neon joe wrote:
Take a look at Neil's data (data, as in facts) - he's listed the countries with the highest number of executions. Do you think that the high rate of CP in any of those countries have deterred crime?
If it isn't working anywhere else, why do you think it will work here?
How can you tell it's not working in those countries? You obviously can't, so let's not make blanket statements.
If you believe that the government already wastes too much of your money, then you might be shocked how much the death penalty costs:
So depending on the studies, one death penalty costs $1,500,000 to $2,500,000 MORE than the cost of life imprisonment.
There's an easy way to make it cheaper. Deny automatic appeals and reduce the overall bureaucracy involved. Or deny free defense for appeals. It's not like the world would run out of do-gooders who'd work out their appeal pro bono anyway.
There are other very strong reasons why I think capitol punishment is wrong: it doesn't deter crime, as is often claimed.
It's no true. It all depends on the pay off of the crime. Death penalty might not be strong deterrent against murders, but try using death penalty against shoplifters, and I guarantee, crime rates would go down. Death penalty most likely has an effect on drug offences in countries like Singapore. (Not that I agree on using death penalty on small meaningless crimes like drug trafficing.)
It costs more money, and it has a high cost for the poor souls who have to carry out the execution.
It has no cost on anyone's conscience. Nobody is forced to execute anyone. I'm sure there are many volunteers for this job.
And it can't "teach" the murderer a lesson -- they get killed. OTOH, if they are forced to reconsider their actions for all the remaining days of their lives, they may choose to repent -- and even if they don't, why should we give them an easy out?
Purpose of judicial system is not to teach, but to punish.
I want them to suffer the guilt of what they have done.
What makes you presume they have a guilty conscience.
Lastly, it seem that revenge is the only reason we execute people. Revenge is a ugly thing, and we should not lower ourselves. Nothing will bring the victim(s) back to life, and revenge is a false satisfaction.
I think revenge is a beautiful thing. A balancing act and the whole basis for the need of judicial system. Right to vengeance should be a basic human right.
As for wrongful convictions? If people really want to get rid of wrongful convictions, get rid of the jury, not the death penalty. When you put 12 potentially stupid, bigoted, racist, or just plain evil people on the jury, is it really that big of a surprise you can end up with wrongful convictions. If you have seen 12 Angry Men
, you know what I mean. Murder trials are basically decided in the jury selection. Consider this, if you were a murderer would you rather have BF or Neil sitting in your jury? I thought so.