Studies say death penalty deters crime
• Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University. (Other studies have estimated the deterred murders per execution at three, five and 14).
• The Illinois moratorium on executions in 2000 led to 150 additional homicides over four years following, according to a 2006 study by professors at the University of Houston.
• Speeding up executions would strengthen the deterrent effect. For every 2.75 years cut from time spent on death row, one murder would be prevented, according to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor.
See more reaction to this here.  The debate isn’t over on this, nor should it be, but I do believe that if the dp were carried out in a more timely fashion, with absolute proof of guilt, we would see crime numbers drop at the violent level. (Murder, rape/totrture etc.)
June 11, 2007 - 04:37 AM on June 11th, 2007
Killing people to prevent murder…
Free access to guns to prevent crimes…
Making war for peace…
Reducing human rights (Guantanamo) for Freedom…
I really wonder, what filthy thing Republicans do to preserve their virginity before marriage…
June 11, 2007 - 05:43 AM on June 11th, 2007
Mattias,
You are one screwed up creep!
I won’t have any sympathy when people are out there trying to kill you and your freedom to be an absolute jerk.
June 11, 2007 - 06:18 AM on June 11th, 2007
PCD,
I don’t really have to be surprised that at the topic on people who have no sex you are the first to repond…
June 11, 2007 - 06:30 AM on June 11th, 2007
Mattias,
I’m not surprised that you can only make stupid comments. Remember, “Stupid is as Stupid does”, and you do Stupid well.
June 11, 2007 - 06:39 AM on June 11th, 2007
4- …Mama says…
June 11, 2007 - 06:56 AM on June 11th, 2007
5, Mattias, you never listened to your parents in your life, and it shows.
June 11, 2007 - 07:38 AM on June 11th, 2007
1- Those being killed have proven themselves to have no regard for human life.
Who has free access to guns? Are you assuming all of these people killed with guns?
Responding to an attack on our sovereignty and the declaration of war by OBL…
Reducing human rights? Hardly..
June 11, 2007 - 07:54 AM on June 11th, 2007
very true after all such infamous muderers like ROBERT ALTON HARRIS,TOOKIE WILLIAMS and TED BUNDY will never murder anyone again PUT THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL:roll:
June 11, 2007 - 08:12 AM on June 11th, 2007
7- “Those being killed have proven themselves to have no regard for human life.”
Neither have military leaders who accept the risk of “collateral damage” when they start a war for whatever reason… What about those?
8- If you put someone behind the bars for the rest of his life, he/she won’t be able to murder again either…
June 11, 2007 - 08:41 AM on June 11th, 2007
8, Mattias, you are wrong again. There are murders within prisons all the time committed by killers sent up for life. Ever hear of Jeffery Dahmer?
June 11, 2007 - 08:47 AM on June 11th, 2007
10- What do you complain about murderers in prison, being killed in prison? At least no public servant has to do that crime… (which could not be prevented)
June 11, 2007 - 09:38 AM on June 11th, 2007
Wow- what a scatter-brained train of thought.
From the death penalty…to guns… to The Iraq War…to people’s private sex lives…to his mama (How did his mother get squeezed in between sex and the war?!?!)…to war again…back to the death penalty.
Matthias- how about less defledction and ad hominen attacks and more on topic discussion?
June 11, 2007 - 09:46 AM on June 11th, 2007
“Each execution deters an average of 18 murders, according to a 2003 nationwide study by professors at Emory University.”
Interesting. This same conclusion has been around since 1974 but that study was later dismissed by counter studies. It has long been my conclusion that some of academia is corruptede by the politico. It seems this is a sym,pton of the problem.
Folks, be careful when sending your kids to college to temper their education wit a bit of realism and common sense.
“Speeding up executions would strengthen the deterrent effect. For every 2.75 years cut from time spent on death row, one murder would be prevented, according to a 2004 study by an Emory University professor.”
