Still believe in the death Penalty?

[Gozer]

I with Gonzo because he used the term "high hat".

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Dr GonZo

but I'm still betting that capital punishment generally scares people away from doing things that can get them executed.

One thing your whole post did was demonstrate that there are a lot of factors that go into crime rates. This "scared away" is just one aspect and I'd bet it is quite insignificant.

The thing with criminals or people who would commit a capital offense is that they are, well, criminals. It makes sense to you and I to be scared of being executed, but your average criminal doesn't think he's going to be caught in the first place, so he ain't scared. Or, to use a fancy medical term, they are "crazy" and are going to do it either way.

They have capital punishment in Georgia, where this guy was executed, and the murder rate is 4 times as high as it is in Alberta. In Georgia in 2006, 600 people were murdered. In Canada in 2006, 605 people were murdered. There's like 9 million people in Georgia. We've got 25 million more people, and 5 more murders.

I could go on all day. The point is, "capital punishment as deterrence" doesn't appear to work. At least in Georgia. Or the country as a whole. They have the death penalty, they have more violent crime. Like you said, there are a lot of factors, but this factor doesn't seem to do much.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Dr GonZo

I don't have the time nor the encouragement to research statistical data showing crime rates going down after the introduction of capital punishment, but I'm still betting that capital punishment generally scares people away from doing things that can get them executed.

Great post for the most part, however, I think the bolded statement above is subject to a big fat caveat. If the average person takes the time to ponder the potential consequences of any particular action and realize that they could be executed for the crime they are about to commit, then I think your statement holds.

Personally, I don't think capital punishment is an effective deterrent for offences that are committed in the heat of the moment, crimes of passion, etc. In those cases, you don't really have time to consider the consequences; you simply act.

If you look at the circumstances surrounding a lot of murders, I think a good number of them occur in situations where things happened quickly and there was little opportunity to weigh the consequences of those events.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Dr GonZo

This made me laugh at both the irony of the ignorance and arrogance of the statement. You talk statistics? Let's go.

No, I did not use that site, but it is far superior then the site that I did use. I did not post the links, because I had to go to 16 separate sights to get the numbers that I did (the website only had yearly numbers nationally and for each state, so there would have been 16 links). For the purposes of this post, there are only two links
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/kncrime.htm
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm
Now that I have your stats and better website, I will gladly use an even broader time period if you like. I will note that I did use 91 in my previous post, contrary to what you stated, I did not use 89 as I did not have those numbers from my inferior website. That website started at 1990 and went through 2006. However, now we can average it out over a 20 year period, if you would like a larger period of time, or shorter, feel free, I am sure the numbers will demonstrate the exact same result. But the numbers for 1984-2003, with 1994 being the midpoint, as that was when they decided to reinstate the death penalty for all of its deterrent purposes.

84-93
Kansas 4.88 murders per 100K
US rate 8.79 murders per 100K
Kansas as % of national rate 55%

94-03
Kansas 5.46 murders per 100K
US rate 6.58 murders per 100K
Kansas as % of national rate 83%

You will notice that the average number of murders in Kansas increased by about 11% over 94-03 compared with 84-93. Over the previous, biased time period, I stated that the number of murders increased by 12% from 94-97 compared with 90-93. Let us just say that in Kansas after the death penalty was instituted, murders increased by 11%. For every million people in Kansas, 6 more or so were murdered after the death penalty vis-à-vis before over those two time periods.

