GNBRETT
Registered
how do you come up with that? its already been proven in states with death penalties that those states have the highest homicide rates in the country so how has the death penalty deterred anyone from committing a homicide?
Death Penalty
- Thread starter GNBRETT
- Start date
1. Lets see some statistics
2. There is no way for you to prove it you can't prove something that hasn't happened.. So if we are going to speculate, I speculate on the side that the death penalty works..
Last edited:
GNBRETT
Registered
you said the death penalty is a deterrent. show me how it has been proven to be a deterrent?
basically you cant back up what you said so now ur changing the subject to guns and moving to other countries lmao? you sound like a typical politician that cant refute what someone else is debating so you try changing the subject.... how lame!
GNBRETT
Registered
there is no speculation here capt. if it works so well then why do the states with the capital punishment still have the highest murder rates? the south makes up 80% of death penalty executions. studies were done on this many years ago and from 2000-2009 those states with capital punishment saw no significant drop in murders. its the same for the country's other regions, like the northeast which has the lowest number of executions at less than 1%. no less murders then it had before.
people arent running out and killn people here the northeast cause they don't have to fear execution. according to you areas like the northeast which only see 1% capital punishment cases should be seeing a huge hike in murder rates cause the criminals dont have to fear being put to death. thats simply not the case.
lets add up the average cost while the person is in prison. It costs about $47 a day to house a criminal in prison in the state of Texas for example which has the most lethal injections. if someone were sentenced to life it would cost about $700k to house him or her for approx 40 years. That is still less then a death penalty case which on average will cost the state a $1,000,000.00.
on average prisoners on death row spend at least 12 years in prison before they are executed. so in TX that wud b another $208,050 added to the cost of the court case and the lengthy appeals process.
the death penalty is simply not effective in discouraging murder and it is certainly isn't cost effective. The death penalty doesn't work. sorry if that offends you but those are the facts.
Still waiting on some statistics... Last time I checked Washington DC had the highest murder rate, then their is NY, Chicago come on now.....
newman
Registered
I agree with the death penalty.
But here in the UK we don't have it.
So I think life should mean live, in prison until you die.
But here people can get out after serving half their sentence for good behavior.
So you can serve some silly time in jail like 7 years.
And of course people have come out of jail and murdered again.
But here in the UK we don't have it.
So I think life should mean live, in prison until you die.
But here people can get out after serving half their sentence for good behavior.
So you can serve some silly time in jail like 7 years.
And of course people have come out of jail and murdered again.
Regardless of where you stand on the issue, I think you might find this website interesting > Part I: History of the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center
It lays out a timeline through history of the death penalty around the world. I think at times in history the death penalty has been a great deterant to crime, and and times it was probably done wrong.
I guess my position on it is that if a person commits a murder, intentionally, willingly, maliciously, then they need to get the chair. That murderer needs to be stopped so that they won't murder again. If a person accidentally commits a murder, say in wrongful self defense, or in a vehicle accident, then maybe life in prison is a better punishment.
It lays out a timeline through history of the death penalty around the world. I think at times in history the death penalty has been a great deterant to crime, and and times it was probably done wrong.
I guess my position on it is that if a person commits a murder, intentionally, willingly, maliciously, then they need to get the chair. That murderer needs to be stopped so that they won't murder again. If a person accidentally commits a murder, say in wrongful self defense, or in a vehicle accident, then maybe life in prison is a better punishment.
1busa
Registered
Yeah but Postal you can't discern who lives or dies based on circumstantial evidence or alleged "intent". Take for instance I pissed off some bad guys and I know that they are looking to do me bodily harm if not take my life. So I get a gun to protect myself legally or illegally. Regardless my intent is on self preservation, so I run across those guys. Weapons are drawn and bullets are exchanged. I just happen to be a better shot than they were. Not saying it's justified but was my intent to kill or defend?? Did I go looking for them or did they find me? Apples and oranges and based on your background, race, social status etc. These factors will all play into account whether you are found guilty of premeditated murder or not 
now for the other side of the coin I'm a wealthy retired upper class guy who happens to be an alcoholic. I have 5D.U.I.'s on my driving record but I can afford proper legal representation and managed to cop plea deals etc. Etc. And avoid jail. This is not exaggerating I actually know someone who has done this. Now I'm leaving the local country club watering hole after putting back 1 too many drinks and I wrap my shiny BMW around a mini van killing a soccer mom and her 2 kids. My intent wasn't to murder a woman and 2 children so I shouldn't be eligible for the death penalty right?? After all I have a disease a sickness so I can't be held accountable 4 my actions and too bad so sad for the grieving family... like I said before nothing is black and white it's always gonna be a shade of grey....
now for the other side of the coin I'm a wealthy retired upper class guy who happens to be an alcoholic. I have 5D.U.I.'s on my driving record but I can afford proper legal representation and managed to cop plea deals etc. Etc. And avoid jail. This is not exaggerating I actually know someone who has done this. Now I'm leaving the local country club watering hole after putting back 1 too many drinks and I wrap my shiny BMW around a mini van killing a soccer mom and her 2 kids. My intent wasn't to murder a woman and 2 children so I shouldn't be eligible for the death penalty right?? After all I have a disease a sickness so I can't be held accountable 4 my actions and too bad so sad for the grieving family... like I said before nothing is black and white it's always gonna be a shade of grey....
oeballer50
Registered
I totally agree with the death penalty... These animals don't have it as rough as they used to.. Most sit in their cells all day watching tv, smoking and eating out of their ridiculously huge stash of ice cream, cosmic brownies, and potato chips. Only coming out to settle a bet on the Monday night football game that every inmate in the jail could watch because of the tv's you and I so graciously provided for them. So yes, death penalty it is....
and that is the problem!!! let me kill them on primetime tv using the same method they used to murder their victim within 6 months of their crime and most of it would stop...if nothing else, we would quickly get rid of the minority of people who feel it is ok to murder another
GNbrett, have you ever heard of the theory "broken windows", this theory goes on to say that in places where crime is more "acceptable" that it continues to happen, and when changes are made to that environment crime statistics get better. Think about that for a moment, and then apply it to punishments. With more severe punishments (ultimately death being the worst), crime is deterred. If you take out Chicago, Detroit, New Orleans, DC, and I forget a couple of other cities, the US has the top 10 lowest crime rate for the world. These cities group us into the top 10 for the worst. In certain areas people do not worry about the consequences as they know they don't have to be based on the lack of police/judicial system to harm them. You will never be able to prove your "theory" that capital punishment does not deter crime when you compare modern age to years ago. You cited that most murder happens in the "heat of the moment", that is true in some cases, but not when you throw in urban Chicago, Detroit, etc. These murders are gang related, etc. For the people in these cities that are caught and executed I firmly believe that it would make a difference.
1) No one generally changes their stance on this topic
2) IMHO, and that's all this is - I don't believe the death penalty is the deterrent it could be simply because it is a long, drawn out process, it's riddled with loopholes (like, if you tell us where the body is, we won't kill you, or if you rat out others involved, you get a deal that doesn't include death...) We've made murder PC, and I'm certain many victims' families feel taken advantage of and wronged by our backwards system of "justice" because, quite honestly, the laws are manipulated to benefit the criminal, not the victim.
2) IMHO, and that's all this is - I don't believe the death penalty is the deterrent it could be simply because it is a long, drawn out process, it's riddled with loopholes (like, if you tell us where the body is, we won't kill you, or if you rat out others involved, you get a deal that doesn't include death...) We've made murder PC, and I'm certain many victims' families feel taken advantage of and wronged by our backwards system of "justice" because, quite honestly, the laws are manipulated to benefit the criminal, not the victim.
GNBRETT
Registered
bottom line is statistically the death penalty has not proven to be a deterrent in states that have it. thats not an opinion, thats a fact. if it was such a deterrent then texas would have less murders then states that have no death penalty. they dont, they have plenty. it cost more money to have them on death row then simply life in prison. if we put someone to death immediately like some have suggested we as a society would have surely put numerous people to death that were simply innocent.