This may be true, but I am not sure if I would want to do this. Our system is purposefully slanted in favor of those that are accused and this is one way that does that. Is is the most reasonable assurance that we are not conviting folks that are innocent. As long as folks are granted due process like this, I will continue to support the death penalty.
June 11, 2007 - 11:05 AM on June 11th, 2007
Yeah, an executed criminal never commits another crime. And I think we could speed it up some – too many people on death row milk the system for all it’s worth. Not that we shouldn’t allow some appeals, as Tedintheshed said, because our whole system is geared to protecting the innocent. On the other hand, we have these money-grubbing lawyers who want to keep their clients alive, so they can keep milking them and their families. To these lawyers, the death penalty and the way it is meted out is a boon.
June 11, 2007 - 11:38 AM on June 11th, 2007
12- Ted, I just wanted to point out the various contradicting results which conservative people conclude from single values (in my #1 comment)…
The “Mama says”-statement was made by PhorreCD, so please let my late mom rest in peace..
June 11, 2007 - 11:40 AM on June 11th, 2007
14- Susanna…
though being against death row, I might be persuaded to consider exceptions for lawyers..
June 11, 2007 - 11:57 AM on June 11th, 2007
11, So Mattias, let the killers kill the killers? Anything so long as there is no official involved? What a piece of work you are. No wonder why Germany is going to HELL.
June 11, 2007 - 12:08 PM on June 11th, 2007
“12- Ted, I just wanted to point out the various contradicting results which conservative people conclude from single values (in my #1 comment):”
You failed miserably, if that was your intent.
The “Mama saysâ€-statement was made by PhorreCD, so please let my late mom rest in peace..
That’s false. You brought up you mama. Refer to your post 5:
“4:Mama says:”
YOU are the one who brought up your mother. If you want to “let (your)late mom rest in peace” perhaps you should watch what you say.
June 11, 2007 - 12:41 PM on June 11th, 2007
Executions are known to have been carried out in the following 25 countries in 2006:
Bahrain, Bangladesh, Botswana, China, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, North Korea, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mongolia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Uganda, USA, Vietnam, Yemen.
We’re in lofty company.
June 11, 2007 - 12:44 PM on June 11th, 2007
Re 19:
That is a tired, old arguement.
Most of those countries do not have true due process or an appeals process. To compare our legal system to that of China’s or Syria’s is appples to oranges.
June 11, 2007 - 01:26 PM on June 11th, 2007
20. That is a tired, old arguement.
My argument was that in utilizing the death penalty, we’re in the company of the countries that I listed (which includes the entirety of the axis of evil, incidentally). That’s it. As far as it goes, it’s true. Of course, byt itself, this doesn’t mean that there’s anything wrong with CP–to infer this would be to fall prey to a genetic fallacy. If Iran, Iraq, and North Korea started giving away free ice cream, it wouldn’t make free ice cream a bad idea. They’re not giving away free ice cream, though, they’re executing people, just like we are.
Regardless, clearly something is broken in the American penal system, and I’m not sure that gassing or frying a few more Texans will fix it.
Here are some old stats—as near as I can tell, they haven’t changed much. If (collective) you have something more up to date, please post. Here they are:
Prisoners (per 1,000 people)
United States 4.2
United Kingdom 1.0
Germany 0.8
France 0.8
Austria 0.8
Spain 0.8
Switzerland 0.7
Denmark 0.7
Belgium 0.7
Italy 0.6
Sweden 0.6
Japan 0.4
Netherlands 0.4
Death row inmates
United States 2,124
Japan 38
Others (from above)0
Murder rate (per 100,000 people)
United States 8.40
Canada 5.45
Denmark 5.17
France 4.60
Portugal 4.50
Australia 4.48
Germany 4.20
Belgium 2.80
Spain 2.28
Switzerland 2.25
Italy 2.18
Norway 1.99
United Kingdom 1.97
Austria 1.80
Greece 1.76
Sweden 1.73
Japan 1.20
Ireland 0.96
Finland 0.70
I can’t get the link to post, but if you google “Myth: Getting tough on crime reduces crime,” it should come up. I’ll try again in a minute.
