capital punishment?

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by OptimusRoo, Sep 14, 2015.

?

do you believe in capital punishment?

  1. yes

    11.1%
  2. no

    88.9%
  1. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Except, I haven't. If you really think otherwise, show it. But you can't. Because you cannot prove something that doesn't exist. You are back to your habit of misrepresenting your links.

    Well first, they are not mine. They are independent and highly regarded journalists and economists and all evidence and reason clearly indicates they are correct, hence all this obfuscation on your part. But you have unwittingly summed up your belief with this, " Let's say there is, against all evidence and reason, a significant net deterrent effect from the current death penalty operations - so what?". You really don't care if the death penalty is a deterrent to murder. Fact and reason are just not relevant to you. Your belief trumps fact and reason all the time. As I have repeatedly said here and elsewhere, facts do matter.

    Well we are back to your paranoia with respect to government, a trait you share with our right wingnut brethren.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Post #6, first link. The site has compiled much of the published research in the field, including the actual studies referred to in the biased and poorly informed mass media article whose claims you have swallowed as "fact".
    They read like biased and naive people who have made some basic errors in their research and reasoning. What evidence and reason indicates to you that they are likely to be correct?

    Meanwhile, plenty of evidence and reasoning indicates they are likely to be wrong, including that of the major researchers in the field. You simply deny that those people and that research exists, and you refuse to comprehend the reasoning presented to you. Why?

    Not really, no. It's obvious that it can't be much of a deterrent, and the bad effects of allowing it are quite significant. Whatever deterrent remains after all counter-effects have been subtracted and the various problems allowed for (killing the innocent, creating an attractive form of suicide for psychos, motivating the murder of witnesses to capital crimes, deflection of resources from more effective deterrents, etc etc etc) is not in my opinion worth the large and historically inevitable bad consequences of allowing the State to kill its citizens on purpose.

    Capital punishment creates the governmental version of a moral hazard. Just say no.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2015
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Except as is often the case with you, that isn’t true either, what you did was post a link to an advocacy web site which contained links to other sites which sold publications. And here is the thing about that “biased and poorly informed mass media article”. There was more than one article and you have not been able to prove, nor have you even attempted to prove they were factually in error or biased. Just because reality isn’t consistent with your beliefs it doesn’t mean reality is biased or incorrect. In summarily dismissing fact and reason you are doing the exact same things are right wingnut conservative brethren do.
    Then you should be able to prove your allegations. But you haven’t because you can’t because your charges are bogus.
    Except, that isn’t true either, I suggest you go back and reread this discussion.
    And you think any of that makes sense…really? The studies do show the death penalty is a deterrent to murder. That is the science and that is what a number of very credible economists have concluded including a Nobel laureate.

    But as you clearly stated in your last post, this isn’t about evidence, or reason with you, it’s all belief and ideology. And your really don’t care about fact or reason.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    Here in Denmark capital punishment haven't been carried out for decades.

    Our murder rate: 0.8
    US murder rate: 4.7

    Conclude from that what you want.
     
  8. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Denmark's population is about half of that of a major US city. The US is about 60 times larger in population. Denmark has about 16k square miles. The US land mass contains about 4 million square miles. Additionally, the US is much more culturally and ethnically diversified than Demark....not really a very good comparison don't you think?

    This is about what works in the US.
     
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Three posters now - not just me - have shown you in detail the bias in your media articles and questionable nature of the claims therein. You hae responded with denial, not counter argument.
    No, they don't. That's why you base your arguments on misrepresentations in the mass media. I linked you to a compilation of the actual studies, the actual science involved, so you can improve you arguments regarding deterrence. Others (James, Bells) have as well. You have not taken advantage of this opportunity.
    When you have reread the phrase "very credible economists" a couple of times, light may dawn.

    And you still have the actual issue to address: whether the death penalty is worth the risk and cost. Fixating on one of the possible benefits is avoidance.
    So use all of Europe. You'll get exactly the same pattern to explain.
     
  10. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    Sorry, joe, but the question wasn't about what works in the US. It was about the effect of capital punishment and whether or not you believe in it.

    I don't see how the size of Denmark vs the US matters. Or why the ethnic make-up of my country does either.
     
  11. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Oh, I suggest you actually read the pages of discussion which preceded your post. Pay attention to the studies which have been discussed.

    The discussion was about reducing murder rates, not about actual murder rates. And the discussion has been about studies conducted in the US which have found capital punishment is an effective deterrent and does reduce murder rates. Actual murder rates are affected by many cultural factors.