142 people have been either acquitted, charges dismissed or pardoned based on evidence of innocence since 1971. it sure would be a shame to put any of these people to death immediately when subsequent evidence proved they were innocent of their crime for which the state decided to kill them for. either by DNA or new evidence that proved they were innocent or eye witness statements that were proven to be complete BS!
in my experience eye witness accounts of what happened are the most unreliable evidence in any prosecution. take 5 people who witnessed a crime and ull have 5 different suspect descriptions.
of course there are plenty of people put to death that surely committed murder but that fact is there is plenty that were innocent and set free. witnesses lie or get confused, cops lie, prosecutors lie, evidence technicians lie when performing analysis of evidence, (look up the woman in Mass that was just arrested for never even testing over 34,000 cases of her 9 year career that were put before her) Arrest warrants issued for chemist at heart of state drug lab scandal - Boston.com
there is no changing the criminal justice system so putting someone to death immediately after being sentenced to death row is never gonna happen. its simply cheaper to give them life without parole so the whole spending money on prisoners for life being more expensive then putting them on death row is absolute nonsense!
once again, death is too good for an actual murderer. I would rather see them suffer in a cage like an animal.
Innocence: List of Those Freed From Death Row | Death Penalty Information Center
142 people have been either acquitted, charges dismissed or pardoned based on evidence of innocence since 1971. it sure would be a shame to put any of these people to death immediately when subsequent evidence proved they were innocent of their crime for which the state decided to kill them for. either by DNA or new evidence that proved they were innocent or eye witness statements that were proven to be complete BS!
in my experience eye witness accounts of what happened are the most unreliable evidence in any prosecution. take 5 people who witnessed a crime and ull have 5 different suspect descriptions.
of course there are plenty of people put to death that surely committed murder but that fact is there is plenty that were innocent and set free. witnesses lie or get confused, cops lie, prosecutors lie, evidence technicians lie when performing analysis of evidence, (look up the woman in Mass that was just arrested for never even testing over 34,000 cases of her 9 year career that were put before her) Arrest warrants issued for chemist at heart of state drug lab scandal - Boston.com
there is no changing the criminal justice system so putting someone to death immediately after being sentenced to death row is never gonna happen. its simply cheaper to give them life without parole so the whole spending money on prisoners for life being more expensive then putting them on death row is absolute nonsense!
once again, death is too good for an actual murderer. I would rather see them suffer in a cage like an animal.
Innocence: List of Those Freed From Death Row | Death Penalty Information Center
You keep bringing up statistics but have yet to provide any legitimate credible sources for your statement. Lets take percapita homicides into account and see how the numbers prove out..... Not going to disagree with you on eye witness accounts at all but there are some slam dunk cases out there where the option for death is the right thing...
GNBRETT
Registered
you keep dodging the question.... explain to me why Texas who still leads the nation in state-sanctioned killings and has executed four times more ppl than any other state yet has had one of the highest murder rates in the country demonstrating that the death penalty does not have a general deterrent effect.
the three largest cities in Texas have murder rates among the top 25 in the country, while none of the largest cities in new york state are in the top 25.
there is ur statistics so do you have an answer to that question or are you gonna keep spinning it? waiting for ur response.....
GNBRETT
Registered
agree 100%. we as a society do subscribe to revenge which is what the death penalty gives us. but as far as punishment goes it just doesnt equal punishment. look around the world and see what other countries subscribe to the death penalty?Believe what you will, I think the poll so far shows a vast majority of Americans are for the death penalty...
And, again, neither side will ever change their minds, so why argue over it?
the U.S. takes a spot behind China, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia for the most executions in the world. idn about you vabs but being listed with those other 4 countries who think women are tools and have virtually no right to do anything is not the type of counties I as an american want to be compared to.
last year we in the USA have the highest murder rate of any civilized country on the planet. so obviously, the death penalty has no effect of reducing murders so maybe as a nation we shud try a different approach no?
Similar threads
