Death Penalty (poll)

[dairygirl4u2c]

can anyone show that it's a proven deterrent?
most criminal law books and people i've talked to and teachers etc say it's not a deterrent.
that it's not a deterrent i'd argue makes the most sense considering my points in my last post.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Deb' post='1506711' date='Apr 22 2008, 02:46 PM']This is from the University of Vermont Study in 2001:
One argument in support of capital punishment is that the threat of death deters murder more effectively than prison. However, research indicates that the death penalty is no more effective as a deterrent to murder than the punishment of life in jail. States with the death penalty on average do not have lower rates of homicide than states without the penalty. The average murder rate per 100,00 people in 1999 among death penalty states was 5.5 and the average murder rate among non-death penalty states was 3.6 (US Dept. of Justice, 2001). A study examining executions in Texas between 1984 and 1997 found that the murder rate was steady and that there was no evidence of a deterrent effect. The number of executions was found to be unrelated to murder rates (Sorenson, Wrinkle, Brewer and Marquart, 1999). Furthermore, a survey of experts from the American Society of Criminology, the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, and the Law and Society Association shows that the overwhelming majority of these experts do not believe that the death penalty is a proven deterrent to homicide. Over 80% believe the existing research fails to support a deterrence justification for the death penalty. Similarly, over 75% of those polled do not believe that increasing the number of executions, or decreasing the time spent on death row before execution, would produce a general deterrent effect (Radelet and Akers, 1995). Additionally, Attorney General Janet Reno stated at a Justice Department news briefing, "I have inquired for most of my adult life about studies that might show that the death penalty is a deterrent. And I have not seen any research that would substantiate that point." (US Dept. of Justice, 2001).

ON the Financial Aspects of it:
A study found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million per execution over the costs of a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of imprisonment for life (Cook & Slawson. 1993). On a national basis, these figures translate to an extra cost of over $700 million dollars spent since 1976 on the death penalty.

What many Americans do not realize is that the death penalty is more costly than incarcerating an inmate for life. A murder trial takes much longer when the death penalty is being pursued. The taxpayer is paying the salaries of the judges, prosecutors, public defenders, court officials, and the cost of briefs. "A 1982 study showed that if the death penalty were reintroduced in the state of New York, the cost of the capital trial alone would be more then double the cost of a life term in prison" (Bright, 1996). The Duke University study estimated that a death penalty trial takes about four times longer than a non-capital murder trial (Bright, 1996). And, of course, not every death penalty trial results in a death sentence. Based on the experience in North Carolina, the authors found that less than a third of capital trials resulted in a death sentence.

Florida spent an estimated $57 million on the death penalty from 1973 to 1988 to achieve 18 executions - that is an average of $3.2 million per execution ([i]Miami Herald[/i]). It costs six times more to execute a person in Florida than to incarcerate a prisoner for life with no parole. In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years ([i]Dallas Morning News[/i]). The death penalty costs California $90 million annually beyond the ordinary costs of the justice system - $78 million of that total incurred at the trial level ([i]Sacramento Bee[/i]). The New York Department of Correctional Services estimated that implementing the death penalty would cost the state about $118 million annually. To illustrate the cost, it is estimated that the money it would take to implement the death penalty in New York for just five years would be enough to fund 250 additional police officers and build prisons for 6,000 inmates (Lacayo, 1987).

So, if no deterrent and costs less to let them sit in prison and think about their crime til they die, the only reason I could see that we would kill people is for vengeance[/quote]

THe only reason its expensive is because the state has appeal after endless appeal which as a delaying tactic is a miscarriage of justice. Remove the endless appeal process and the costs would drop dramatically.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='kujo' post='1506773' date='Apr 22 2008, 05:24 PM']Yeah, poke holes in my opinion of when to preservation of human life by likening it to an opinion on when to end human life. Right on dude.

Anyway, I think that imprisoning Osama Bin Laden or Saddam Hussein (and others) would be a magnet for the sort of danger that I speak of. These people would call for their followers to set them free. It would be like dropping a lollypop on the ground. How long would it take for the ants to come and crawl all over it?
WORD! Thus, the Catechism states:

"The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when [b]this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor[/b]. If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person. [b]Today, in fact, given the means at the State's disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender 'today ... are very rare, if not practically non-existent."[/b] - CCC #2267[/quote]
However given the number of murders committed in prisons themselves we do not have the capability or the resources to protect the safety of persons, so executions are justified on that point alone.

[kujo]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1506844' date='Apr 22 2008, 07:10 PM']However given the number of murders committed in prisons themselves we do not have the capability or the resources to protect the safety of persons, so executions are justified on that point alone.[/quote]

The point that I believe the Catechism is making is that criminals are put to death in order to protect the innocent, not to protect other criminals. Besides which, are you saying that, rather than spending more money to hire more C.O.s, installing more security measures, and offering more counciling and other services, we should just put them to death? Better the state kills them then another criminal, eh?

