Death Penalty: Does it really work?

[Guest gearhead]

I'm not sure if this belongs here but anyway:

 

Some of the countries with death penalties are Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Vietnam, and The United States of America. 117 countries have abolished the death penalty by law or practice. 15 of those countries only reserve the right of using those for wartime crimes, 79 have abolished the death penalty all together, and 23 have it, but have not used it for the past ten years or more and are believed to not practice it anymore. 78 countries carry it out but the countries that use this on a year to year basis is actually quite small. 84% of the death penalty executions in 2003 were used by China, The United States, Vietnam and Iran. Those are all non western countries exept the USA and yet we haven't abolished it and we are western.

 

After really thinking about this, does the death penalty really work? Many people say, it is a deterent. But, Canada proves this wrong. And if it's such a big deterent that would mean a state that has outlawed it would have skyrocketing murder rates. I mean Canada for example only had 11 murders over the last year, they do not have the death penalty. In Canada the homicide rate was 1.85 per 100,000 population, 40 per cent lower than in 1975, thus disproving it is a deterent. America however continues to have problems on finding ways to stop murders. It is clear that the death senteces per year have droped for example in 1994 it there were 315 sentances and in 2003 there were 143.

 

Right now there are 38 states with the death penalty. Yes this is the majority right now, but now its starting to take a turn. Its more and more states abolishing the death penalty. The states that allow it are starting to use it less in most cases. There are 12 states without the death penalty. Looking on a regional chart the south has the most executions, Texas and Virginia making up about half of this regions executions. Now with the overwhelming evidence and appeals it's very hard to send someone on death row who is innocent. However it is possible, it is very unlikaly due to DNA. Since 1976 there have been 912 executions.

 

 

States That Allow Death Penalty:

 

 

1. Alabama

 

2. Arizona

 

3. Arkansas

 

4. California

 

5. Colorodo

 

6. Connecticut*

 

7. Delaware

 

8. Florida

 

9. Georgia

 

10. Idaho

 

11. Illinois

 

12. Indiana

 

13. Kansas*

 

14. Kentucky

 

15. Louisiana

 

16. Maryland

 

17. Mississippi

 

18. Missouri

 

19. Montana

 

20. Nebraska

 

21. Nevada

 

22. New Hampshire*

 

23. New Jersey*

 

24. New Mexico

 

25. New York*

 

26. North Carolina

 

27. Ohio

 

28. Oklahoma

 

29. Oregon

 

30. Pennsylvania

 

31. South Carolina

 

32. South Dakota*

 

33. Tennesee

 

34. Texas

 

35. Utah

 

36. Virginia

 

37. Washington

 

38. Wyoming

 

The US Government and the US Military* are also able to use this.

 

*- Is allowed, but not used since 1976.

 

 

States Without the Death Penalty

 

 

1. Alaska

 

2. Hawaii

 

3. Iowa

 

4. Maine

 

5. Massachusetts

 

6. Michagan

 

7. Minnesota

 

8. North Dakota

 

9. Rhode Island

 

10. Vermont

 

11. West Virginia

 

12. Wisconsin

 

Also the District of Columbia (Washington D.C.) and Puerto Rico have the death penalty outlawed.

 

What are your thoughts on the death penalty? Should it be abolished? Should children and mentally handicapt even be able to be executed? Because in the United States they can. There are currently campaigns by several organizations by different organizations and the UN to stop the executions of children or mentally challenged. And yet the United States continues to look over this.

 

What is your beliefs on this one?

[MrRant 0]

So because someone is a retard and axe murder's his family we should give him a break?

 

Cap his retarded ass.

[Guest MikeSC]

Real simply, death penalty works perfectly.

 

Criminals who get executed don't tend to commit crimes again.

-=Mike

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

It's totally unnecessary and is simply there to satisfy the most bloodthirty and debase human emotions. It's also become yet another vehicle for both the lawyers to get rich and the politicians to get facetime. Studies have shown that it is cheaper to house an inmate for life than to pay the costs of a capital case, which with appeals may drag out over several years and result in massive lawyer's fees.

