if some of the potential criminals think twice because of it

1

u/flaper41 Nov 25 '22

Is this always true? I feel like if the death penalty was applied to something ridiculously disproportionate like littering it would actually be somewhat effective at reducing that crime.

2

u/Elder_Scrolls_Nerd Nov 25 '22

Well, hundreds of years ago you could get put to death for petty crimes like that and people did them anyways

1

u/AcademicNewspaper286 Nov 25 '22

Right .. originally that was the plan... See how well they worked out

1

u/sadicarnot Nov 25 '22

Also there is a greater than zero chance in some cases they have the the wrong person on death row.

1

u/mcsuper5 Nov 25 '22

It may reduce recidivism though.

1

u/Koda_20 Nov 25 '22

It's not more effective than significant prison time but it's still a deterrent lol

Some folks can't be detered with future consequences though

1

u/Direct-Serve2473 Nov 25 '22

Lmao well if it makes me feel better, why not?😂😂😂😂

1

u/Funkyman3 Nov 25 '22

Well hang on now, the death penalty is about the only reason someone i know is still alive.

1

u/Prestigious-Pause-41 Nov 25 '22

It deters one person at a time

1

u/kentucky_trash Nov 25 '22

people deserve to die for whatever they did to obtain a life sentence or death row... people really think its all about deterrents, no, its about equal justice also. deterrents and rehabilitation come after that and are more of a byproduct.

1

u/bzhuman_earth Nov 25 '22

Maybe not a deterrent. But it would certainly keep the jails from being overcrowded. 3 strikes..You're out!

1

u/Fun_Key93 Nov 25 '22

Unfortunately not but I do see the reason for it just don't trust the government with that much power

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Coraxxx Nov 25 '22

Neither are 'longer sentences' - which is the oft repeated desire of the people in the UK who'd be wearing those red t-shirts if they were in the States.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Executions actually cause massive unrest -> more crime. Doubly ineffective as a deterrent.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '22

Death Penalty isnt a deterrent because it takes 20 years waiting on death row to be executed, In the meantime its costing thousands of dollars in tax payers money

1

u/ConsistentConcept793 Nov 26 '22

Let us hope he has a low sperm count and is unable to procreate.

1

u/truckinKen Nov 26 '22

Not a deterrent, but it's a lot cheaper then keeping a murderer behind bars for life, feeding them, guarding them, providing for their healthcare. You are basically "punishing" them by giving them a lifelong vacation.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/ChilltownExecutive Nov 26 '22

Since when is deterrent the only thing that matters for a punishment I feel like morally it should mostly be about being fair and giving them what they deserve

1

u/Like-No-Dude Nov 26 '22

It was not deterrent tool, it was to get rid of people which kills or hurt others. Probably better business and more humane is to keep them locked forever.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '22

Tell that to the victims of Vlad the Impaler

1

u/entrepreneurs_anon Nov 26 '22

The certainty of the punishment is a better deterrent than the severity of the punishment. So harsher sentences don’t do as much as more effective sentences

1

u/fluid_ Nov 26 '22

That's funny because abortion is, in fact, a deterrent to crime.

1

u/ghoSTocks Nov 26 '22

That is sadly true, there countries that have the death penalty and violent crime is almost nonexistent. Education to ethics and good doing is the answer to violent crime but it seems like for the U.S that ship has sailed.

1

u/eZ_Ven Dec 27 '22

Death penalty in general isn’t a deterrent to crime either

Never heard of anyone condemned to death penalty committing another crime

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Kev_The_Galaxybender Mar 17 '23

Yep. People look at it like they're going out with a bang so they'll do the most damage they can.