Posted on 09/24/2011 7:15:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
You’re making the mistake of assuming that people who commit the most heinous crimes (child murder, cop murder, etc) are rational human beings who believe that they will be caught and will have to pay a price for their crimes.
They will murder if the punishment is life in prison. They will murder if the punishment is the death penalty.
The psychological profile of a person on death row is one of extreme arrogance. They don’t see other people as having value. They’ll take a life for their own sexual gratification, because someone looks odd to them or just because someone ‘is in my way’. Their own desires trumps your right to breathe. (On a snarky side note: this sounds a lot like the motivations of a woman who’d have an abortion.)
And they usually believe that they’re smarter than the rest of us. They don’t believe that they will be caught.
Now the best deterrent is the possibility of an *immediate* death penalty. Just like a child or an animal, the best way to train these people is with the possibility of quick and swift punishment. They don’t think long-term.
Arming the potential *victim* does more to deter crime than *anything* the courts can dole out.
Some of the smart ones might limit their murdering to the days you indicated, so there might be a slight trend; but I don’t believe that it’d have as huge of an impact as you do. I guess the best way to figure out the truth of your argument is to look at the murder rate of states that have the DP vs the ones which don’t. But that would have to be adjusted for other factors such as local gun laws. (Which I firmly believe has a greater impact on crime rates than criminal punishment.)
>>If you announced tomorrow that people who murdered people on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays would not be eligible for the death penalty but people who murdered people on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays would - do you think there would go up or down on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays?<<
No murders on Sunday due to NFL? ;)
What?
Good point. It would be interesting to know how many people have been killed by killers who could have gotten the death penalty but didn’t. I would guess it’s easily bigger than the number of innocent people who have been executed.
“(evil people are evil “
A true statement. But evil people are also deeply devoted to their own self interest. I therefore think the death penalty does have a deterrent effect.
I can’t prove it, of course, nor can non-deterrence be proven; no one knows what might have been.
You stated, “I still don’t understand why the left is against the death penalty for people tried and convicted by a jury, but is not opposed to the death penalty for innocent children.”
I think you have stated very well an issue that many of us have been grappling with.
Forgive me, I do not have a link handy, but I believe I read recently that folks like George Soros and other radicals have a list of things they want to accomplish. I was thinking it might be the Communist Manifesto list, but the following thread, post 3, shows it isnt exactly what I had been thinking of.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2494919/posts
[The thread deals with how many of the points of the Communist Manifesto have been accomplished.]
I believe that among the points on the list I read is to reduce law and order and respect for the same. Breaking the justice system in any way they can, by creating a climate conducive for crime and then destroying morale of the law abiding citizen when the justice system does not dispense reasonable justice is at the heart of this.
Also on the list (not stated so boldly, as I recall, but I read between the lines) is the desire for government to control our offspring up to and including abortion. Thinning out the herd, if you will. If the incoming little ones cannot be prevented from taking their places, then the plan is to indoctrinate them away from common sense and love of this country and her God. Smaller numbers of docile servants/slaves are so much easier for the overlords to handle, don’t you know.
Perhaps someone more up to date on George Soros and the UN Agenda 21 plans or some who follow the ProLife issues could be more articulate in answering your worthy comment than I have done, so I am pinging some who are interested in this topic who may wish to weigh in on this.
No problem. If I don’t know something, I just ask someone who does. :)
“I agree with you. I am really ambivalent about the issue because of two conflicting principles that make it a non-issue in my mind. These are: (1) that our radically secular State does not have the legal credibility or moral authority to put people in jail, let alone execute them; and (2) that the emotional/political “energy” spent these days on a very small number of high-profile cases is dwarfed by the millions of unborn children we have slaughtered in recent decades in the name of “choice” or “convenience.””
I have no ambivalence.
The death penalty is appropriate punishment. I do not care one whit as to whether having such a “penalty” deters or not.
I will go further.
Not only do I think the death penalty is appropriate for use as punishment, I am appalled that we are not using it _nearly enough_.
We should be executing more - many more. Take a life deliberately without justification — forfeit your own. That’s simple — everyone and anyone can understand it.
I would prefer that capital punishment be expressly embodied into the U.S. Constitution with the following amendment:
“This Constitution of The United States recognizes the death penalty to be appropriate punishment pursuant to the due process of law.
No person in the United States, nor in the several States, shall face such punishment unless above the age of thirteen years and six months.”
No qualms, no apologies.
Just sayin’...
Opponents of the death penalty believe that no one deserves to be executed.
So child killers can live a long life in jail?.It’s a sick mind that supports that type of thinking.
Even murderers need a day of rest.
>>The death penalty is appropriate punishment. I do not care one whit as to whether having such a “penalty” deters or not.<<
It is a matter of justice. I can’t recall who said it, but an official in Texas summed it up beautifully: “In Texas, if you kill us, we will kill you back.”
Google search: +death +penalty +exonerated site:crimeandconsequences.com
At the end of the day my first hand experience having served on a jury in a non-capital murder trial where I had to face the reality I was serving with some of the stupidest people walking the streets of New York who were mesmerized by the raconteur prosecutor and ready to convict on the testimony of a crackhead eyewitness who wet himself in the courtroom and an alleged jailhouse confession reported to police in a written statement by an illegal who clearly couldn't read, write or speak english. The trial ended in a hung jury.
Combining this with my brothers experiences as a Sheriff dealing with prosecutors who were demanding capital murder cases where there were none to be had and deputies who were eager to please the prosecutors to the point of perjury I now believe this is something we best do without.
Gen 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
If that is not succinct enough, how about these?
Num 35:16 But if he smote him with an instrument of iron, so that he died, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
Num 35:17 And if he smote him with a stone in the hand, whereby a man may die, and he died, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
Num 35:18 Or if he smote him with a weapon of wood in the hand, whereby a man may die, and he died, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
Num 35:19 The avenger of blood shall himself put the murderer to death: when he meeteth him, he shall put him to death.
Num 35:20 And if he thrust him of hatred, or hurled at him, lying in wait, so that he died,
Num 35:21 or in enmity smote him with his hand, so that he died; he that smote him shall surely be put to death; he is a murderer: the avenger of blood shall put the murderer to death, when he meeteth him.
Num 35:30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be slain at the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person that he die.
Num 35:31 Moreover ye shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer, that is guilty of death; but he shall surely be put to death.
Num 35:32 And ye shall take no ransom for him that is fled to his city of refuge, that he may come again to dwell in the land, until the death of the priest.
Num 35:33 So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood, it polluteth the land; and no expiation can be made for the land for the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.
Num 35:34 And thou shalt not defile the land which ye inhabit, in the midst of which I dwell: for I, Jehovah, dwell in the midst of the children of Israel.
That pretty much settles it for me.
In a nutshell, and you'd best believe that death penalty opponents *know* this. Their 'endgame' is current day Norway, where a mass murderer can only serve "X" amount of years in prison (where "X" is a ridiculously low number...)
the infowarrior
“...but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.”
That’s interesting, corroboration is required.
I suppose this is where the founders got this requirement for testimony against the treasonous in the Constitution.
“No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
““...but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.”
That’s interesting, corroboration is required.
I suppose this is where the founders got this requirement for testimony against the treasonous in the Constitution.
“No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.””
I think you’re right. From what little I know, our law is handed down from Biblical and Roman law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.