• http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080228/ap_on_re_us/prison_population

    america ain’t as free as it thinks it is.  😛 …… 😢

  • simple fix, exacute more prisoners and make prison more undesireable to be in.
    ok as a serious responce, i see no problem with capital punishment, i would accually like to see people on death row shorter periods of time. yes i know innocount people die from this but it shows that the state/government is sirious about follow through and the effect is fewer people will commit the crimes that warnt exacution. this is my opinion on it atleast.
    as for lowering the general pop, make prison so undesireable that you realy don’t want to go there, not the way it is now where it’s no big deal to go. there are people who are in and out because they way the risk and find that commiting the crime is worth the punishment. make the punishment worse and crime should go down.
    i would love to see prisons emptyer, but not at risk of public safty. we have in WA sex offenders being set free early not because of parole but because the state wants to make room, these arn’t just your statitory rape (sex with under aged person) but also your violant sex offenders. this isn’t a good thing to be letting back out into the public expetally earlier then sentanced as it shows them and future offenders that the punishment is less then expected.
    as of now prison isn’t a bad place to go for all, it needs to be so that you don’t want to go back or go in the first place.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator


    simple fix, exacute more prisoners and make prison more undesireable to be in.

    I do not believe we can enforce the laws any better by killing offenders then by warehousing them.  However, by not killing them, we leave open the possibility (as rare as it may be) that they might find a way to contribute to society.

    Bear in mind, however, I do not feel it is right to kill anyone except in the case of war or defense of self or family or property.  A prinsoner in jail or a baby in the womb are both incapable of harming you, your family, or your property and as such, should not be killed by you or anyone else.  They are also not at war with you.

  • from a religous stand point.
    eye for an eye… life for a life.
    forgive can be brought in, but you can forgive and still exacute.

    economics stand point.
    a drug coctail (or even a short drop with a sudden stop) is cheaper then 30 years of free room and board even if it’s bread and water in a room thats 6ft cubed.

    socianty safty stand point.
    if you know you will be exacuted for something (and fast) it will prevent people from doing it, take away the threat of exacution and crim would go up, this also holds true to other harsh punishments including long and hard prison stays. the more un desireable it is to commit crimes the less likelly you are to do it.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Actually, the death penalty has been proven to be MORE expensive then life imprison because of all the perks you have to give the victim of the death penalty and all the special court hearings s/he gets etc.

    It’s far cheaper to just put them in a cell 40 feet below ground and forget they exist then it is to go for the death penalty.

    And I agree that the death penalty has been shown to reduce crime IF, and only if, it’s also demonstrated that punishment will be given swiftly.  But when you know it’ll take the government 50-60 years to finally get around to killing you, what deterant is that?  Odds are you’ll die of disease or system malfunction long before you get put to death in this country. (the 50-60 year thing is pulled out of my ass.  It’s a hella long time, dunno exactly HOW long.  I think it’s actually like 30 years or something, but still…not exactly SWIFT is it?)

  • my point on cost is IF it’s done fast, there are a few apeals (even lifers get that), last meal, and specal cell blocks. if you make the sentance swift then it is cheaper to give the perks for just a few years and then be done with them.
    IMO 10 years or 3 apeals (thats 4 trials in total) take the shorter of the two. after that there out of time and go away.

  • 2007 AAR League

    not much cost to drag them outside after court and shoot them.  they will never even spend a day in jail.  very cost effective.

    better yet, let the victims family beat them to death with instruments of their choosing.  and put it on TV for petes sake.

  • exacution like that would be verging on Cuban or Stalan policy, i’m not up for seeing our nation turn to that. although exacution squad’s i’m not against my self, even if a little messy.

    as for letting the victomes family get invalved like that i again think is wrong, that kind of punishment can lead to mob rule. that is not a good thing.

  • 2007 AAR League

    after a constitutionally protected free trial, and if he’s found guilty, give him a week for 1 appeal, then let the family do with him as they wish.

  • i’m sure Cuba says they have free trials as well.
    getting family invalved in punishment is wrong.
    giving such a short apeal time is also wrong as you would have to start working on your apeal as soon as you were charged the first time. apeals are ment for new evidence or what is considered an unfair trial. ether could take more then a week to get to prove.

  • Immediate capital punishment was how it worked in this nation for many, many decades (several Centuries actually, from before we were a nation, until well into our independence…)

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    The concept is that we can take life away, we cannot give it back if we make an error.  So those on death row get an insane amount of appeals to make good and dead certain we KNOW they are guilty and worthy of death.

    That’s why it takes like 30 years and costs much more then life sentences. (You only get a few appeals and then you have to ask the President/Governor for pardons after that to get out.)

  • Release the non-violent drug offenders from prison, and our prison population drops by 40%.  Then we would have plenty of beds for violent criminals…

  • 2007 AAR League

    if we did that, blue states would fill back up the prisons with cigarette smokers.  :x

    its halarious that smoking weed doesnt matter, hell they are for it.(california weed vending machines!)  but smoking a cigarette is a sin now.

    and i know for a fact its b/c democrats know that america’s unhealthy lifestyles make universal healthcare a bankrupting venture.  so instead they will just ban transfats, smoking, etc etc.  basically take away as much individual freedom as they can get away with.

    back on hand, i think we need to build more prisons.  its weird, sometimes i’m all for rehabilitation, other times, all for outright punishment.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I’d accept that, Switch.  I would also legalize the use of ALL narcotics by anyone over 18 years old.  The stupid will weed themselves out of the gene pool that way.  Darwin’s theory can be proven!

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys