Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders?

Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

pinksugarsub -> Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 11:46:19 AM)
New criticism has emerged regarding studies which purport to show that enforcing the death penalty deters other murders. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html?em&ex=1195534800&en=01f24346fb68048e&ei=5070 pinksugarsub

LadyEllen -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:14:54 PM)
Enforcing the death penalty does not prevent murder, since even in the presence of a strictly enforced death penalty, there are still murders. There may be a case for some deterrent effect, but I would venture that where the motivation exceeds the inhibition then murder will occur regardless of the possible consequences to a killer - whether those possible consequences include or exclude a death penalty. The only possible reasons for a death penalty then become, (the deterrence factor having fallen), the notion of public vengeance for the crime of murder and/or the notion of maintaining public safety by removing the murderer. The first motivation is understandable but not perhaps one on which we ought to base our law given its possible extrapolations - indeed, we have spent centuries rolling back from such bases. The second motivation is met just as well, (albeit at considerable public expense) by lifetime incarceration. For all the expense of lifetime incarceration it is definitely a better alternative to death, pending a system of justice which does not make errors, and for this reason alone lifetime incarceration is the only realistic sentence to award with any sense of good consience. The expense is regrettable, but I do not see any way that we might argue for execution for financial reasons. E

popeye1250 -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:20:15 PM)
No and it's not meant to. Opponents of the death penalty try to use that non-argument as an argument. I don't know how to say that in Latin but I'm sure there's a saying for it. Maybe Julia our resident "academic" would know.

LadyEllen -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:21:47 PM)
So then Popeye, without the Latin - what is the reason to have it then please? E

Raechard -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:22:40 PM)
Well I don’t know what goes through the mind of someone who kills another so who am I or any other relatively normal person to judge if they fear the death penalty or not. Smokers probably fear death from lung cancer but it doesn’t make them all quit smoking. I tend to think if someone is wired that way, that they can take human life then they aren’t going to be deterred by the death penalty. There is no deterrent if they think they are more clever than the person investigating the crime and so will never get caught. The problem with economists is they will study the side of the moon that is visible and assume the other side of the moon is made up in the same way.

popeye1250 -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:33:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen So then Popeye, without the Latin - what is the reason to have it then please? E LE, for punishment of course.

AMaster -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:34:49 PM)
It certainly deters the executed form committing any more murders.

Raechard -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:36:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AMaster It certainly deters the executed form committing any more murders. Yes and in some parts of the world they cut your hands off for stealing and that seems effective so thats introduce that also.

LadyEllen -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:40:57 PM)
Put it this way Raechard - I dont want a life sentence and neither would I want to risk hanging, so in normal circumstances I'm not going to kill anyone. There may be some moral inhibition that might deter me from killing someone too. But, if the circumstances are right then alike with every other moral inhibition that might deter me from certain acts, the moral inhibition would become so minor as to be irrelevant as a consideration, and be overcome. And if the circumstances are right for that to occur in relation to killing someone then the possible consequences to me will be the last consideration in my mind should it be a crime of passion, and carefully planned for in relation to avoiding arrest, should it be a premeditated crime. What those circumstances might be will vary from person to person of course, and what might tip me over the edge will be different to what might do the same for someone else. All in all, once the personal moral inhibition is overcome by those circumstances, then no penalty whatsoever will deter me from killing whoever for whatever reason I feel their death would be a good thing. E

popeye1250 -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 12:56:38 PM)
LE, agreed. But there are some people who are just sociopaths and just don't care about other people. (The Clinton's come to mind everytime I hear that word.) Some of those sociopaths are so dangerous and their crimes so heinous that it simply isn't worth taking a chance on them escaping.

cyberdude611 -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 1:06:15 PM)
Every western democracy has banned the death penalty except for the USA. The US also has the highest prison population in the world (including 3rd world countries). That's why the US is laughed at when we preach about human rights.

popeye1250 -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 1:10:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 Every western democracy has banned the death penalty except for the USA. The US also has the highest prison population in the world (including 3rd world countries). That's why the US is laughed at when we preach about human rights. And almost a third of those prisoners are from third world countries! Yes, I really wish that the government would stop all that "human rights" preaching.

Raechard -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 1:10:36 PM)
This is the problem though because what is more expensive keeping someone in jail for the rest of their lives or buying a few toxic chemicals? If you think the politicians think beyond that question in relation to this topic then you are all kidding yourselves I fear.

popeye1250 -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 1:17:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raechard This is the problem though because what is more expensive keeping someone in jail for the rest of their lives or buying a few toxic chemicals? If you think the politicians think beyond that question in relation to this topic then you are all kidding yourselves I fear. In China they just shoot them in the back of the head and bill the family for the bullet. And, they don't have endless appeals that last for 18-25 years! Calif hasn't executed anyone for decades. I think they have 600 people on death row including that Richard Ramirez "Night Stalker" guy. They need to "do" him tommorrow morning! If they did an execution every weekday it would take more than two years to get rid of the backlog! They need to get busy out there! "Three chairs, no waiting!"

