The Death Penalty

[Geoff332]

OK, so some murders do reoffend. That raises two issues.

Should we execute people if there is a reasonable probability if them killing someone in their future? Is the only indicator of them murdering someone in the future the fact that they have murdered in the past? Are they better indicators and, following your logic, we should then execute these people. What is the cut-off proability of a future murder at which we decide that someone should be executed?

Secondly, some people are unjustly executed. How many future murders does one have to prevent to justify each unjust execution?

[Sodfather]

Originally posted by GreatWyrm of Babylon@09-28-2003 09:13 AM
We have at least one occurance of someone sentenced to life rather than death killing again. We have zero occurances of dead people killing again, so your assertion that they are equal is complete BS.

Wait - I thought we were arguing CP versus life (without paroll)? When you say "killing again," I guess you mean fellow inmates, not civilians - because if they were imprisoned they obviously couldn't kill civilians.

Edit: Oh yeah, and Geoff, I love how you bunch everyone else together, as GW of B stated, as one big fat Geoff's Enemies - even to the point when you begin to argue with those on your side (me). I never even implied the cost being a valid reason to continue sentencing criminals to death - I just said it was a downside, something that would have to be dealt with. But instead of saying, "No, Sodfather, it costs less to care for a lifer so there are in fact virtually no downsides," you began to argue. Fool...

[Geoff332]

Oh yeah, and Geoff, I love how you bunch everyone else together, as GW of B stated, as one big fat Geoff's Enemies - even to the point when you begin to argue with those on your side (me).

I never thought I was arguing with you. As I said, you commented on cost. I said this wasn't really an issue, then GWB told me I was a liberal for even suggesting we look at the facts. The only other reference I made to you was that this particular thread of the debate started with a point you raised.

As I said, I was a little unclear about who I was disagreeing with but, for the record, the only thing that you said and I disagreed with was that single factual point.

[Anarchist Patriot]

Originally posted by Geoff332@09-24-2003 05:34 PM
OK then. You go out and find a country that uses the death penalty and doesn't have an appeals process that you would like to live in. I'll even help you with a list of countries that still have the death penalty.

AFGHANISTAN
ALGERIA
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA
BAHAMAS
BAHRAIN
BANGLADESH
BARBADOS
BELARUS
BELIZE
BENIN
BOTSWANA
BURUNDI
CAMEROON
CHAD
CHINA
COMOROS
CONGO (Democratic Republic)
CUBA
DOMINICA
EGYPT
EQUATORIAL GUINEA
ERITREA
ETHIOPIA
GABON
GHANA
GUATEMALA
GUINEA
GUYANA
INDIA
INDONESIA
IRAN
IRAQ
JAMAICA
JAPAN
JORDAN
KAZAKSTAN
KENYA
KOREA (North)
KOREA (South)
KUWAIT
KYRGYZSTAN
LAOS
LEBANON
LESOTHO
LIBERIA
LIBYA
MALAWI
MALAYSIA
MAURITANIA
MONGOLIA
MOROCCO
MYANMAR
NIGERIA
OMAN
PAKISTAN
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
PHILIPPINES
QATAR
RWANDA
SAINT CHRISTOPHER & NEVIS
SAINT LUCIA
SAINT VINCENT & GRENADINES
SAUDI ARABIA
SIERRA LEONE
SINGAPORE
SOMALIA
SUDAN
SWAZILAND
SYRIA
TAIWAN
TAJIKISTAN
TANZANIA
THAILAND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
TUNISIA
UGANDA
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
UZBEKISTAN
VIET NAM
YEMEN
ZAMBIA
ZIMBABWE

Why don't you pick one and then tell us about the superiority of their appeals process over the US? Since what you're advocating is such a good idea, there must be a place that actually uses it.

Afghanistan, Somolia, Congo, Cuba...

A real list of countries there. The US is part of the same group of nations. Yes, the US of A is indeed part of a distinguished group!