Anyway, I’m curious to hear why people think that the numbers are what they are. If we’re trying to get at the root of the amount of violent crime in the US, this seems like something to be addressed.
June 11, 2007 - 01:31 PM on June 11th, 2007
18. YOU are the one who brought up your mother.
Uh, I think this was one of those cultural references. I don’t think that Matthias brought up his mother….
June 11, 2007 - 01:42 PM on June 11th, 2007
“My argument was that in utilizing the death penalty, we’re in the company of the countries that I listed (which includes the entirety of the axis of evil, incidentally). That’s it. As far as it goes, it’s true.”
If that’s it, then your “arguement” is irrelevant. The fact that both the United States and China/Syria uses the death penalty is as relevant as saying “America has red on their flag and so does China.”.
Yeah…so what?
“Regardless, clearly something is broken in the American penal system, and I’m not sure that gassing or frying a few more Texans will fix it.”
I believe you mean that there is “clearly something wrong with the American legal system”. Either way please expand upon your statement. What is exactly wrong in your estimation?
The only way to reduce violent crime is to reduce our freedom. The figures are simply a by-product of a combination living in the freest society in the world and our cultural heritage.
On a side note, I find this a bit amusing:
“Death row inmates
United States 2,124
Japan 38
Others (from above)0″
Most of those other countries don’t have an appeal, due process or death row. Those folks sentenced are dead or the walking dead, pure and simple.
June 11, 2007 - 01:57 PM on June 11th, 2007
I believe you mean that there is “clearly something wrong with the American legal systemâ€. Either way please expand upon your statement. What is exactly wrong in your estimation?
Actually, I meant penal: “Of, relating to, or prescribing punishment, as for breaking the law.” The discussion is over what does and doesn’t deter crime. The death penalty is one “penal” measure aimed at deterrence. My assertion is that we have a higher percentage of people in jail and a higher number on death row (two penal measures) than the other countries listed. Nonetheless, our murder rate is nearly double that of the next closest Western democracy. Our deterrence isn’t working.
On a side note, I find this a bit amusing:
“Death row inmates
United States 2,124
Japan 38
Others (from above)0″
Most of those other countries don’t have an appeal, due process or death row. Those folks sentenced are dead or the walking dead, pure and simple.
You find it amusing because you failed to read closely. The countries listed in the last post (with the exception of Japan) don’t have the death penalty. Japan does; it also has due process. So do all of the other countries I listed. Look at the list in 21 if you’re confused.
June 11, 2007 - 02:51 PM on June 11th, 2007
22- You are right AKD…
Ted, I wanted to express that statements like “Stupid is as Stupid does”(as made be PCD) reminded me of a famous movie and that’s why I continued the line with “…mama says”. I use sarcasm and irony… Lefties like me do such naughty things!
Coming back to the original topic:
Okay… “Death penalty deters crime!”… well in that case I have to ask why you only fight for death row?! Why aren’t you demanding stoning people, hacking off limbs or whipping or crucification?? Did any of you ever read about the kind of execution of William Wallace (not shown in “Braveheart”)? That’s what I call effective deterrence!!!
Which cruelty is human and civilized enough for a western country in the 21st century?
June 11, 2007 - 03:20 PM on June 11th, 2007
Hey Ted,
Look at the “conclusions” list that Peejz posted—you can’t tell me that some of them aren’t hilarious (especially since the “research” methods are nowhere to be found).
June 11, 2007 - 04:53 PM on June 11th, 2007
24- Please list what country, with like population, you are comparing to the US.
26- Do you even read from the source or are you just that obtuse?
June 11, 2007 - 05:00 PM on June 11th, 2007
13- Ted, I think the process can and should be sped up without taking the life of an innocent person….21 years on D.R. is silly, and it is that way because a person waits an average of 4 years for the appeals process to start in a court room.
June 11, 2007 - 05:20 PM on June 11th, 2007
24.
