Why have executions televised as a pay-per-view special?

Because making someone pay for something they should be able to watch for free, in the public square, is bullshit.

let the kids watch too, plant an early seed of what will happen if you step out of line. they gotta learn about death sometime.

Because public executions are even more barbaric than executions. At least we have evolved past that point.

I am opposed to the death penalty.

The execution is held at night, not because they are hiding. It is at night because that is the end of the day. A prisoner has a date for his/her execution, the last min. of that date is 1159pm. Would you want to die before the last min?
Executions are not pay per view because the money would have to go to the ‘star’ of the show, the prisoner. No matter what he/she has done, they still own the right to their image. Also the privacy of his/her family. Even a criminal has/had a mother somewhere. What about her feelings?
Your question has many levels you may not have thought out.

I’d buy that for a dollar!

I thought they did televise Timothy McVeigh’s murder, but, maybe not. There was a lot of coverage of it, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqKlSldlSDE&feature=related

The US really needs to look around the globe and see who’s company they’re in with the ‘death penalty club’. http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/juveniles/countries.html

I’m opposed to the death penalty also. Those kind of things should only be available for the people involved. If you watched the “Green Mile,” you would never want to attend any kind of excecution.

Your premise is flawed in some fundamental ways.

In the first place, the death penalty itself is barbaric and the state is ashamed to be carrying it out, for one thing. Most thoughtful people already recognize this.

Second, the reason the death penalty costs so much to implement is the cost of exhausting all appeals ad infinitum. Adding this profit motive for the victim would only increase those costs.

Finally, as barbaric as the death penalty is in the first place, adding a victim’s profit motive (and you don’t seem to consider the case of ‘multiple victims’ or ‘unknown victims’, in the case of serial killers who are only officially charged with a fraction of their crimes—so who does the accounting and cuts the checks to the various victim families—and who in the families gets the checks, anyway?) would only make it more macabre and ghoulish.

And yet….everytime the death penalty comes to vote, it is re-instated. If the state were so ashamed I am sure the voters would have repealed it by now. I have been voting for over 20yrs and it has been voted on twice that I remember, could be more that I don’t.

I am opposed to the death penalty and the hypocrisy of those who value life so much that they oppose women’s right to choose but they abhor any limitations on guns, including automatic weapons and they demand quicker executions of those convicted to save costs.

Hooray for good old conservative values!

I think the idea here is to do what we need to, but not to enjoy it.

@MissPoovey I did say “thoughtful”. That lets most voters off the hook.

@marinelife _ Because public executions are even more barbaric than executions._ Sadly they are here and looking to not go anywhere soon.

@MissPoovey A prisoner has a date for his/her execution, the last min. of that date is 1159pm. Would you want to die before the last min? I would rather not die at all, but that would not happen. I don’t think the state chose the very last minute, because many times they don’t make it anyhow, because they wanted to please or had consideration for the condemned, I believe it was done for what was best for the state.

Executions are not pay per view because the money would have to go to the ‘star’ of the show, the prisoner. The same laws that prevent infamous criminals from selling their story and cashing in off their crimes would be in place here or I am sure quickly passed to make it so. Criminals are stripped of many rights even after they ”paid their debt to society”.

Also the privacy of his/her family. Even a criminal has/had a mother somewhere. What about her feelings? The law never cared about that from jump street, from the moment he/she was perp walked from the car to the jail or jail to the court the privacy of the accused and his/her family was never an issue. If the state cared so much that he/she has a mother out there there would be no death penalty just life without. It is not about the condemned it is about vengeance for the victim under the guise of justice, especially in a murder case.

@CyanoticWasp Second, the reason the death penalty costs so much to implement is the cost of exhausting all appeals ad infinitum. Adding this profit motive for the victim would only increase those costs. The cost is an unavoidable by product if you want to make sure the condemn has every opportunity to prove their innocence, once they are dead you can’t say ”oops, we goofed”; there are no Mulligans when it comes to the death penalty. Televising it won’t gain the state another dime but it would generate money to compensate the victims, and most will support that.

Finally, as barbaric as the death penalty is in the first place, adding a victim’s profit motive (and you don’t seem to consider the case of ‘multiple victims’ or ‘unknown victims’, in the case of serial killers who are only officially charged with a fraction of their crimes—so who does the accounting and cuts the checks to the various victim families—and who in the families gets the checks, anyway?) would only make it more macabre and ghoulish. It is macabre and ghoulish and most love it if you go off the polls, and not going away. IMO most want vengeance, they want the person who took their loved one away to die too, not enjoy his one hour on the yard, his three a day and his cable TV and maybe visits from his family like they don’t have anymore. They want him to suffer as they are. Even if they didn’t get a dime I think that need for pay back will be unchanged. If there are multiple victims where a lot will never be found like the Green River Killer, etc he is not doing time for them because he or others, don’t get charged and tried for them, even when the DA know they did it or they confessed to it. So, some will slip out off the loop and won’t see any funds from it, no system is perfect.

@Dr_Lawrence I oppose it too but if the state is going to be callous enough to attach my name to it by saying they were acting for the people then this “people” want them to act in complete transparency and openness. Don’t tell me you are killing a human for me in my name and not give me to see you do the job you say you are doing for me, I myself would most likely never view it, I am sure others would, but it is not that I would but I could, it would be my choice not their’s.

@Hypocrisy Central It was my pleasure to be a plank in the side-wall of your soapbox.

@Hypocrisy_Central I guess you could go attend them. They need witnesses and there is a gallery, as I understand it, in some States. Attend them, write about them and argue for stopping the practice.

Because like in the dark ages when people flooded the market squares, barbaric practices seem to have special appeal.