This would not really matter much if the national average was going up at the same time. One could safely assume that Kansas was just experiencing a murder increase along the lines of the rest of the nation. However, the national rate for murder decreased by 25% between 94-03 compared with 84-93. So while the rest of the country was experiencing a decline in the rate of murder, Kansas was experiencing an increase.
Then you mention that Kansas somehow missed out on the 1990’s boom. Please see the following website http://www.nam.org/Docs/IEA/26763_19...+Manufacturing which

shows Gross State Product for each state in the union from 1992 -2000. The GSP for Kansas was 3.2%, California was 3.7%. Not sure if that qualifies as a huge difference between the two states, and somehow the 3.2% happens to be very close to the national GDP growth of 3.67% over that period.
http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/...ate&JavaBox=no

You also mention that the rate of murder in Kansas is at its lowest level in 30 years over the past 6 years. That may technically be true, but as a percentage of the national rate they have had many lower years. 84-89 is one such period, in fact virtually every single period of 6 year increments before they switched to the death penalty, Kansas's murder rate as a percentage of the national rate was lower than the last 6 years. Why is the national rate falling at a faster rate than the rate in Kansas, the death penalty should be reducing murders, the rate should be far below what it was in the dark days of murderers living long and prospering.

You want deductive reasoning for why capital punishment increases murder rates, how about these guys want to die and murder seems like a good way of going about that. The numbers do not lie, murder rates are lower in states that do not have the death penalty. It serves no deterrent effect.

[Buckwheat's barber]

Originally Posted by Dion

Look how long it took for Millgaard to be found innocent.

In other cases appeals have not been heard or ignored by the federal review board.

As well as at the state level, particularly when George W. Bush was at the helm in Texas...

http://archive.salon.com/politics200...ush/index.html

Bush says he reviews each and every death sentence. But the sheer volume of executions in Texas militates against any serious review.
Even Bush's former counsel, Judge Alberto R. Gonzales, says that a typical execution would receive no more than 30 minutes of the governor's time.
Because Bush doesn't have the time to review these cases, he relies instead on jury verdicts, which he admits he is loath to reverse, and the recommendations of his hand-picked Board of Pardons and Paroles. But the BPP does not seriously review these cases. In fact, it has been shown to be little more than a clumsy charade of clemency review.

In 1998, Judge Sam Sparks of the U.S. District Court in Austin, Texas, found that the board hadn't held a single hearing on a death-row clemency appeal nor conducted a single meeting among its members -- not even a telephone conference call -- nor investigated a single case in 25 years. "It is incredible testimony to me," Sparks said, "that in 70-plus cases, in an 18-member board, that no person has ever seen an application for clemency important enough to hold a hearing on, or to talk with each other about." Nevertheless, Bush has not contravened the board in a single case.

[Flames in 07]

This is a textbook case where the death penalty should be used.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tory/National/

Now, he'll go through the courts for awhile were a bunch of experts will determine if he is insane or not, if he is repsponsible for his actions or not.

I just think who cares, he adds nothing to society, why spend money on him? Just put him to sleep, take the money you save from doing so and put it towards something productive.

[Azure]

Yeah, hard to argue against that case.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

This is a textbook case where the death penalty should be used.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tory/National/

Now, he'll go through the courts for awhile were a bunch of experts will determine if he is insane or not, if he is repsponsible for his actions or not.

I just think who cares, he adds nothing to society, why spend money on him? Just put him to sleep, take the money you save from doing so and put it towards something productive.

The man is most likely a paranoid schizophrenic who was either off his meds or his meds were out of wack. It's doesn't excuse his actions but helps to explain why he did what he did. No rational minded person would do such a thing.

People with mental illnesses don't get a choice in the matter. My brother and i had a friend in HS who was schizophrenic. A year after grad his meds were out of wack and needed adjustment. Sadly he tried to choke his mother to death but luckily failed in his attempt. Police came and took him away and got him some proper treatment. A year after that his meds were out of wack again -drugs do need adjustment from time to time. He was driving himself to the hospital to get help but never made it. Jumped off the Bay parkade downtown splattering himself on a few cars below.

I don't agree with putting the mentaly ill criminals to sleep to save a few bucks.

[Flames in 07]

Too bad for existing and future victims that it is ok to have no responsibility for your actions. And that some people automatically draw the conclusion that he must be hopelessly mentally ill.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Too bad for existing and future victims that it is ok to have no responsibility for your actions. And that some people automatically draw the conclusion that he must be hopelessly mentally ill.