United States 8.40
Canada 5.45
Denmark 5.17
France 4.60
Portugal 4.50
Australia 4.48
Germany 4.20
Belgium 2.80
Spain 2.28
Switzerland 2.25
Italy 2.18
Norway 1.99
United Kingdom 1.97
Austria 1.80
Greece 1.76
Sweden 1.73
Japan 1.20
Ireland 0.96
Finland 0.70
Those are the countries (as the “from above” indicated).
26. I read the source—no indication of method. Typical.
Edited by Peejz~
Obviously you didn’t take the time to read it, nor did you follow up on the study:
Which of those countries has 300 million people?
Â
June 11, 2007 - 07:02 PM on June 11th, 2007
“Actually, I meant penal: “Of, relating to, or prescribing punishment, as for breaking the law.â€
Then you made an incorrect reference. The penal system references the prison system and to an extent the mental health system. The legal system is what places them within the penal system for punishmentthere and is what dictates the punishment. The penal system is what enforces the punishment prescribed by the legal system.
My mother worked in the penal system for the State of Ohio for 15 years.
“You find it amusing because you failed to read closely.”
No, you are making an assumption. I was referring to the original post (post 19) that you listed the countries that carried out death penalties and commented that we were in “lofty company”.
That is the stark difference- why you were comparing apples to oranges.
June 11, 2007 - 07:04 PM on June 11th, 2007
“13- Ted, I think the process can and should be sped up without taking the life of an innocent person:.21 years on D.R. is silly, and it is that way because a person waits an average of 4 years for the appeals process to start in a court room.”
My understanding (which may be wrong) is that 1) The average death row prisoner in America spends 9-9 years before sentence is carried out and 2) The problem is with the legal system. The same amount of appeals can be carried out judiciously in a shorter amount of time.
June 11, 2007 - 07:51 PM on June 11th, 2007
31- I have been having a problem with some of the stats I find:
Number executed bwtween 1976 and 2005=1078
Number on death row:
1976
420
Â
1977
423
Â
1978
482
Â
1979
593
Â
1980
692
Â
1981
860
Â
1982
1,066
Â
1983
1,209
Â
1984
1,420
Â
1985
1,575
Â
1986
1,800
Â
1987
1,967
Â
1988
2,117
Â
1989
2,243
Â
1990
2,346
Â
1991
2,465
Â
1992
2,580
Â
1993
2,727
Â
1994
2,905
Â
1995
3,064
Â
1996
3,242
Â
1997
3,328
Â
1998
3,465
Â
1999
3,540
Â
2000
3,601
Â
2001
3,577
Â
2002
3,562
Â
2003
3,377
Â
2004
3,320
Â
2005
3,254
Â
Source: Capital Punishment 2005, December 2006, NCJ 215083
June 11, 2007 - 10:28 PM on June 11th, 2007
Since the recent more readily availability of DNA testing, fifteen death-row inmates have been exonerated of the crimes they were convicted of. That highlights the problem of death sentences. Evidence is fallible, witnesses are fallible, and juries are fallible. You can’t just say “ooops, my bad!” once a death sentence is carried out.
How many innocent people have we killed in the past just because we lacked the technology to get to the truth?
June 11, 2007 - 11:25 PM on June 11th, 2007
TT- See if you can figure it out with the 2 sources I added in #32..it will be a guess on your part, but I would bet youcould come close…1 is too high, I know, but I don’t think that there are as many provable as you think…At the same time, how many have been incarcerated in the past and released but were never cleared legally? You don’t stop incarcerating, but you start correcting the mistakes that were made…..JMO
June 11, 2007 - 11:57 PM on June 11th, 2007
34- “1 is too high”
Definitely, one is too high. But that’s the point; you can’t rescind a death sentence onces it has been performed. I don’t even want to ponder how many innocent people have been put to death under our system of laws, but even “1 is too high.”
Now you have people in this thread talking about putting the appeals process on a fast-track. How many of those 15 on death-row who were exonerated would be dead today if such a fast-track appeals process was in place?
