James Holmes Sentencing

[CKwi88]

Streaming right now on Yahoo!

Looks like life sentence without possibility of parole.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

Definitely the best possible outcome. The guy will never sense freedom again in his entire life.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-07-2015, 09:48 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Definitely the best possible outcome.  The guy will never sense freedom again in his entire life.

Agreed.  I just posted this on another site.  I think being imprisoned for the rest of your natural life is worse than being sentenced to death.  Additionally, it costs less to incarcerate a person for life than to execute them.

[CKwi88]

I've made my personal views on capital punishment pretty clear throughout the lives of this board and its predecessor. 

If you commit a crime, you have a debt to pay to society. Killing Holmes would have zero benefit to society, and SSF said, end up simply costing society money. Lock him up, make 'em work, never let 'em out. There's no way he can possibly repay the families that lost a member, but it's a whole lot better than just offing the guy, in my opinion. 

[*PhilHos*]

(08-07-2015, 10:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Agreed.  I just posted this on another site.  I think being imprisoned for the rest of your natural life is worse than being sentenced to death.  Additionally, it costs less to incarcerate a person for life than to execute them.

I never understood that. How and why does it cost more for an execution (assuming they're not on death row for decades) than to have someone spend 20, 30, 40 years or more in prison?

[Goalpost]

I was for him dying. I don't know the extent of his mental issues though, which probably is the only thing that spared him.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(08-08-2015, 09:49 AM)PhilHos Wrote: I never understood that. How and why does it cost more for an execution (assuming they're not on death row for decades) than to have someone spend 20, 30, 40 years or more in prison?

Here's a good site that breaks down the costs associated with execution vs. lifetime incarceration.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Defense and incarceration costs are much higher.

[BmorePat87]

(08-08-2015, 09:49 AM)PhilHos Wrote: I never understood that. How and why does it cost more for an execution (assuming they're not on death row for decades) than to have someone spend 20, 30, 40 years or more in prison?

Mandated appeals are very expensive and it costs a lot more to house someone on death row than gen pop. The average time spent on death row is 15 years ( 1/4th die of natural causes before their execution).

In California, it costs $47k to house an inmate and $137k to house a death row inmate (or about 3 times as much).

The average age of a convicted murderer is 29. If they're expected to live to 78, that's 39 years in prison. So they'll cost 1.83m compared to a death row inmate who'd be in there for 15 years and cost 2.05m. However that doesn't account for life expectancy IN PRISON. Vanderbilt says every year in prison reduces life expectancy by 2 years. But that's not exact so let's not even focus on the fact that they're not likely to live to 79.

Add in the extra 1-2m for the trials, and the death penalty inmate costs 1.2-2.2m more over all.

[*michaelsean*]

Dude deserves to die. If death is the easy way out, why do those on death row fight it all the way? Also he may be in prison for the rest of his life, but he can still hurt people.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(08-09-2015, 09:08 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Dude deserves to die.  

Human beings should not be allowed to decide whether or not another human being lives or dies.  Whether or not he deserves the life that he has is irrelevant.  We should not be given the option to take it from him.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-10-2015, 12:45 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: Human beings should not be allowed to decide whether or not another human being lives or dies.  Whether or not he deserves the life that he has is irrelevant.  We should not be given the option to take it from him.

He already decided that it doesn't apply to him, so I have no problem with excluding him from benefitting from it.

[Vas Deferens]

(08-10-2015, 03:04 PM)michaelsean Wrote: He already decided that it doesn't apply to him, so I have no problem with excluding him from benefitting from it.

He was insane.  Never should have gone to trial.  DA wasted a LOT OF MONEY on this.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

(08-10-2015, 03:04 PM)michaelsean Wrote: He already decided that it doesn't apply to him, so I have no problem with excluding him from benefitting from it.

I subscribe more to the "turn the other cheek" mentality than the "eye for an eye" mentality.  

I don't care what his crimes are....I don't believe that human beings should be allowed to decide whether another human being lives or dies.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-10-2015, 07:51 PM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: I subscribe more to the "turn the other cheek" mentality than the "eye for an eye" mentality.  

I don't care what his crimes are....I don't believe that human beings should be allowed to decide whether another human being lives or dies.

That's cool.  I have no problem with that view point.