Show me how you think that guy was sane.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Dion

Show me how you think that guy was sane.

I'm sure his trial will figure that out.

Thats not the point though. If there was even a 'remote' chance that the guy could lose his mind and do something like that, he should be a mental ward. And either way, mental or not, you're still responsible for your actions.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Dion

Show me how you think that guy was sane.

I don't care, and I don't care to spend millions of dollars gathering a ton of differing and likely conflicting medical opinions just to be kinda sure that he was or wasn't. That's all we will be able to do, be sorta kinda sure that maybe he is. It isn't a math formula, it is an art with millions of different views when it comes to determining clinically insane people. It's absolutely assinine to me that anyone would think that the big burden of proof here is to 'prove that he IS sane"

I don't feel sorry for him in any way, sick or not.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm sure his trial will figure that out.

Thats not the point though. If there was even a 'remote' chance that the guy could lose his mind and do something like that, he should be a mental ward. And either way, mental or not, you're still responsible for your actions.

The point seems to be that if we don't put them to sleep then these people aren't taking responsibility for thier actions. Mental hospitals aren't good enough.

Having lost a good friend to mental illness, maybe my views are biased. Or seeing him struggle to be a part of society and have him admit that he can't beat his illness - to only a day later hear he comitted suicide.

There is always a risk with mentall illness. If you want a 100% security then you better round everyone up and keep em in a mental hospital. Better throw me in there too as i suffer from depression from time to time.

[Azure]

Okay, depression is a long ways away from being schizophrenic, which is what people are claiming this guy was.

IF the doctor who treated him knew about it, he should have been closely watched.

I'm not saying put EVERYONE who suffers from mental problems into a mental ward either.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Azure

Okay, depression is a long ways away from being schizophrenic, which is what people are claiming this guy was.

IF the doctor who treated him knew about it, he should have been closely watched.

I'm not saying put EVERYONE who suffers from mental problems into a mental ward either.

What about the guy in Calgary that recently murdered his family and the tenant in the basement? Didn't co workers say he was depressed?

Whose to say he wasn't closely watched by his GP. They don't always know if a patient is taking thier meds on a regular basis. In some cases people go off their meds as they think they are feeling better.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I don't care, and I don't care to spend millions of dollars gathering a ton of differing and likely conflicting medical opinions just to be kinda sure that he was or wasn't. That's all we will be able to do, be sorta kinda sure that maybe he is. It isn't a math formula, it is an art with millions of different views when it comes to determining clinically insane people. It's absolutely assinine to me that anyone would think that the big burden of proof here is to 'prove that he IS sane"

I don't feel sorry for him in any way, sick or not.

I don't feel sorry for the guy either. Experience with a friend has helped me to understand what may have happened - that's all.

Nor do i believe in the revenge factor of the death penalty.

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Dion

What about the guy in Calgary that recently murdered his family and the tenant in the basement? Didn't co workers say he was depressed?

Whose to say he wasn't closely watched by his GP. They don't always know if a patient is taking thier meds on a regular basis. In some cases people go off their meds as they think they are feeling better.

I think the guy in line at Orange Julius said he was a little sad as well. It's tough just throw out examples like that because we have no idea what the real background of each individual case is.

And in the bolded example, if that's a decision then I guess they'd be responsible for their actions as a function of DECIDING to go off their meds right?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

And in the bolded example, if that's a decision then I guess they'd be responsible for their actions as a function of DECIDING to go off their meds right?

Going off thier meds is a descion, yes. So what's your point?

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Dion

I don't feel sorry for the guy either. Experience with a friend has helped me to understand what may have happened - that's all.

Nor do i believe in the revenge factor of the death penalty.

Who exactly said anything about revenge. Is that a specific reply to anything I argued, or just a concept that you made up right now?

[Flames in 07]

Originally Posted by Dion

Going off thier meds is a descion, yes. So what's your point?

My point is that even the people deemed medically disabled in anyway still have responsibility.