June 12, 2007 - 12:24 AM on June 12th, 2007
Actually I think the average time on death row is closer to 19 years than to 9. We just had one executed here that had to argue to STOP his attornies appeals despite his having admitted to having murdered at least 2 people, assaulted a third and then repeatedly raped the assault victim’s girlfriend in front of him. Exactly how did the US/ state of Arizona benefit from keeping this human piece of garbage alive in prison for 20 years? BTW he was out of prison on parole for a similar crime spree in California when he committed these crimes. We have another human piece of rubbage awaiting trial on a series of brutal murders and sexual assaults that occurred over a 12 month period who was out on parole less than a year when the attacks began. There are currently over 70 charges filed against him, over half a dozen of which are for murder. Maybe if, when he beat his ex girlfriend nearly to death (she suffered brain damage from the beating with a shotgun buttstock) and raped her repeatedly over a number of days, they had executed him instead of giving him 21 years and letting him out after only 13 DESPITE WARNINGS THAT HE WAS A THREAT TO SOCIETY, a number of children in this state wouldn’t be wondering why a parent was murdered in cold blood and a number of women wouldn’t be wondering what they did to deserve being brutally raped.
Why do we have so many people on death row? Because the appeals process has become so drug out that we are sentencing people to be executed faster than we are actually executing them. Personally, we should be far less concerned with whether a needle stuck into a convicted murderers’ arm hurts than we are with providing the victim’s family with closure. I’m in favor of going back to hanging. Done properly, it’s quick, reasonably low pain, and economical as the rope is reusable. It also makes much more of a statement that wanton violent crime is unacceptable than strapping someone to a gurney and shooting them full of drugs. Of course an economical injection procedure would be to simply OD them on Heroin. They would feel no pain, and we could get the heroin for free from half of the city evidence lockers around the country.
June 12, 2007 - 01:07 AM on June 12th, 2007
36- FAO,
your example case… would you think that a normal/sane person would do such violent actions?
June 12, 2007 - 03:12 AM on June 12th, 2007
30. No, you are making an assumption. I was referring to the original post (post 19) that you listed the countries that carried out death penalties and commented that we were in “lofty companyâ€.
That is the stark difference- why you were comparing apples to oranges.
Boy, you’re terrified of admitting that you made a mistake , aren’t you? In a post that followed my post 21, after already having responded to my post 19, what you ACTUALLY WROTE is:
On a side note, I find this a bit amusing:
“Death row inmates
United States 2,124
Japan 38
Others (from above)0″
Most of those other countries don’t have an appeal, due process or death row. Those folks sentenced are dead or the walking dead, pure and simple.
If you’d looked at the list of countries, or even at Japan, youd have seen that all of them listed have due process, no prisoners on death row (with the exception of Japan), and lower murder rates than the U.S. If you were actually thinking of the other countries, why did you cut and paste the reference that you did? Let’s see a modicum of intellectual honesty, OK. On the other hand, it might be fun to see you tie yourself in knots trying to show that you weren’t wrong.
29. I said there was no indication of method, Peejz. Do you know what “method” means? It isn’t the fact of restating that “you looked at data.” It means describing the specific means of fact gathering and and explaining exactly how the conclusions from the data were derived. It’s included in every bit of legitimate social scientific research. Instead, in your initial post, we get sloppy jumps from correlation to causation, e.g., “The Illinois moratorium on executions in 2000 led to 150 additional homicides over four years following, according to a 2006 study by professors at the University of Houston.”
June 12, 2007 - 06:11 AM on June 12th, 2007
“Boy, you’re terrified of admitting that you made a mistake , aren’t you? In a post that followed my post 21, after already having responded to my post 19, what you ACTUALLY WROTE is:
On a side note, I find this a bit amusing:
“Death row inmates
United States 2,124
Japan 38
Others (from above)0″
No, I was referring to the list in post 19 when I said “Most of those other countries don’t have an appeal, due process or death row. Those folks sentenced are dead or the walking dead, pure and simple.”,
specifically when you said:
“Bahrain, Bangladesh, Botswana, China, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, North Korea, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mongolia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Uganda, USA, Vietnam, Yemen.”