[Highland 0]

I suppose there's safeguards in place to prevent any miscarriages of justice, unless your lawyer falls asleep during your capital murder trial in Texas, then you're fucked no matter what.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Here in Florida, we had a chair that set people on fire. Best death penalty ever, short of something involving alligators, which I bet we could also engineer.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

If life actually meant life, it wouldn't be necessary. But since that isn't the case, there is a need for it. It is the only one sure-fire way to make sure that a murderer won't get a chance to do it again.

[spiny norman 0]

I was friends (or aquaintances, I dunno) with a guy who killed a guy. What he did was despicable and a terrible thing to do. He's currently going to be in gaol for god knows how long. And I'm glad, he deserves to be imprisoned, but not killed.

 

Australia hasn't had the Death Penalty for thirty years. To reinstall it would be such a step back socially. Two wrongs don't make a right, it only furthers the tragedy of the initial murder.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

If life actually meant life, it wouldn't be necessary. But since that isn't the case, there is a need for it. It is the only one sure-fire way to make sure that a murderer won't get a chance to do it again.

So the solution to guys getting out early on their sentences is to kill them? Why go for the most extreme option instead of doing the logical thing and simply toughening up the law so that a life sentence includes no possibility of parole.

[Guest Cerebus]

For the record, it's pretty much been established that the death penalty is not a detterent.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

For the record, it's pretty much been established that the death penalty is not a detterent.

That's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that it is an effective punishment.

[Firestarter 0]

Real simply, death penalty works perfectly.

 

Criminals who get executed don't tend to commit crimes again.

Mike, you scooped me and I salute you.

[chaosrage 0]

It's totally unnecessary and is simply there to satisfy the most bloodthirty and debase human emotions. It's also become yet another vehicle for both the lawyers to get rich and the politicians to get facetime. Studies have shown that it is cheaper to house an inmate for life than to pay the costs of a capital case, which with appeals may drag out over several years and result in massive lawyer's fees.

Who gives a shit though? We should let them live because it's cheaper? Getting rid of murderers and making sure they won't have a chance to kill again is money well spent if you ask me. The world is simply a better place without some people in it. Such as that guy that beheaded those kids. How could you even argue that people like that don't deserve to die a horrible (and painful) death?

[MrRant 0]

The death penalty could be cheaper..... and also far more entertaining but we are civilized.

[Guest MikeSC]

The death penalty could be cheaper..... and also far more entertaining but we are civilized.

Personally, I'm all for dimmer switches on electric chairs.

-=Mike

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

1. Alaska

 

2. Hawaii

 

3. Iowa

 

4. Maine

 

5. Massachusetts

 

6. Michagan

 

7. Minnesota

 

8. North Dakota

 

9. Rhode Island

 

10. Vermont

 

11. West Virginia

 

12. Wisconsin

 

Also the District of Columbia (Washington D.C.) and Puerto Rico have the death penalty outlawed.

 

Well crime in Michigan, DC and Puerto Rico is totally out of hand while a lot of the other places are in New England where crime isn't a big problem to begin with. North Dakota has a small population and the others I don't know about as far as crime.

[teke184 0]

It's totally unnecessary and is simply there to satisfy the most bloodthirty and debase human emotions. It's also become yet another vehicle for both the lawyers to get rich and the politicians to get facetime. Studies have shown that it is cheaper to house an inmate for life than to pay the costs of a capital case, which with appeals may drag out over several years and result in massive lawyer's fees.

Who gives a shit though? We should let them live because it's cheaper? Getting rid of murderers and making sure they won't have a chance to kill again is money well spent if you ask me. The world is simply a better place without some people in it. Such as that guy that beheaded those kids. How could you even argue that people like that don't deserve to die a horrible (and painful) death?

I believe in the death penalty as being reserved for the true scum of society who not only kill, but do so in exceptionally bad ways (killing kids, cops, major mutilation, kidnapping / ransom / murder, etc.).

 

I also believe in life in prison as long as life means LIFE. In my state, Louisiana, that is the case.

