DEATH PENALTY- Most states say that executions are too expensive and that is why the criminals stay on death row so long. Do you think that we should make executions "PAY PER VIEW" to cover the cost and give the left over money to the families?

No, I think the death penalty is cruel and should be abolished.Anyway I think,from my point of view,it would be demented television programming.No station would pick it up.

No. It is simply barbaric. What are we, ancient Rome?

Im for the death penalty, against it being televised. Why should they get some sort of Fame in their last moments, just kill them and let people forget they ever lived.

The cheapest and best way is a bullet to the back of the head. Just git-er-done!

Not a good thing you are proposing here, letting the familities profit from the killings of criminals.

Furthermore, i would be surprised if any TV network would pick up the coverage.

Do I want murderers to pay for their crimes?---Yes

Do I believe in the Death penalty?-------------YES

Would I enjoy watching them die? -----------NO

Would I pay to watch them die?----------Hell No

The suggestion lacks any form of humanity

No. If there was an easy answer to the death penalty vs. life imprisonment and prison overcrowding we certainly haven't found it yet. But I don't think PPV is the answer either. Regardless of whether it is cruel or inhumane to the prisoner, it is certainly cruel and inhumane to the prisoner's innocent family members who are grieving.

Seems to me that it'd be more expensive to keep the condemned on death row rather than just pump them full of croak juice and get it over with.

No I think they should just use stones which are free and save the tax payers money

It's too expensive because they are given too many appeals. It should be easy. Judge says, "Guilty. Bailiff take him out back." BLAM! One in the back of the head. No muss, no fuss.

Any attempt to do this could be easily thwarted thanks to the Eighth Amendment. A stay on death row actually varies on the state, as it is up to each state to regulate capital punishment as it chooses. Some states have inmates that spend twenty years on death row before being executed (or being vindicated in court/pardoned). However, in Texas inmates are usually executed within a year or two of being sentenced.

How much did it cost some of these murderers to go out and kill, I bet it didnt cost near the amount of taxes the government is collecting off of cigarettes lately; just use some of that cash to crank up old sparky instead of that Bill Clinton secret german hydeaway some of these senators go to enjoy.

Execution is not all that expensive at all. The trial, which the states must supply two highly qualified attorney's for defense, and the inevitable appeals run up the cost. You can grease one of these freaks for a few bucks. A death penalty trial will easily approach 2 million dollars.

As a George Carlin fan, I'd like to see the U.S. cashing in on this untapped resource. With people as crazy and bloodthirsty as Americans, it doesn't take much imagination to visualize a stadium full of people cheering as a person gets crucified at half time during the Monday night football game.

If someone has been proven guilty beyond a doubt (there have been many falsely accused people on death row), I say give them to the families of the victims. Period.

Great question! I think it is a reprehensable idea but it would be picked up, either by cable or the net and would make kajillions.

Instead of taking their lives, I prefer them working their asses off in a chain gang for the rest of their lives (to pay for their deeds, the prison itself, and live long enough to have an appeal...).
But if they choose VOLUNTAIRY to fight other contenders to death, like gladiators in a arena, why not exploit it to pay the families of their victims.
When a murderer knows he's guilty, and he has a 1 in 3 chance of not having to work during his lifetime lock up, he just might volunteer.

I find this question to be untrue.
Most states do not keep their death row prisoners on death row a long time due to cost. This is absolutely not true. On this topic I can say I am very well informed. I have researched the death penalty and other areas of this field for six years. I am more familiar with Texas, Florida, North Carolina and California's legal systems.
Many inmates sit on death row due to not having legal counsel to represent them in their appeals. The majority of death row inmates across the U.S. are indigent and do not have the funds to fund their defense in their appeals process. The counsel who do represent them are often overworked, understaffed and are state appointed. Ever see the web pages people put up for the inmates that ask for help in funding their case? It is because they are trying to get adequate counsel to represent them.
The state appointed counsel have so many cases that they are literally swamped in having the manpower and time to research the cases.. it takes them longer.
VERY few private attorneys take on death row cases for free like you see in the movies.
Once in a blue moon you will hear of one who does.. where they do a public service and promote their offices by doing such service.. but the majority are NOT chomping at the bit to take on a death row inmate's case.
Death row cases are not popular with attorneys unless they are very well paid.. very few death row inmates/and/or their families have the funds to pay for their defense in the appeals process.
We see the high profile cases (Scott Peterson, David Westerfield etc) where the defendant has a high profile lawyer.. they have money..they are the exception.. the MAJORITY of death row inmates, do not.
Think of it another way.. you are an up and coming lawyer.. how many death row cases can your firm afford to take on when the pay is outrageously low? Not many.. hence why many sit on death row for YEARS without counsel.
This is why they sit on death row for years.. not because of the price it costs to put them to death. This information is available all over the internet.