I was comparing that stat to the list of countries you made in 19. The interesting part to me was the obvious evidence it present as to the lack of due process in those other countries you listed, thus enforcing the fact that it is an apples to oranges comparison when lumping the United States in with most of those other countries. The fact seems that of those countries listed by you in 19 only Japan and the US have a death row.
“Let’s see a modicum of intellectual honesty, OK. On the other hand, it might be fun to see you tie yourself in knots trying to show that you weren’t wrong.”
Hey, if you want to play mind reader/psychologist feel free to do so, but but then I’d have to ask who’s being intellectrually dishonest?
Pot, meet ketlle.
Feel free to debate semantics at your leisure.
Back on topic:
The death penalty is Constitutional according to the SCOTUS because of the due process we have in place. That is why that listing the United States with countries such as Syria and China is inane.
June 12, 2007 - 06:25 AM on June 12th, 2007
“Definitely, one is too high. But that’s the point; you can’t rescind a death sentence onces it has been performed.”
This is absolutionist clap trap. By using such thinking one would completely abolish the legal and penal systems. “We make mistakes, so we should not attempt to enforce the laws.” would be the standard. This is also the type of thinking that leads to “We shouldn’t go to war ever because we would cause collateral damage.”, thus we would all be speaking German and saluting Herr Matthias on this Nazi regulated blog. (How’s that for a future scenerio?)
The system is ran by people- it will never be perfect. This goes for any system. However, this fact should in no way disuade from us from utilizing the system established to be within legal bounds. It is reasonably accurate and unquestionably Constitutional.
June 12, 2007 - 06:28 AM on June 12th, 2007
39- Ted, I have a slight Deja-Vu…
You like this “I said this and you meant that”-game… don’t you?
…and..
Because death penalty is “Constitutional” in the US it is a good thing and death penalty in China or Syria take place in China or Syria, they are evil instruments of oppression, right?
Funny that it always ends up with the justification:“If we do it it is good and if they do it it is evil- because we are the good ones!” …and that with any inhuman action (to come back to my post#1)
June 12, 2007 - 06:42 AM on June 12th, 2007
re 41:
“Because death penalty is “Constitutional”in the US it is a good thing and death penalty in China or Syria take place in China or Syria, they are evil instruments of oppression, right?”
Matthias please read my previous posts, and then read about due process. Once you educate yourself, please feel free to comment further.
“Funny that it always ends up with the justification:”If we do it it is good and if they do it it is evil- because we are the good ones!”:and that with any inhuman action (to come back to my post#1)”
Putting aside that this smacks of jealousy on your part, the fact that both countries do this is irrelevant. What is relevant is how it is done. The death penalty is not “inhuman”. Let me repeat this point for you:
“This is absolutionist clap trap. By using such thinking one would completely abolish the legal and penal systems. “We make mistakes, so we should not attempt to enforce the laws.”would be the standard. This is also the type of thinking that leads to “We shouldn’t go to war ever because we would cause collateral damage.â€, thus we would all be speaking German and saluting Herr Matthias on this Nazi regulated blog. (How’s that for a future scenerio?)”
June 12, 2007 - 06:43 AM on June 12th, 2007
40- “This is also the type of thinking that leads to “We shouldn’t go to war ever because we would cause collateral damage.â€, thus we would all be speaking German and saluting Herr Matthias on this Nazi regulated blog. (How’s that for a future scenerio?)”
Actually one of my motivations to speak against death penalty is that the last German states were death penalty was “constitutional” were the communist East Germany and Hitler’s Nazi Germany…
But I understand: Liberals are all a bunch of Islamofascistcommienaziperverts…
June 12, 2007 - 06:48 AM on June 12th, 2007
42- “What is relevant is how it is done.”
