Skip to comments.The Death Penalty Does Not Deter Liberals
Posted on 05/02/2011 5:21:17 AM PDT by Kaslin
Liberals are compassionate people. Thats why they support abortion and oppose the death penalty. They figure its best to kill a majority of black children before they are born. If they did not, a small minority of those black children would later commit homicide. Liberals are not just compassionate people. Theyre logical, too.
Because of their undying commitment to expanding abortion rights I always welcome moral advice from liberals. Thats why I was nearly moved to tears after I read a new report from Appalachian State University Professor Dr. Matthew Robinson. His scientific report asserts that the death penalty system in North Carolina costs millions of dollars a year and does not make our state safer.
What Professor Robinson does not report is that the abolitionist movement is the sole reason for the higher-than-expected expense and lower-than-expected deterrent value of capital punishment. The death penalty is expensive because abolitionists level costly appeals even in cases where they know the condemned is guilty and has had a fair trial.
Put simply, the abolitionist wants to get rid of the death penalty regardless of guilt and regardless of process. And the impact of these endless appeals is predicable: It undermines the deterrent capacity of the death penalty.
If the liberal reader cannot understand why a fifteen year delay between crime and punishment undermines deterrence then just try this little two-step experiment: 1) The next time your fifteen-year old breaks a rule tell him he will be grounded when he turns thirty. 2) See if you can count to ten before he decides to recidivate.
Dr. Robinson also says that the death penalty poses a serious risk to innocent people. I have a similar concern with abortion. I think it might pose a pretty serious risk to innocent people. So, for me, the solution lies in the appellate process.
Heres my plan: When a woman decides to abort, opponents of abortion should be able to file appeals on behalf of the baby. If we can just drag out the process for fifteen years or more then, who knows, we might be able to reduce the risk abortion poses to innocent people.
The learned Professor Robinson says that ''All the data point to one obvious conclusion Our state's capital punishment system is broken, and our lawmakers should take a serious look at whether it is still serving the interests of North Carolina.'' Well, hes right about that. We havent executed anyone in five years in this state. The abolitionists have certainly managed to break down the system.
Professor Robinson recently participated in a press conference with three other learned scholars - Dr. Frank Baumgartner and Dr. Seth Kotch of UNC Chapel Hill and Dr. Miriam DeLone of Fayetteville State University. They all agreed that the death penalty is both an ineffective and unfair punishment although they said nothing at the press conference about the inherent unfairness of terminating 51% of black pregnancies in the name of choice.
''Among other things, this report shows us that the death penalty does not deter crime,'' said Professor Baumgartner. ''We haven't executed anyone since 2006, and the murder rate has gone down. If the death penalty isn't making us safer, why do we cling to this punishment?''
Baumgartner failed to mention that the crime rate rose every single year between 1967 and 1977 when there were no executions in America. He also failed to mention that after eighteen years of increases the crime rate finally leveled off in 1978. That was the year after the death penalty made a comeback in America.
Of course, we are all guilty of suppressing statistics when they make us feel somewhat uncomfortable. Every summer when ice cream sales increase the murder rate increases, too. But I dont talk about it often. I really like ice cream. Did I mention that I like social science professors who make really complex statistical arguments?
Professor Robinsons study asserts that decreased use of the death penalty has been followed by a decrease in murder. But thats only half of the story. The increase in gun sales and issuance of concealed weapons permits has been followed by a decrease in murder, which has reduced the need for executions in North Carolina. But Robinson tries to keep things simple. Hes writing mostly for a liberal audience.
Robinson also asserts that innocent people are being wrongly sentenced to death. He notes that seven people have been exonerated and freed from North Carolina's death row since 1973. Im glad he chose the year 1973 as a reference point. Since then, no wrongfully condemned person has been freed from a North Carolina abortion clinic. The criminal justice system is broken but, look, the health care system works just perfectly!
Robinson concluded a recent interview by asking, ''What do we get for all the money we spend on the death penalty?'' He humbly answered his own question saying, ''We get a punishment that is almost never used, that is mired in racial bias and that threatens the lives of innocent people. It defies logic to continue using a system like that.''
In recent years, the abortion rate has been dropping slightly as has been the murder rate. Imagine if abortion were mired in racial bias or threatened the lives of innocent people. Then both logic and sanctimonious professors would defy its continued use.
Th Arab Street on of their conspriacy is that why he wasn’t captured
The death penalty is not about deterrence. It is about the prevention of future atrocities by felons. The threat to the innocent comes not from state execution of felons, but from imprisoning them - sometimes for ostensibly life sentences - and then letting them out for good behavior with time served.
The fact that we have a legal system that is dedicated to ensuring the death penalty doesn’t work effectively is an indictment of that legal system, not the death penalty.
The majority of University faculty would starve to death if they had to function in the real world.
I remember getting into a debate with a young lady who took the position that it was cheaper to incarcerate vs. execute. Told her if we cut out all the appeals and made it cheaper, would she support it since her argument was based on economics?
Doesn’t seem to deter criminals either.
And what did she say?
I personally believe more innocent people have been killed by men that were once on death row, then innocent men have been executed by the state.
Why do we demand 100% perfection in this one aspect of our legal system? I know the argument, an innocent person may be executed, okay, I agree that is possible.
However, innocent people die every day in this nation.
There is a certain risk just being a live. We do not demand 100% perfection in our freeways, or the automobile that we drive and because we don’t accidents occur, and people die.
We can not be 100% certain that a plane may not experience a mechanical problem and fall from the sky killing all aboard.
I can go on listing the thousands of ways innocent people die in this nation, there is a risk to living.
We can not with 100% certainty in some cases know that the person tried and convicted of a crime is not in fact innocent, we just need to trust the system to be as fair as possible (and in our legal system, guilty people do get set free).
I do know with 100% certainty that someone that is executed will never kill another person. To me, that is enough of a reason to keep the death penalty.
I would like to see the whole process speeded up.
liberal/progressive/socialist/commie scum are not only insane, theyre EVIL...the only things they refuse to kill are rabid animals...
No they're not -- their brains are royally screwed up; that's why they call evil good and good evil. THAT IS WHY they oppose the death penalty and support abortion.
Wow, your views are so out of step with the founders. I’ll stick with their views on the evils of government over your rationalizations.
The proper response to crime is to let the people be armed to deal with the crime as it is occurring.
The government has too much power now. It needs less. That goes for federal and most state government.
All federal and state gun laws should be repealed. Crime would reduce drastically.
I used to be for the death penalty. I prefer hard labor instead now.
I would support life imprisonment if it were really guaranteed: no parole, no early release, no time off for good behavior, and of course no prison escapes. Just as I would support exile, if there were a place the exiled truly could not escape from (an orbiting penal colony?), Oh, for 18th century Australia!
If those options don't exist, the state has the duty to do what needs to be done, to protect society from these aggressors. Even the convict crucified next to Jesus, said of himself and the third convict, "We are only getting what we deserve for our sins."
I guess we have read different history books. The founding fathers allowed for the death penalty.