(rolling eyes)

[RebelWithanAK]

The only first-world countries on that list are the US, Japan, and S. Korea, and Japan and S. Korea's death rows are not all that long...

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

DWtS & Sodfather
I live a mile from a sporting goods store where a police officer was murdered by escaped criminals because he tried to stop them from robbing the place. This gang of seven escapees consisted of two that were convicted murderers and had they not escaped would have been in prision serving life sentances. So they obviously can still kill, even if they are "locked up"...SodFather!!!

I do not think any system can be perfect, but what does that have to do with anything? I am not advocating perfection. I am only advocating that corrections should regard future victums as having a bit more right to life than a murderer.

You are the one that is claiming that lifetime lockup is a perfect system. But in the world I live in, they can still escape, and they always cost us resources.

[Section 8]

GWB, I completely agree with you that the neither system is perfect. I just think that the death penalty is the more faulty of the two.

People aren't expendable, government is
Shalom

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

Then why do you demand statistics from me, but use phrases like "I think" when stating your own opinion. I, personally do not like statistics, I see too many of them abused to show things that are not true.

Statistics are paticularly bad with CP because:
a) "Innocent" and "Not Guilty" have unqualifiable meanings. By that I mean that we have no way of knowing how many "Not Guilty" folks in actuality were 'the real killer'.
b) Prior records are illegal to mention to the public, because that is part of our legal process. They are legal to mention after the trail is over, but who ever looks except during the trial? Ever try and look these people up after the fact, I have and it is not easy.
c) There are no statistics on criminals doing crimes while escaped from prison. Or none that I have been able to find.
d) In order for any statistical breakdown to have meaning, you must list:
I] The entire population at the time
II] The entire prison population
III] The entire prison murderer population
IV] The number of people murdered by people with no prior record
V] The number of people murdered by people with no prior murder convictions
VI] The number of people murdered by escapees (murderers and non-murderers)

Therefore, you expect a lot of work from me, since I refuse to give unqualified statistics. I do so because I refuse to accept unqualified statistics. All I have to go on is my failure, at this time, to find a "not guilty" man that was innocent. A lot of them were mentally retarded, but I do not consider that innocent.

[Downwiththestereotype]

GW of B


A court of law can not and should not be expected to predict if someone is likely to escape and murder again. the job of a court is to prosecute on crimes commited, not on possible future crimes.
Il acept that this depends on your philosophy of the prison system, if you beleive prisons are for punishing murderers or protecting society, but even so, no judge or juryt has a magic ball.

You also did not answer my earlier question
How many inmates who have escaped or been freed from death row have also killed again?

[Waychel]

The death penalty is only exercised in the most extreme of cases, and even then, inmates are kept on death row for anywhere from 10 to 20 years or more before being executed.

I have no problem with the death penalty personally, because I would rather see that child molester or serial killer get the penalty than have my tax dollars go to providing them with television, air-conditioning and general living for the rest of their not-so-miserable life. We already have enough people on the welfare system, why do we have to siphon off even more tax dollars to keep people like Charles Manson alive in Corcoran Prison, living decently at that? People who never will be beneficial to society or a part of it again in the first place?

Besides, their deaths are humane (death by electric chair is no longer given by courts, only death by lethal injection), which is more courtesy than they treated their victims with, I am sure.

[castille]

I believe most sane criminals can be reformed. They have a specific reason for committing their act, and if we dig deeper, we can discover it, and perhaps help them adapt to society.

In return, they should be able to try and help others, as they were helped.



However, the crazy ones should be shot. Like the man who blows up buildings because the voices in his head tell him to. Yes, maybe he has a missing thyrodexterous pintament in his thyriod gland, but lets face it - there is no deterrant for those people.

[The Fyrdman]

But at the same time, those people are not choosing to commit crimes, they have no control over themselves. So you are killing someone for a disability. As a civilised state we should be looking after these people, not executing them.