I know… there are so many cuddly ways to end somebody’s life. I guess most delinquents are carried out the chamber with a smile…
June 12, 2007 - 07:05 AM on June 12th, 2007
“Actually one of my motivations to speak against death penalty is that the last German states were death penalty was “constitutional”were the communist East Germany and Hitler’s Nazi Germany:”
Again…due process. It was non-existant in Nazi Germany. Constitionality means nothing without it.
But I understand: Liberals are all a bunch of Islamofascistcommienaziperverts:
No, not at all. Most liberals are decent honest folks, just as most conservatives are decent honest folks. It is the idealogues on both sides is who are unreasonable.
“I know: there are so many cuddly ways to end somebody’s life. I guess most delinquents are carried out the chamber with a smile:”
You are King of Tangental Thinking.
The “how” refers to the rights protected to the accused under the legal system, and the legal due process afforded the accused.
June 12, 2007 - 08:02 AM on June 12th, 2007
45- “Again
ue process. It was non-existant in Nazi Germany. Constitionality means nothing without it.”
“due process”… like having the government (legislative) fire all those judges (judicative) that don’t comply with your views? ..or “due process” like bringing terror suspects to prisons abroad in order to make sure that you don’t violate your own rules?
“The “how”refers to the rights protected to the accused under the legal system, and the legal due process afforded the accused.”
So how does it come that in your country much more poor people are executed than rich ones? It is not justice that decides between right or wrong, but the fee you pay to your lawyer(s)… Just ask Paris or O.J. !!
June 12, 2007 - 08:38 AM on June 12th, 2007
“”due processâ€: like having the government (legislative) fire all those judges (judicative) that don’t comply with your views?”
Egads man- you have no idea what you are talking about, do you?
..or “due process”like bringing terror suspects to prisons abroad in order to make sure that you don’t violate your own rules?
That is entirely speculative on your part. Military tribunals have a different set of rules than that of civil. Rules were not established for terrorists, and are still not entirely established for them. It is a new precedent.
“So how does it come that in your country much more poor people are executed than rich ones? It is not justice that decides between right or wrong, but the fee you pay to your lawyer(s): Just ask Paris or O.J. !! “
They are afforded no higher level of due process than any other person. The difference is in the quality of lawyers that one can afford. The issue is that the jury of peers and prosecustion failed the system, not the fact that they are rich.
Again, the system is not perfect, but it’s is definately the best that we as humans has acheived.
June 12, 2007 - 08:43 AM on June 12th, 2007
35- No, I am not referring to putting it on the fast track as in let’s kill the guy, but I do see where you could think that was my intent. I am referring to the fact that we condemned a person to die, and the first appeal takes up to 4 years to see a court. It isn’t the condemned holding the process up in most cases. Our system just told John or Jane Doe that they will be put to death, and imo, that appeal should take priority over civil cases etc..that’s all…Those people released didn’t have to wait 15 years to be released. Had their cases been given the attention in a timely manner, they very well could have been exhonerated much sooner. I will use CA as an example and break my rule and talk about..gasp…Paris. I listened to Mark Garagous(sp?) discuss the injustice to the Sherriff ..what was the injustice? well “for the past 12 years, the Sherriff and the courts have played this game where the jail gets overcrowed so the sherriff releases arbitrarily those with bail at $10000 or lower,the courts got mad so upped bails to $15000, and they have been going back and forth ever since”…..what is the rule of law? Paris, with 3 DUIs and a 45 day sentence takes priority over a person that we have said was judged by a jury of their peers to be put to death….
June 12, 2007 - 08:47 AM on June 12th, 2007
“I am referring to the fact that we condemned a person to die, and the first appeal takes up to 4 years to see a court. It isn’t the condemned holding the process up in most cases.”
EXACTLY!
June 12, 2007 - 08:57 AM on June 12th, 2007
47- “Again, the system is not perfect, but it’s is definately the best that we as humans has acheived.”
In dubio pro reo!
If there is a doubt in the guilt of somebody and the system to decide on this guilt is not perfect, it is absolutely not tolerable that such an imperfect system offers the result to kill somebody innocent!