    My ancestors came to the US from Sweden 135 years ago. They settled in a small rural community with other Swedish immigrants. All crime, not just murder, is virtually nonexistent within that community. People never locked anything. Homes were always unlocked. People policed themselves. Professional police were hours away. But when population density and diversity increases so does crime. So you cannot honestly compare murder rates in one country with another without considering cultural factors and cultural factors are influenced by geography.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2015
  12. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    LOL, well Iceaura, you can have a thousand or a million posters sign up for the anti-death penalty squads but that won't change the facts. And you have and probably will continue to misrepresent those facts and your "links" and the links of others. But you cannot change them. Funny, you didn't mind the "mass media" when it supports your beliefs. You have often referenced articles in the "mass media". The unfortunate fact for you is the science just doesn't support your beliefs and the news sources are very credible (e.g. New York Times, Associated Press, CBS). What you have done is obfuscate in order to avoid those facts.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    LOL, oh, and what is that suppose to mean exactly? The fact is these studies were conducted by and reviewed by a number of very credible economists and their conclusions are not consistent with your beliefs.

    You don't think saving lives is a benefit? You have claimed there are costs associated with the death penalty, You have been repeatedly asked to specifically name them, define them with some degree of specificity, and quantify them and to date you have been unable to do so. And just where do you get this notion that I have fixated on one benefit? Have I not repeatedly mentioned your fixation on deterrence excluding all the other benefits afforded by the death penalty (e.g. use in crime fighting, and providing knowledge and comfort to the families of victims)? You are the one who has repeatedly asserted there are great costs associated with the death penalty, so name, define, and quantify them with some degree of specificity...something you have been unable to do.

    As previously and repeatedly pointed out, there are significant cultural and diversity issues between the US, Denmark, and all European countries for hat matter. So it is an error to compare Denmark, or any and all of Europe with American murder rates. The US is far more culturally and ethnically diversified than Europe and has a very different history.

    Additionally, as much as you may wish it were, this isn't about comparing murder rates, it's about reducing them. Murder rates in the US are already higher. And the evidence, the science shows, the death penalty lowers murder rates. It saves lives. That is what he science says, as much as that pains you. Facts are facts, and belief doesn't trump science.
     
  13. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Apparently you are never going to read, even, let alone deal with, that actual scientific studies people have discussed here. Three, maybe four, posters here have attempted to draw your attention to the actual science in the field, without success. Until you do, your claims as what's in that science and what it says are going to become increasingly divorced from reality.
    And I did so, more than once - not all of them, of course, but a selection of the more obvious, with examples. They haven't been quantified, to my knowledge - so?

    They are obvious costs and serious risks, and you are not dealing with them.
    Sure you have - including right after one of the three or four posts (Bundy, McVeigh, Unabomber, etc) in which I directly addressed those disturbing moral hazards you presented as benefits of capital punishment - namely the State using it to coerce information and confessions, and threaten alleged criminals.

    The parallels with the State's use of torture to threaten and coerce are direct, and some of the same problems attend.
     
  14. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910

    LOL...and you keep misrepresenting your posts and your links. As has been endlessly pointed out to you the science doesn't support your beliefs, hence your effort to discredit it and he journals which have published the science (e.g. The New York Times, CBS, and the Associated Press, et al). Suddenly, when they publish articles citing science which isn't supportive of your ideological beliefs they become biased and poorly written as you have repeatedly alleged?


    I guess you need another reminder of what the science actually says:


    "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.


    The reports have horrified death penalty opponents and several scientists, who vigorously question the data and its implications.


    So far, the studies have had little impact on public policy. New Jersey's commission on the death penalty this year dismissed the body of knowledge on deterrence as "inconclusive."


    But the ferocious argument in academic circles could eventually spread to a wider audience, as it has in the past.


    "Science does really draw a conclusion. It did. There is no question about it," said Naci Mocan, an economics professor at the University of Colorado at Denver. "The conclusion is there is a deterrent effect."


    A 2003 study he co-authored, and a 2006 study that re-examined the data, found that each execution results in five fewer homicides, and commuting a death sentence means five more homicides. "The results are robust, they don't really go away," he said. "I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty (deters) — what am I going to do, hide them?"


