Country Living
Country Living, Country Skills
Country People

KountryLife.com - A Country Living Resource and Community
Community
Message Board
Country Topics
Trading Post
Memory Lane
Country Skills
Country Cooking

Channels
Gardening
Livestock
The Kitchen
Machinery
Tools

Photographs
Photo Gallery
Vintage Photos
Special Collections

Fun
Country Humor
Country Sounds
Coloring Book
Interactive Story

Farm Tractors
Pictures
Tractor Parts
Tractor Manuals

Miscellaneous
Classic Trucks
Antique Tractors
Modern Tractors
Site Map
Links Page
Contact Us

  
Country Discussion Topics
To add your comments to this topic, click on one of the 'Reply' links below.

Speaking of the death penalty
[Return to Topics]

steve19438    Posted 12-14-2004 at 15:38:54       [Reply]  [Send Email]
has it EVER been proven to be a deterent to crime?
i like the idea the french had with it's penal colony in french gueana.(sp) (devils island)
i think the united staes should have a penal colony; how bout mississippi??? build a 20ft wall around it and let the criminals run it.


Dave 2N    Posted 12-15-2004 at 05:29:57       [Reply]  [Send Email]
Now Stevie-
Just when it began to look like we had found some common ground, "there you go again!"


steve19438    Posted 12-16-2004 at 14:19:38       [Reply]  [Send Email]
dave, dave, dave. i just asked a question! stop putting ideas and words in my mouth. i am all for the death penalty!!!! i just don't think it is a deterrent to crime.


Indydirtfarmer    Posted 12-15-2004 at 03:38:29       [Reply]  [Send Email]
No "recipient" of the death penalty has EVER been acused of repeting their offense. Sounds like a "deterrant" that works to me.....John


big fred    Posted 12-14-2004 at 22:06:25       [Reply]  [No Email]
Has it ever been shown that deterrence is the only reason for punishing criminals?


Jet9N    Posted 12-14-2004 at 19:37:50       [Reply]  [No Email]
How do you define "deterent"? It sure cuts down
on repeat offenders.

JMHO

Jet


Jimbob    Posted 12-14-2004 at 18:59:40       [Reply]  [No Email]
I do believe the ultimate fear of death is a deterrent to crime, but some will always believe they can get away with crimes. Others are so confused, they have no regard for others because they have no regard for themselves.


Peanut    Posted 12-14-2004 at 18:50:17       [Reply]  [No Email]
Steve, C'mon now. There cannot be solid proof anywhere that capital punishment is a deterrent for the applicable crime. You may find some "massaged" numbers somewhere but let's look at it at a more primal level:

If I had the intention of taking someone out, I would be very interested in whatever I could do to avoid being caught. Common sense approach first. But underneath that layer is a more emotional layer that is probably rather ugly. If you have reached the point you want to take someone out, you probably don't care what happens to you (except for the sociopaths such as Scott Peterson). Assuming the latter is not true, you are emotionally destroyed and will take a life without fear of death yourself. So, I do not feel the death penalty is a deterrent in any way. Maybe ... this is all theory of course.

Now for the less sinister look at this:

If you are convicted of a major crime that warrants the death penalty, I would prefer you live our life in a he!! called prison. Your life will be over. No chance of paroll. I want to make sure you cannot look forward to an easy "out" by injection or gas. I want to see you suffer for what you caused the victim's family. Sound evil and expensive? Maybe evil but not even on the same playing field as the crime committed to get you on death row. Not expensive either studies have shown that dath row inmates cost as much as a "lifer w/o paroll" due to the appeals process and solitary confinement for them. Pick your poison!!! I would rather have control over criminal punishment than letting serial killer (Jeffery Domer) or a mass murderer (Timothy McVeah) relax into death prescribed by a doctor.


Dave Munson    Posted 12-14-2004 at 18:27:12       [Reply]  [No Email]
When I lived in Lincoln, NE, a co-workers daughter was tortured and murdered. I was working at the VA mortgage center while going to school. His daughter was a few years younger than I: nice girl.

The killers were caught and after a long trial, executed. I guaranty that they will do no more harm.

It deters the convicted guilty from committing another crime.


Red Dave    Posted 12-14-2004 at 18:20:35       [Reply]  [No Email]
The death penalty is a guaranteed to eliminate recidivism, at least in those whose sentence is carried out.