June 12, 2007 - 09:02 AM on June 12th, 2007
50- so the alternative is to lock that innocent person up for the rest of their life? Or do we just stop jailing murderers?
June 12, 2007 - 09:18 AM on June 12th, 2007
“In dubio pro reo!”
And that is exactly how the system is set up. What is your point?
“If there is a doubt in the guilt of somebody and the system to decide on this guilt is not perfect, it is absolutely not tolerable that such an imperfect system offers the result to kill somebody innocent!”
None of the accused would ever be convicted, ever, using this standard for anything. The standard is “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
June 12, 2007 - 09:23 AM on June 12th, 2007
51,52- The alternative is to lock in the assumingly guilty person either for the rest of his life or until the opposite is proven.
Nobody says, that there shall be no punishment/verdict at all, but obviously death penalty belongs to those ones that can’t be reversed.
June 12, 2007 - 10:46 AM on June 12th, 2007
“51,52- The alternative is to lock in the assumingly guilty person either for the rest of his life or until the opposite is proven.”
No, that isn’t an alternative. That does not outweigh the pro’s of maintaining the death sentence.
June 12, 2007 - 01:06 PM on June 12th, 2007
54- “That does not outweigh the pro’s of maintaining the death sentence.”
That is your opinion… The alternative of a life sentence has the ultimate pro to make sure that nobody innocent is murdered by the state. The protection of life should always count more than the idea of punishment! The latter one will bring no victim back to life…
June 12, 2007 - 01:16 PM on June 12th, 2007
“The alternative of a life sentence has the ultimate pro to make sure that nobody innocent is murdered by the state. The protection of life should always count more than the idea of punishment! The latter one will bring no victim back to life:”
That is your opinion. Taking a person’s freedom is much worse than taking a person’s life. Like taking a person’s life, once taken that freedom can not be given back. It is a sad commentary on our society, one that covets being self centered over that of being a part of a community.
But that is a rant for another day…
If what you say were true then you would favor the death penalty, as it is a deterent that saves more lives than it maginally takes.
June 12, 2007 - 01:17 PM on June 12th, 2007
55- so we don’t put them to death, we just keep an innocent person in jail?
June 12, 2007 - 01:21 PM on June 12th, 2007
“So we don’t put them to death, we just keep an innocent person in jail?”
Sure- becasue imprisoning someone for life and allowing them to slowly die in jail is much more humane than the death penalty.
There are things in this world more precious than living.
June 13, 2007 - 02:44 AM on June 13th, 2007
56- “Taking a person’s freedom is much worse than taking a person’s life.”
So these few poor fellows who protest until the end and write one mercy petition after another and sometimes also claim that they are innocent, those are just a bunch of misled sheep, who don’t know that they were better off dead?
June 13, 2007 - 07:59 AM on June 13th, 2007
59- As you have been advised, study the justice system in this country and take the time to fully study the subject. You are just going in circles now.
June 13, 2007 - 01:21 PM on June 13th, 2007
With the DNA and the forensics they have now, the possibility of an innocent person being executed is effectively zero. That takes away the one argument the anti-DP side had that held water.
Does it deter crime? Even simple common sense tells you it does. An executed killer will never, ever hurt anyone else again. And yes, they can get out of prison. By mistake, by order of some activist judge, or whatever. There are documented cases of once-condemned criminals who have been released only to murder again.
No valid argument remains against the DP. I say review all pending cases using DNA forensics to confirm, then run ‘em through assembly-line style.
October 6, 2007 - 02:31 PM on October 6th, 2007
I do not understand why some people say that the death penalty deters crime. It doesn’t! I live in France, a country of about 60 million people, a country which abolished the death penalty in 1981; and yet there are far less murders here than in the city of New York! The conclusion I draw from this is that there is something wrong with the American way of life. Too much violence and too many guns. There’s strict gun control here too, and as I said, there are less murders than in one single big city in the USA.
So what’s wrong with America ?