I don't see the logic there, CM. Sorry.

[rkwright]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1506844' date='Apr 22 2008, 05:10 PM']However given the number of murders committed in prisons themselves we do not have the capability or the resources to protect the safety of persons, so executions are justified on that point alone.[/quote]

lol cmom isn't this a bit circular? These murders are going to murder other murders, we should just murder them first.

Of course I don't know how the prison system works and who is housed with who, and who is killing other prisoners...

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1506843' date='Apr 22 2008, 06:07 PM']THe only reason its expensive is because the state has appeal after endless appeal which as a delaying tactic is a miscarriage of justice. Remove the endless appeal process and the costs would drop dramatically.[/quote]
I just happened to wander in here...weren't we discussing appeals in another thread?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='rkwright' post='1506866' date='Apr 22 2008, 07:20 PM']lol cmom isn't this a bit circular? These murders are going to murder other murders, we should just murder them first.

Of course I don't know how the prison system works and who is housed with who, and who is killing other prisoners...[/quote]
First of all, a person legally put to death by the state isn't murdered, they are exucuted. There is a big difference. They have been duly tried and convicted of a capital crime.
They are not innocent.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1506877' date='Apr 22 2008, 06:26 PM']They have been duly tried and convicted of a capital crime.
They are not innocent.[/quote]Not all who are convicted are truly guilty.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='kujo' post='1506861' date='Apr 22 2008, 07:18 PM']The point that I believe the Catechism is making is that criminals are put to death in order to protect the innocent, not to protect other criminals. Besides which, are you saying that, rather than spending more money to hire more C.O.s, installing more security measures, and offering more counciling and other services, we should just put them to death? Better the state kills them then another criminal, eh?

I don't see the logic there, CM. Sorry.[/quote]
Excuse me, the people in prison are there because they are convicted of a crime, and have the right to be protected from other prisoners just like the guards are. The prisons are much more dangerous without the death penalty.
And yes instead of building more expensive prisons to keep convicted murders on death row for the rest of their lives, why don't we carry out the sentences they were given and execute them? Sorry if that actually seems too logical to everyone. Again I can see why atheists object, but don't see why christians do.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1506908' date='Apr 22 2008, 06:34 PM']Excuse me, the people in prison are there because they are convicted of a crime, and have the right to be protected from other prisoners just like the guards are. The prisons are much more dangerous without the death penalty.
And yes instead of building more expensive prisons to keep convicted murders on death row for the rest of their lives, why don't we carry out the sentences they were given and execute them? Sorry if that actually seems too logical to everyone. Again I can see why atheists object, but don't see why christians do.[/quote]There are mistakes in our legal system. Accidents do happen. Also, as I said in the other thread which appears to have been abandoned, to kill someone who is in a state of mortal sin is to seal his or her fate. Although that person has freely chosen his/her fate, I think that Christian charity demands to afford a soul every reasonable chance to repent. Many manuals of moral theology consistently state that material goods ought to be sacrificed for a spiritual good.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Paphnutius' post='1506920' date='Apr 22 2008, 07:39 PM']There are mistakes in our legal system. Accidents do happen. Also, as I said in the other thread which appears to have been abandoned, to kill someone who is in a state of mortal sin is to seal his or her fate. Although that person has freely chosen his/her fate, I think that Christian charity demands to afford a soul every reasonable chance to repent. Many manuals of moral theology consistently state that material goods ought to be sacrificed for a spiritual good.[/quote]
Don't you think telling someone they are gonna die on a certain date is not an incentive to repent???? If thats not incentive, I don't know what is!

[rkwright]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1506877' date='Apr 22 2008, 05:26 PM']First of all, a person legally put to death by the state isn't murdered, they are exucuted. There is a big difference. They have been duly tried and convicted of a capital crime.
They are not innocent.[/quote]

Murder is the intentional taking of life. Thats what the death penalty is. It is considered justifiable homicide, yet it is a homicide none the less.

[rkwright]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1506938' date='Apr 22 2008, 05:48 PM']Don't you think telling someone they are gonna die on a certain date is not an incentive to repent???? If thats not incentive, I don't know what is![/quote]

Ends don't justify the means. Threatening to kill someone in order to save their soul is not conversion.

[dairygirl4u2c]

so it's like in one ear goes the catechism and pope "only in the msot extreme situation, which hardly do not ever exist" and then out the mouth goes "kill em all", without an explanation of how they're objecting.
it's an interesting phenomeonon

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1506938' date='Apr 22 2008, 06:48 PM']Don't you think telling someone they are gonna die on a certain date is not an incentive to repent???? If thats not incentive, I don't know what is![/quote]
Not necessarily. As a student, I know that I am not always mindful of due dates. Also, a lot can happen in any duration of time. Just as slow drops of water will eventually erode a rock, God's grace may eventually soften the hardest of hearts. I, for one, would not be one willing to end another life and deprive that person of God's actual or sanctifying grace that may have been dispensed in the future.