No, I do not think they should be pay per view
If you want to help.. there are MANY victim's funds you can donate to.. even online.

I see you are trying to make this bitter-sweet. Letting people watch death(bitter by my opinion), but in the end the familys get something in return.

My answer is no, no amount of money makes up for the fact a loved one has died, although, the reason for being on death-row is obviously for doing something horrible. Many families still love those who are put to death. And for the ones who don't love them, are sadistic, and totally mean; it wouldn't happen anyway. The U.S. Constitution prevents "Cruel and Unusual Punishment". Myself and I believe the Supreme Court would agree, televising someone put to death is Cruel and Unusual enough for it to never happen.

I also believe the death penalty should be abolished too.

PPV sounds repugnant, but after the interest in seeing Saddam hang, I am sure there would be some sadists that would like to watch. I would never support this insensitive exploitative form of broadcast.

It is the APPEALS process that is expensive. The death itself is not a cost factor.

The appeals process is cruel, if not unusal punishment, but it is a safeguard against executing an innocent person.

Locking someone up for life is cruel. Personally, I'd prefer the injection.

But that is not the question.

No- Society has been desensitised to hoor and tragedy by the news and Hollywood. Televising an execution on Pay per View makes it entertainment.To watch a man's life ebb, and see him take his last breath for real is not what you watch while eating dinner. Taking a man's life should not be done easily- or for profit.

I'm against death penality

Fact from fiction, truth from diction. The death penalty is more about vengeance than justice. The case of which I could make of I had a book's worth of space to use. Since I don't sticking to the question I feel if society wants to have a execution then it should be a pay-per-view event. It is as close as one could get to a public execution. The thought that no station would pick it up is ludicrous. They would all be stumbling over themselves trying to out bid the other stations for exclusive rights to air it. As many people scoured the Web to find sites that showed the beheading of Nick Berg shows there is a market out there. If they combined it was a match to the death. A Ted Bundy vs The Trailside Killer, or Henry Lee Lucas vs Dennis Radar aka BTK Killer to a chainsaw death match, people with deep pocket would phone in their card number, get out the popcorn and sit back to watch the carnage. Those with out deep pockets would just make it a “pitch in and pay party”. They can pay and watch all from the privacy and comfort of their homes. The government can reap 100s of millions off each match or death.

You won't see it because as practical it maybe for those who want blood, a death for a death, society don't really have the stomach for it. That is why they have it done now between the hours of midnight and 2am, like cowards, when most people are sleeping. It can be over and done while everyone is dreaming away in their beds. Passing like a overnight shower, nothing they have to think about. And those who want the execution there is still a stink to it. Those who strap the man down and put the needle in his arm or flip the switch, they are in no big hurry to get in front of a camera at a press conference like the police captain or the DA when the man was arrested and or convicted. If they thought they were doing such a great deed making society safer why not stand before all and say they don't it? Why have a yellow streak down their back and not want anyone to know their name? Society wants death but too much of a coward to see it. Then there is the fear of being compared to the Romans. We can't profit from someone's execution or match to the death, that would be barbaric, and we are so much more better than that (if you can taste the sarcasm it is because it is extra tart). Civilized folk would never watch a gladiator match.

I think they should just kill them the reason its so costly is all the time we keep them up while waiting for the to be executed. FREAKING CUT COST KILL THEM ALREADY..

Whether any TV company would pick it up or not, I certainly would not be willing to pay to watch it - I wouldn't watch if it were free so I am definitely not going to pay for it.

It isn't so much the cost of the execution as the cost of waiting for the appeals process etc to be complete before carrying it out. What they should do in the meantime is have those individuals worked hard; I don't care if it is breaking rocks or stitching mail bags - just work 'em.

As for the execution itself they should set it up so that all executions are by electric chair, powered by other inmates on exercise bikes/treadmills - this would also encourage them to be nicer to each other inside - quick blast versus a slow fry ;0)

Yes, it would be a good idea and may have an impact on people, executions are far to slow due to the legal process and it takes away the deterrent factor.
Once sentenced to death it should be carried out within 14 days, these bastards sit there looking for delaying tactics, claiming killing is wrong, etc etc.
Yet forgetting that they are there for killing someone, what fair trial did they give, there victim had no appeal..
There victim never even did anything wrong, our legal system is more than fair already on murdering scum