 

 

When life means life and the people involved are incredibly guilty beyond a doubt, they should get death if they go to trial or get life if they see they're in a no-win situation and want to plea out.

 

In my area, there are two cases that typify my point of view.

 

In the first, Officer Betty Smothers, the mother of football player Warrick Dunn (Florida State, Tampa Bay Bucs, Atlanta Falcons), was gunned down while pulling an off-duty assignment escorting a grocery store manager to make a night deposit.

 

The men who killed her were, IIRC, captured on video and were tied to the crime through a lot of physical evidence. They went to trial and were sentenced to death.

 

 

In the second, a teacher from my school was beaten to death and dropped in a field nearly two parishes away covered in only a school blanket. They couldn't even identify the body until Spring Break ended and he didn't show up to teach class on Monday morning.

 

In this case, there was also a lot of physical evidence to tie them to the crime but, due to a combination of the family's reluctance to suffer through a trial (the teacher was gay and they didn't want to see his name dragged through the mud in a VERY public trial) and the DA threatening to drop the case for lack of funding, they were able to get the guys off with life in prison.

 

Sidenote- The DA fiddle-fucking around was a blantant play for the influential parents of the school involved to get them more funding for a case they knew meant a lot to them. I hope the fuckers burn in hell for even threatening to drop the case)

 

 

Getting back to the point, life in prison was an acceptable alternative to the death penalty because it saved the expense and heartache of a trial in which the defendants were going to be found guilty. Because the defendants knew they were going down and they'd get the death penalty, they plead out to life in prison as an acceptable alternative.

 

 

Even if a state doesn't use the death penalty, they should keep it around as something to hold over defendants who are sure they're going to jail. If they know they're not facing the death penalty, they don't see a reason to plead out to life in prison and will use every trick in the book to stick it to everyone, be it to set up appeals down the road or twist the knife in the hearts of the victims' families.

[Styles 0]

The worst crimes deserve the worst punishment. Unfortunately though, lawyers keep clients on death row for years and years before an execution and makes the whole thing pointless at times.

If murderers and rapists and such were given hard time, back breaking labor for the rest of their lives, I wouldn't care for the death penalty. But if you commit a heinous crime that ends life, you do not deserve to be able to make something meaningful out of your life, form social relationships, play sports, workout, watch cable television, read books, find companions on the internet, etc. You don't deserve to live. Call it blood thirsty, I call it justice. I'm not talking about white collar crime or petty crimes or drug possesion. I'm talking about the worst of the worst, those that committed horrible acts that ended lives and ruined others, who shouldn't deserve to live on with the aforementioned immenities paid for by our tax dollars no less. Not that they have anything to worry about anyway, as a good lawyer can keep you on death row for the rest of your life anyway...

[Rob E Dangerously 0]

If life actually meant life, it wouldn't be necessary

 

Can you tell me when a guy who is sentenced to 'life without parole' has been released?

 

Getting rid of murderers and making sure they won't have a chance to kill again is money well spent if you ask me.

 

And how is this not done with "life without parole"?

 

The option should be left there and there's people who probably deserve such a fate.

[NoCalMike 0]

This is one of those weird issues with me. I mean if I had to vote on it, I'd probably vote against the dealth penalty for certain reasons, however at the same time I don't really feel any sadness or smypathy for the guilty murderers who are put to death. I mean I would NEVER go out and protest, unless I was so sure the person was innocent.

[The Czech Republic 0]

In regard to your list of states:

I know that Illinois has a moratorium on the death penalty while it investigates possible wrongful deaths. Also, while many states have the death penalty in place, how many actually use it?

 

I think we should have the most severe death penalty for the most severe of criminals. Especially heinous murders and treason should be punished by firing squad or hanging, quickly and efficiently, uncruelly and usually (?). The dragged-out appeal-after-appeal lethal injection form that the death penalty has taken is worse, in my opinion. So cut that out and go with life without parole for the higher offenses and death for the highest offenses.

[Lil' Bitch 0]

If you take somebody's life, we should take yours. Murderers & rapists deserve to die so don't give me that pro-humanity bullshit.