    Statistical studies like his are among a dozen papers since 2001 that capital punishment has deterrent effects. They all explore the same basic theory — if the cost of something (be it the purchase of an apple or the act of killing someone) becomes too high, people will change their behavior (forego apples or shy away from murder). " CBS, AP http://www.cbsnews.com/news/death-penalty-deters-murders-studies-say/


    You are not being honest Iceaura, which unfortunately is the norm with you.



    Oh, no you haven't. Show me where you have specifically identified these costs you have repeatedly alleged are incurred by the death penalty. You can't. Because you have not identified your alleged costs. Additionally, you want a cost benefit analysis when you cannot even name much less quantify these alleged costs...seriously? What you have done is repeatedly make a very generalized claim that these alleged social costs exist without any support. You can't even define what the hell they are beyond social costs.



    Well if they are so obvious, why have you been repeatedly unable to name even one?



    What you have done is express a belief government will always abuse its power, a belief shared by right wingnuts. And it has been repeatedly pointed out to you you are wrong. You claimed that where the death penalty is available the state will always abuse it. And I showed you evidence your belief wasn't rooted in reality. I cited Kansas as a case in point. In the decades in which the death penalty has been on the books in Red State Kansas, Kansas has not executed even one person. And you think that is abuse....seriously? It isn't.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2015
  15. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    Nope. Deterrence doesn't even enter into my opposition to the death penalty.
     
  16. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Fine, at least you are honest about it. For some, like the papacy, this isn't an issue where fact and reason matter. Opposition to the death penalty rests upon a moral belief ,and there is nothing wrong with that. For me, it's a public defense issue. Deterrence and the other benefits afforded by the death penalty warrant the death penalty for particularly heinous crimes and where guilt is certain (e.g. Ted Bundy, the Carr brothers, et al). The science indicates capital punishment is a deterrent and prevents additional murders.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2015
  17. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Someday you may read some of this science, such as what I and Bells and James have linked for your convenience. After you do that, you will be able to remind other people of what the science actually says.

    You have never backed that claim up with evidence and argument. You have ignored - even denied the existence - of the evidence and arguments against that claim, such as have been linked and posted here on this thread.

    Repetition of unsupported claims does not make them more plausible.

    Your touching and naive faith in the "certainty" of State prosecutions and convictions is noted, but in US real life Texas provides the type specimen of capital punishment in action.
    meanwhile: Ted Bundy apparently committed several murders and heinous assaults in Florida because he was attracted by the death penalty there. You invoke him as an example: Is that your idea of deterrence?

    The Unabomber was caught because agents of the State promised the critical informants the death penalty would not be sought by the State. Are you including the deterrent effect on informants, and consequent extension of criminal careers, in your praise of "deterrence"?

    Notice that in the particular actual scientific papers your biased and slipshod media articles briefly referenced, such factors are ignored - never corrected for.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2015
  18. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    Moral belief is certainly a factor but I don't consider not wanting to make an irreversible error a "moral belief". Our courts are far too quick to jump to "certain" conclusions for us to trust them with matters of life and death.

    Even if there is some value to deterrence, which is questionable, the death penalty is mostly used as a form of retribution after the fact, which has no benefit for public defense.
     
    Kristoffer likes this.
  19. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    LOL...I am always amazed at the blatant lies you are willing to tell. You, James and Bells have not linked to the "science". What you have done is provided links and misrepresented those links, claiming they say things they clearly do not and then continuously referencing them. You have been repeatedly requested to provide specific text from your links which validates your assertions and you have repeatedly failed to do so. In no small part because that text doesn't exist. That is what you always do. You a long history of misrepresenting (i.e. lying) about your references.

    Let's look at your assertions with respect to James R. James R has posted 5 times in this thread. He and I discussed conviction error rates. James R had originally asserted that 20% of US convictions were erroneous convictions. After James R did a little research he found the error rates were as high as 4% and not the 20% he had previously cited and most of the convictions studied occurred prior to the availability of DNA evidence. And some of that 4% were eventually overturned by appeals courts. The discussion with James R had nothing to do with the deterrent effect found in the studies I referenced and which are giving you so much gastrointestinal pain.

    Bells has done what Bells always does, attempt to rescue you when you get in trouble. What you and Bells have done is to attempt to discredit the science of the last few decades by referencing criticism of the studies I referenced. Fegan, one of the critics referenced, claimed that because murders were ignorant of the number of executions, that proved the death penalty had no deterrent effect. And frankly, that is stupid. Whither a murder knows the exact number of executions is irrelevant to deterrence. As I pointed out, the only relevant factor is the murder's belief that the death penalty is credible.

