Clan_MacKay wrote:

Mike Painter wrote:

Clan_MacKay wrote:

Mike Painter wrote:

Clan_MacKay wrote:

The Death Penalty may not exactly be a "Punishment" for the dead
person, but when others see the Death Penalty used and realize
that if they commit a crime that may be their fate than they will
be less likely to think of committing a crime.

Most murders are committed by close relations and involve alcohol.

Where did you get this nonsense?

Look it up. A spouse is always a prime suspect where the killer is
initially unknown.

They are a "Suspect" yes, but that does not mean they are the Killer.
You made the Statement of fact that "murders are committed by close
relations and involve alcohol" such statements as Fact are usually a
mistake.

No, it does not men they are the killer. However there *IS* a reason why
they are almost always a suspect. It is because they are the most likely
person to have done the killing and alcohol is involved most of the time.

There is no evidence to support the idea that the death penalty is
a deterrent and there is some to show it is not.

That all depends on which studies you prefer to look at, obviously
you prefer the Anti-Death ones.

But all you have to do to show this wrong is compare the per capita
murder rate in countries with the death penalty and those who don't
have it.

It's easy to find increases in the murder rate as social services
and jobs decline.
The murder rate dropped dramatically when prohibition came in.

But the death penalty, even with public executions, has never
slowed things down.

This is because the Death Penalty in the U.S. is rarely utilized in
a proper fashion partially due to the "Bleeding Hearts" who demand
more appeals and "stays of Execution" for people who have been
confirmed guilty beyond a doubt by anyone.
The U.S. has the highest population of Death Row inmates Worldwide
and I'm referring to inmates who are confirmed guilty, in other
countries with a Death Penalty these people are executed quickly and
efficiently. In those countries the lesson is clear "Commit murder
and you will die" in the U.S. it is more like "Commit murder and you
will live out your days in comfort while we think about it".

Of course the USA has a high number. Industrialized nations don't
have death penalties and don't have near the murder rate that we
do. The countries that execute rapidly are the same ones we say are
the bad guys.

Now I'm confused I thought that I made it plain that I am posting from
the U.S. but this part makes it sound like you think I'm posting from
somewhere else.
I'm also unsure about your continued reference to "industrialized
nations", industry to my knowledge has little to do with the tendency
of people to kill each other.

Then you've not really studied the issues.

As to the "Bad guy" reference, who are you calling "Bad Guys"?

Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan to name a few. In general if we have been talking
about how they need to practice our form of government, etc, the chances are
good that they have the type of death penalty, frequently for non capital
crimes as well, that you want.
Countries that *do* have the kind of government we want no longer kill
people.

A study done at UC Davis shows that a significant number of people
will kidnap somebody in a non death penalty state, take them into a
death penalty state and kill them. It does not go the other way
around.
It is believed this is a "death by cop" desire.

You may believe as you wish, "death by Cop" is usually done by
"Attacking" a Police officer in a fashion where the Officer must
defend himself with deadly force.

It's not a matter of belief. It's what happens and has nothing to
do with how it "usually" happens.

Actually the fact that this is how most people perform "Suicide by
Police Officer" make it "what happens".

Which has nothing to do with what I said. Try reading it again and again and
again if needed.

The US is the only industrial nation that has not omitted it. Iraq,
Iran and several other countries we have had problems with however
do practice killing without all that legal protection you seem to
want to get rid of.

"Protection" for whom?
The countries who do use the Death Penalty still have trials just as
we do the main difference is when they find someone guilty they
execute them rather than wait for the guilty to die of old age.

I will admit that some truly innocent people may be wrongfully
executed, but in my opinion if the defense and investigators are
doing their job right that would be minimal.
But I personally feel that allowing over 300 confirmed "Beyond a
shadow of a doubt" Murders to sit in comfort with all their comfort
paid for by our Taxes for the rest of their lives on "Death Row"
because of the (Very) slim chance that there might be one innocent
person mixed in with them is not a use of My Taxes that I am
comfortable with.

If "your taxes" contribute more that ten cents to that effort, I'd be
surprised.
The additional cost to the state for those people would be so close
to zero that that dime would probably cover it.

Please to show us exactly how and where you get your statistics as far
as the cost of Life Sentence -vs- the cost of Death Penalty and how
much of our (U.S. Citizens) Taxes actually go towards said sentence
since you seem to insist that you are privy to this information.

The cost of appeals is huge and is part of our legal system. It came about
for the same reason the Miranda warning came about. Abuse. It will not go
away.

Remove death row and the staff needed is reduced as well as the cost of
special facilities.

To add 300 people to the estimated 2 million in jail does not require the
addition of any guards, cells, food or anything else.

I would rather that as soon as guilt is confirmed the guilty is
executed in a timely fashion and if at a later date they might be
proved somehow innocent than that one life I feel would be a part of
the cost of living in a less crime filled society.

The death penalty does not deter.

Because in most Countries like the U.S. it is not utilized properly
because of the way our "Legal System" is designed and largely due to
the "Bleeding Hearts" (like you it seems) who would rather "Warehouse"
these Murderers and feed, clothe and pamper them for the rest of their
lives, or maybe you would rather just release them because they
"might" be innocent???

There *are* no other countries like the US when it comes to the death
penalty.
We stopped killing people for stealing apples a long time ago, the other
countries have not.

After all which is worse that one innocent is accidentally killed to
prevent crime or that dozens of children are murdered by criminals
who aren't afraid to live comfortably in prison if caught?

Gosh, I'm so moved by this appeal to my emotions that I would
suggest you get convicted of such a crime, even though innocent and
tell me how you feel about it as you are quickly executed.

And how would you feel if it were your child or spouse who had been
ruthlessly and brutally savaged and killed, but because of some
"Bleeding Heart" (like you) the person who was found unquestionably
Guilty sits in Prison for the rest of his life being pampered and
bragging about how your Baby screamed as she died in his hands???

That's why we have a legal system. And, yes, I note your evasion.

But to answer your question. Killing them would do nothing to bring them
back, nothing to ease the pain of their dying and nothing for me.