[Guest INXS]

I can not agree with the death penalty as there is always a chance, however slight, that the person killed is actually innocent. Life in jail should stop them from killing again, or commiting any other crimes. The death penalty is not a deterrant, people who kill do so regardless.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

The death penalty is something that innately I wind up being against, because I picture myself being charged of a crime I didn't commit and being put to death. But then again, I have also had a brush with crime where a man murdered an entirely family a few houses down the street, including my two best friends at the time. He's currently awaiting execution, and as much as the thought of the death penalty makes me cringe, I still wanna see that fucker go.

 

So I support it, reluctantly, but support it nonetheless. However, I think it should be an exception and not the rule, reserved for mass murderers like the fuckhead above, terrorists, etc. Otherwise, life sentences can actually be a cheaper burden on the taxpayer than an execution.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

The only problem I have with the death penalty is that if you put the wrong person to death there's nothing you can do to bring him/her back. But like Kahran said above, "life" sentences don't mean "life" anymore, and there are lawyers out there that will claim a prison inmate without Internet access is subject to "cruel and unusal punishment," so I don't blame people for wanting the death penalty.

 

On a side note, there's some guy slated to get the needle, but he has taken so many drugs that his veins have shrunk and is claiming that the State won't be able to insert the needle in him in a humane way, thus making lethal injection a cruel and unusal punishment for him...

[Stephen Joseph 0]

Firstly, the odds are statistically against sending an innocent to death. Really, they are. There's probably an exception somewhere, but really...

 

Two, lots of major research has been done on the death penalty. The death penalty does have a deterrent effect, proven through statistical study. Go to Jstor, look up death penality in sociological and economic journals, and there you go. I'm too damn lazy to do it myself.

 

Often the effects are muddied when other laws come into play, specifically three strikes, which induces criminals to more violent behavior the third time around.

 

But then again, I only work for the Justice Department. I'm probably lying

=P

Edited June 2, 2004 by Stephen Joseph

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Firstly, the odds are statistically against sending an innocent to death.

So are the chances of you winning the lottery, but somebody always wins.

 

Now being the stat weenie that you are I can already hear you typing out "more people play the lottery than await execution" so don't bother...

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

1. Alaska

 

2. Hawaii

 

3. Iowa

 

4. Maine

 

5. Massachusetts

 

6. Michagan

 

7. Minnesota

 

8. North Dakota

 

9. Rhode Island

 

10. Vermont

 

11. West Virginia

 

12. Wisconsin

 

Also the District of Columbia (Washington D.C.) and Puerto Rico have the death penalty outlawed.

 

Well crime in Michigan, DC and Puerto Rico is totally out of hand while a lot of the other places are in New England where crime isn't a big problem to begin with. North Dakota has a small population and the others I don't know about as far as crime.

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

 

New England without crime?

 

Providence, RI right now has a larger Irish mob than the South Boston gang ever did when Whitey Bulger was still around.

 

There have been more homicides in five full months of 2004 than there were in 2002 and 2003 COMBINED in the city of Boston.

 

Violent crime rates are up in MA this year.

 

Main reasoning: The old group of convicts this time around, the people that MA locked away in the late 1980s-early 1990s are getting out, back when man-1 with robbery would only net you twelve years. And with MA spending less on its corrective facilities, they're going back to the streets. This time around, they'll spend 25-to-life.

 

And for those wondering: Here in the good old state, murder will net you:

1st degree: life without parole

2nd degree: life with opportunity of parole after 40 served

3rd degree: 25 to life

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

And for those wondering: Here in the good old state, murder will net you:

1st degree: life without parole

2nd degree: life with opportunity of parole after 40 served

3rd degree: 25 to life

Are these punishments with or without the convict saying they're sorry?...

[Stephen Joseph 0]

Firstly, the odds are statistically against sending an innocent to death.

So are the chances of you winning the lottery, but somebody always wins.

 

Now being the stat weenie that you are I can already hear you typing out "more people play the lottery than await execution" so don't bother...

Stat weenie?

 

I prefer Stat Czar, thank you