    Except, I have. Your refusal to acknowledge reality isn't my problem. I suggest you go back and read my posts. The only one ignoring evidence and reason here is you.

    Hmm, so you don't think credible academic studies are unsupported.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Ahh, you Iceaura is the only one making unsupported claims and lies and then repeating them ad nauseum.

    Well in real life, when you cited a Texas case as an example of a wrongful conviction, you kinda left out a lot of material facts.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I suggest your review the error rate discussion in this thread between James R and myself. But you and I know that won't happen because you have no use for facts or reason when they do not support your beliefs.

    Oh, and you have proof of this? If so now is the time to show it...talk about unsupported beliefs!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    "There, on January 2 in a local tavern, he watched his alma mater UW defeat Michigan in the Rose Bowl.[184] Five days later he stole a car and drove to Atlanta, where he boarded a bus and arrived in Tallahassee, Florida, on January 8. He rented a room under the alias Chris Hagen at a boarding house near the Florida State University (FSU) campus. Bundy later said that he initially resolved to find legitimate employment and refrain from further criminal activity, knowing he could probably remain free and undetected in Florida indefinitely as long as he did not attract the attention of police;[185] but his lone job application, at a construction site, had to be abandoned when he was asked to produce identification.[186] He reverted to his old habits of shoplifting and stealing credit cards from women's wallets left in shopping carts." Wikipedia

    Except as previously discussed that too is not true. I suggest you go back and reread the discussion on the Unabomber.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The Unabomber was given a life sentence in exchange for his guilty plea, after he had been investigated by the FBI and after he had been arrested by and charged by the FBI...oops. There was no information deal with the Unabomber as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, the only one ignoring the evidence and ignoring reality is you my dear Iceaura and you have been and continue to be dishonest to boot.


    "A federal grand jury indicted Kaczynski in April 1996 on 10 counts of illegally transporting, mailing, and using bombs. He was also charged with killing Scrutton, Mosser, and Murray.[99] Initially, the government prosecution team indicated that it would seek the death penalty for Kaczynski after it was authorized by United States Attorney General Janet Reno. David Kaczynski's attorney asked the former FBI agent who made the match between the Unabomber's manifesto and Kaczynski to ask for leniency—he was horrified to think that turning his brother in might result in his brother's death. Eventually, Kaczynski was able to avoid the death penalty by pleading guilty to all the government's charges, on January 22, 1998. Later, Kaczynski attempted to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing it was involuntary. Judge Garland Ellis Burrell Jr. denied his request. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld that decision.[100]" Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski#Arrest

    But if there had been an information for leniency deal, it would have proven something I have repeatedly said here. Law enforcement has used leniency as a bargaining tool in order to get more information and solve more crimes and provide victim families some comfort (e.g. returning the bodies of victims to their families and knowledge which victimized families often need). That is one of the other benefits afforded by the death penalty. You have NO evidence the death penalty suppresses information as you have alleged.


    LOL...well just because you don't like the evidence, it doesn't mean it is slipshod or biased. Many credible scientists have conducted and reviewed these studies and found them sound including a Nobel Laureate. And unfortunately for you, just because credible journalists working for credible news sources publish their work in credible journals, it doesn't make them or their work slipshod or biased.

    "But, Mr. Becker (Nobel Laureate) added, “the evidence of a variety of types — not simply the quantitative evidence — has been enough to convince me that capital punishment does deter and is worth using for the worst sorts of offenses.” http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    Sound familiar...? It should, it has been repeated several times for your edification.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2015
  20. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Well, those are your beliefs. But there is no retributions in self-defense. Even if you don't believe the science, was it not just a few weeks ago a couple of murders escaped from prison? And prisoners can murder inside prison almost as easily as outside of prison.
     
  21. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    Executing somebody after he has committed a crime is not self-defence.

    Is that a bad thing?
     
  22. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Oh, let's see if you feel the same way after you have shared a jail cell with one of these guys. And you don't believe the science showing the death penalty is a deterrent.
     
  23. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,057
    The meaning of self-defence doesn't change whether I'm in prison or not. Execution is not self-defence.

    And the possibility of being killed in prison is a deterrent to going to prison, isn't it? Behave and you improve your chances of survival.

    Even IF it is a deterrent, it isn't ENOUGH of a deterrent to be worth the risk. It's better that a thousand guilty men go free than that one innocent man is punished for something he didn't do. I doubt that deterrence can beat those odds.
     

Share This Page