Studies say death penalty deters crime

[Abbey Marie]

Studies say death penalty deters crime
By ROBERT TANNER,
AP National Writer
1 hour, 9 minutes ago

Anti-death penalty forces have gained momentum in the past few years, with a moratorium in Illinois, court disputes over lethal injection in more than a half-dozen states and progress toward outright abolishment in New Jersey.

The steady drumbeat of DNA exonerations — pointing out flaws in the justice system — has weighed against capital punishment. The moral opposition is loud, too, echoed in Europe and the rest of the industrialized world, where all but a few countries banned executions years ago.

What gets little notice, however, is a series of academic studies over the last half-dozen years that claim to settle a once hotly debated argument — whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes. They count between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer....

Story:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/...y_deterrence_4

[-Cp]

Posted here:
http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?t=4309

[Abbey Marie]

Well, technically, mine was posted a few hours earlier.

Thanks, though!

[waterrescuedude2000]

I mean I think the death penalty is a great idea. I also think it should be a public event where we can jeer at these idiots. They are the worst kind of scum anyways. But I say use a noose screw this lethal injection. I think that this crap about it being cruel and unusual punishment is a bunch of crap. what about the victims of these people shouldn't THAT be called cruel and unusual??? Also a noose would be cheaper than paying for the drugs. I say save us some tax money.

I also feel that castration would be a great deterant for rapists. But screw this chemical castration use a dull sword.

[diuretic]

If one jurisdiction has the death penalty and one doesn't then the chances of an innocent person being executed in the first jurisdiction is greater than in the second jurisdiction.

[Yurt]

Studies, schmudies, if you know what you do will result in death, I GUARANTEE you it will deter more people.

I stole stuff as a kid *gasp* you know, little stuff. But one day I got cocky and stole from the science museum in SD repeatedly. Invisible ink, just came out, very hot, made a wee racket at my j.high selling it. Anyhooo, I knew that if I got caught they would just turn me over to my mom and probably nothing would happen (probably would, but then I thought it would not). Had I known the penalty was more severe, like say a hand chopped off, I would never have thought about it.

Cruel?

Since this is in religion, it appears my thread was not, I don't think such a harsh penalty was forbidden.

I like the religion slant on this. I think during the biblical times the punishment was alot more severe for most things, and for the most part it worked.

[nevadamedic]

Studies, schmudies, if you know what you do will result in death, I GUARANTEE you it will deter more people.

I stole stuff as a kid *gasp* you know, little stuff. But one day I got cocky and stole from the science museum in SD repeatedly. Invisible ink, just came out, very hot, made a wee racket at my j.high selling it. Anyhooo, I knew that if I got caught they would just turn me over to my mom and probably nothing would happen (probably would, but then I thought it would not). Had I known the penalty was more severe, like say a hand chopped off, I would never have thought about it.

Cruel?

Since this is in religion, it appears my thread was not, I don't think such a harsh penalty was forbidden.

I like the religion slant on this. I think during the biblical times the punishment was alot more severe for most things, and for the most part it worked.

Great example.

[diuretic]

Studies, schmudies, if you know what you do will result in death, I GUARANTEE you it will deter more people.

...........<snipped>

Criminals don't think they're going to get caught. I must admit to being a bit cynical about the value of general deterrence in sentencing.

[Geolibertarian]

If the death penalty results in even one innocent dead, then that's 1,000 innocents too many. How is it rational to consider the government too incompetant to health care, pension plans or other assistence yet wise enough to accurately judge the guilty and the innocent with a 100% accuracy rate?

[Hugh Lincoln]

If the death penalty results in even one innocent dead, then that's 1,000 innocents too many.

Never has society accepted the argument that the possibility - even the certainty - of some innocent convictions means we should not have a system of criminal justice and punishment.

William F. Buckley, Jr. once said, "the death penalty has a 100 percent effectiveness rate against... recidivism."

I don't like the death penalty much, personally. But those who are against it aren't usually anti-crime, they're pro-crime, and I like that even less.

[diuretic]

Never has society accepted the argument that the possibility - even the certainty - of some innocent convictions means we should not have a system of criminal justice and punishment.

William F. Buckley, Jr. once said, "the death penalty has a 100 percent effectiveness rate against... recidivism."

I don't like the death penalty much, personally. But those who are against it aren't usually anti-crime, they're pro-crime, and I like that even less.

Wiliam F. Buckley is a smart-arse without much wit. On that logic we should have mass suicide, there would be no crime then.

Society accepts our criminal justice system, based as it is on probability rather than certainty, simply because until Utopia arrives, it's the best we can do. Of course innocent people are convicted, the problem is to keep those numbers to the minimum. That's why the death penalty is unfair. You can allow a wrongly convicted person out of prison and compensate them, a posthumous pardon means nothing to the poor bastard who was executed by the state although innocent.

And I'm most definitely not pro-crime.

[actsnoblemartin]

I have heard of this report.

Studies say death penalty deters crime
By ROBERT TANNER,
AP National Writer
1 hour, 9 minutes ago

Anti-death penalty forces have gained momentum in the past few years, with a moratorium in Illinois, court disputes over lethal injection in more than a half-dozen states and progress toward outright abolishment in New Jersey.

The steady drumbeat of DNA exonerations — pointing out flaws in the justice system — has weighed against capital punishment. The moral opposition is loud, too, echoed in Europe and the rest of the industrialized world, where all but a few countries banned executions years ago.

What gets little notice, however, is a series of academic studies over the last half-dozen years that claim to settle a once hotly debated argument — whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes. They count between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer....

Story:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/...y_deterrence_4

[theHawk]

I say we use the death penalty on child molesters. If there is dna evidence it should be automatic death.

[diuretic]

I say we use the death penalty on child molesters. If there is dna evidence it should be automatic death.

I've said this elsewhere but I may as well say it here.

If the penalty for child molestation is death then you will not have a lot of children molested. You will, however, have a lot of children molested and then murdered.

[Abbey Marie]

I've said this elsewhere but I may as well say it here.

If the penalty for child molestation is death then you will not have a lot of children molested. You will, however, have a lot of children molested and then murdered.

I guess that is true. There would be nothing to lose by killing the child, and their silence to gain. How about child molester castration?