Hacker News Reader

Comment by hugh3 | Hacker News Reader

Incidentally, does anyone know why in the US system the governor is given the ability to stop an execution?

I suppose it's the same thing as the ability of the President to grant pardons. But what's the logic behind giving the executive branch the ability to overrule the judicial branch in these sorts of circumstances?

View on HN

I don't believe this is the case in every state, they each have their own constitution. As w1ntermute says, it has to do with checks and balances. Personally, I don't believe that any single branch of government should have final say on the life of an individual. It makes sense that the executive be given the task of second guessing this instance as the executive is the branch actually tasked with enforcing the laws.

And, keep in mind, he only has the right to pardon. Not to execute, only to preserve life. In other words, he has the power to counter the courts, but not replace them.

There is definitely a precedent for this method, which seems to work pretty well; the presidential pardon, as you mentioned, and the presidential veto.

I think the more pressing concern is why, in the US system, the government has the right to execute a person at all.

Who decides in other systems?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment#Global_distr...

It seems like in some of these other systems, people are executed for non-violent crimes too.

Is that a trick question? Because it is clearly allowed by the constitution? And in the "US System", whatever that is, the states can further limit penalties.

> Because it is clearly allowed by the constitution

I think that's what he's got a problem with

I remain unconvinced that there will never be cases where execution is justified.

At the very least, when comparing life in prison to execution, do not forget the sheer cost to keep them in jail for life. It may seem inhumane to say that, but these people are hardly humane themselves. Plus, in being forced to board them, citizens are negatively impacted for the rest of the criminal's life.

I believe the cost to execute somebody in the US is significantly more than the cost of keeping them in prison for life.

Why is it?

Legal costs of getting them sentenced to death. Apparently it takes $1.5-2 million to pay for the legal proceedings necessary to go beyond life in prison, while room & board & etc for life in prison costs about $500k.

That makes it really easy to be against the death penalty.

I would like to think that the decision of whether to execute people would not be based on financial concerns.

Oh. That's ridiculous. I feel like that's a sign of a problem elsewhere in the system.

It's the cost of appeals. Whether you consider that a problem probably comes down to political leanings (discussions of which are best avoided on HN).

It'll be that way until the US get rid of its guns, stop fighting the world and get some human rights in place... Don't count on that happening for a few hundred years yet though.

Funny to see this one downvoted.

Checks and balances, though I feel this particular check/balance is a bad one.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com