LadyEllen -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 1:23:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 LE, agreed. But there are some people who are just sociopaths and just don't care about other people. Some of those sociopaths are so dangerous and their crimes so heinous that it simply isn't worth taking a chance on them escaping. agreed Popeye - and if the legal system could discriminate between the natures of the crimes of various types of murderers then I would have no issue. Serial killers for instance - where each of their crimes has been independently proven, I see no reason to maintain them for a lifetime imprisonment. Except of course, that so many serial killers are insane and committed their crimes as consequences of their illness rather than by the same volition a sane person might. The issues then become 1) do we execute for illness and should we not perhaps anticipate such illness and execute absent any evidence of crime consequent to it? 2) do we refrain from execution in the case of illness, and who then establishes whether the perpetrator is exempt on health grounds or due execution on the grounds of sanity? This becomes a huge issue when one considers the imperfection of psychology as a field, its constant state of flux, the ease of impersonating the symptoms and our contentious legal system which is just as much a contest of lawyers' guile as it is of the truth. 3) does one become a murderer due the death sentence at one victim, two victims, three, four, ten.....how many? If one victim makes one a murderer and the sentence is death then there is no means of differentiating sentence however many more one kills and regardless of the motivation or psychology involved. 4) is it more or less serious to kill a child compared to an adult? A woman compared to a man? Is murder more than murder - in legal terms and in relation to the single punishment of death, should it be associated with sexual or sociopathic motives? 5) is it more or less serious to kill out of passion, out of premeditation, out of psychological illness, out of sexual psychopathology? For even though we might use variations on a theme - various numerical indicators to determine types of killing in your system I believe - murder remains murder and death by execution is final, and it can often be only best guess which can account for actions at trial. We have a guy under arrest in Scotland right now - linked to the abduction and killing of two young women (and maybe many more). There is no question in my mind, he deserves death should his guilt be established. But we must be very careful in all this in the way we might set precedents for future legal procedures. E

popeye1250 -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 1:29:46 PM)
LE, that "Night Stalker" guy is guilty beyond any shadow of guilt. He killid a whole bunch of people in many different incidents and the fucker is still alive after 15? years? WTF are they waiting for?

Raechard -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 1:47:09 PM)
I’m against the death penalty no matter how clear cut the case. I have no good reason for being against it. I just can’t be part of a society where killing people is the only answer left because we should be looking for other answers. I’m not God, politicians aren’t God, so why do we give them the authority to take life? I’m aware of the case you speak of LadyE but I’d rather he suffer in jail for the rest of his life. If there is an afterlife and we are sending them to some kind of express judgement, who are we to decide when he is judged? If God wanted to judge him this instant then where is that bolt of lightning striking him dead? If there isn’t an afterlife then you are only putting them out of their misery rather than punishing them in jail. Let the person languish in jail pondering the consequences of their actions, let them slowly die regretting the mistakes they have made and the families they have destroyed. They may not ever feel remorse for their actions but with instant death and no afterlife they won’t even be given the chance to feel remorse. There is no logic to state killing and it sets a bad example. Some of the reason I don’t see killing people as convenient to me I think I can put down to being raised in a society that looked down upon all forms of killing and didn’t seek to justify it for any reason. I’m not sure this is still the case in the UK but it’s the one thing and at some times the only thing I loved about my country.

LadyEllen -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 1:47:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 LE, that "Night Stalker" guy is guilty beyond any shadow of guilt. He killid a whole bunch of people in many different incidents and the fucker is still alive after 15? years? WTF are they waiting for? I'll assume he is guilty - after all, if all the killings have been attributed to him or only one of them, then he is guilty. Incidentally, thats one of the problems of death for serial killers only - it becomes very handy indeed for the whole legal system to pin several murders on one person, clear a whole bunch up and then execute the one person with an interest in disproving the claim. Meanwhile, the several other murderers are free and clear unless they commit another murder and get caught for another bunch of unsolved cases. But, one would argue that if he were subject to psychopathology at the time of his crimes, and this psychopathology provided the reason for his killing, then we are set ourselves on a dangerous path to hold that his crimes deserve death. He certainly cannot be released, but neither does he deserve the same penalty as a murderer who acted absent psychopathology, otherwise we make no allowance at all for any condition which might temporarily or permanently act upon a perpetrator and might explain his actions in the context of an otherwise law abiding life. The best sentence we should hand down for those so affected is life, meaning life - this reflects the absence of capable reason in their crimes, and also means they will be maintained for psychological and psychiatric study. We must also be careful insuch circumstances that we do not stress deterrence. For if we are to empasise the deterrence of murder by those subject to psychopathology, then we can quite readily enter the sphere of deterrence of crime by anticipation - and lock up those with psychopathology on the grounds we are preventing murder thereby - with the wider implications for habeas corpus that entails. Taken alongside the state of psychology, this is dangerous enough. Taken alongside the idea of psychopathology as "wrong thought" and current political trends, it becomes even more dangerous. E

popeye1250 -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 3:12:33 PM)
LE, you can put all that stuff back up. Even a doctor described the "Nightstalker" as "pure evil" and "a Monster." And they had eyewitnesses, dna evidence and he had very large feet a size 14 I think and a very rare brand of footware that they got impressions from on the ground outside the windows of houses that he broke into. They had a show on A&E about this pos years ago. A true monster. I seriously doubt that he thinks about his victims while in death row.

pinksugarsub -> RE: Does the Death Penalty Deter Murders? (11/18/2007 3:50:32 PM)
It actually costs considerably more to execute a person than it would to incarcerate them for life. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108 pinksugarsub

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875