That Mississippi crack shows an elitist, racist attitude that I find troubling. The citizens of Mississippi deserve an apology.


slim    Posted 12-15-2004 at 05:56:10       [Reply]  [No Email]
Thanks. Here in Mississippi we have the death penalty and it is used. I guarantee that those executed never commit another crime.

slim


MT Pockets    Posted 12-14-2004 at 19:08:51       [Reply]  [Send Email]
Red Dave,thank you.I agree with both statements you made.Zip Code is lacking in several areas.He has revealed them numerous times.


have a book    Posted 12-14-2004 at 18:17:25       [Reply]  [No Email]
that I bought in Nottingham.England a few years ago. It documented the executions , names, offenses they were charged with. It dated in the 1800s. Most of them were by hanging, with a huge crowd of people gathered from the countryside. Most of the offenses were not of capital crimes either. At the end of the book, one of the wardens who had a hand in the writing of this book made his own observation. He said that it seems no matter how many we execute, the crimes keep getting committed. That was not his exact words, but close. On the other side of it, in those days, people were left to starve, children were treated as unwanted animals, so if you had to steal to eat, I guess you took the chance. Death penalty was abolished in 1929 I think.
REt


RusselAZ    Posted 12-14-2004 at 17:33:48       [Reply]  [Send Email]
The death penalty is not in place to serve society as a deterrent to crime. It's purpose in a society is to remove members from it that have shown they are a danger to the society.

The liberal argument of "deterrent" is a useless question. Penalties applied to all the same are a deterrent.

If someone killed you would you then still make the same statement? No matter at what age it is done, murder is still murder.


MT Pockets    Posted 12-14-2004 at 17:21:26       [Reply]  [Send Email]
Zip code, could you please explain what you mean about Mississippi?


steve19438    Posted 12-14-2004 at 17:55:23       [Reply]  [Send Email]
random choice.


MT Pockets    Posted 12-14-2004 at 19:02:55       [Reply]  [Send Email]
Zip Code,how about an apology to the "random choice" citizens?


Redmud    Posted 12-14-2004 at 17:11:51       [Reply]  [No Email]
It is a proven fact that the death penalty is a deterent. It may take 20 years or better before they snuff him out, but keep tabs on Scott Peterson. He will kill no more. Now all bets are off if the left coast liberals cut him loose.


Doc    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:44:33       [Reply]  [No Email]
I never had a problem with the death penalty. I still don't.

However, I do have a problem do to recent events in where DNA evidence is proving many people that we were certain to be guilty actually being in prison falsely convicted and don't say it's insignificant because there have been many cases proven wrong and more being investigated...... now I have a problem with the whole process.

My conscience bothers me to think that even one innocent person has been put to death by false witness. That makes me think that it could happen to anyone. If we ever come up with a full proof method of conviction then I would not have this cloud..... but until then I will.




RN    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:43:05       [Reply]  [No Email]
Why would you pick on Mississippi? Think of what might happen with a prison labor colony- low wages would compete with China, work force not encumbered by OSHA, possible corrupt politicians sentanced acting as administrators? Here an idea- 90 days sentance for criminal while victims family learns autopsy procedure, then turn convicted murderer over to deceased family - state steps out of picture for next year until disposal of body paperwork needs completion? Take lesson from Saudi's. RN


Yes    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:12:01       [Reply]  [No Email]
i never kilt anyone cause I didn't want to be kilt for doing it
So it does work contrary to the belief of many liberals who don't believe it does.

The problem is, that, not all convicted murderers Are executed so it is unequally applied and causes hope in the minds of people capable of murder. If it was a guaranteed fact that if all murderers were executed than the murderer rate would surely go down.

In other words "enforce the law"


Zenia    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:27:57       [Reply]  [No Email]
Naw, they would just make sure there were no witnesses.


OK    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:40:12       [Reply]  [No Email]
You might be accurate in that fact, but with the advancements in Forensics witnesses might not be needed as much as in the past.


mark    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:48:41       [Reply]  [No Email]
I also think with robotics advanced the way
they are people should be made to die in the
same fashion as their victim. If you beat
someone to death you get beat to death, stab
someone 47 times with a cultivator tine guess
whats waitin for you


No. (Zenia)    Posted 12-14-2004 at 15:57:35       [Reply]  [No Email]
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
DETERRENCE and the FBI UNIFORM CRIME REPORT 2003
The South (the region with the most executions) again had the highest murder rate in the country in 2003.
The two states with the most executions in 2003, Texas (24) and Oklahoma (14) saw increases in their murder rates from 2002 to 2003. Both states had murder rates above the national average in 2003: Texas - 6.4, and Oklahoma - 5.9. The top 13 states in terms of murder rates were all death penalty states.

From Amnesty International:
The Death Penalty is Expensive

Capital punishment is a far more expensive system than one whose maximum penalty is life in prison.


- A New York study estimated the cost of an execution at three times that of life imprisonment.
- In Florida, each execution costs the state $3.2 million, compared to $600,000 for life imprisonment.
- Studies in California, Kansas, Maryland, and North Carolina all have concluded that capital punishment is far more expensive than keeping someone in prison for life.
The greatest costs of the death penalty are incurred prior to and during trial, not in post-conviction proceedings. Even if all post-conviction proceedings were abolished, the death penalty system would still be more expensive than alternative sentences.


- Under a death penalty system, trials have two separate phases (conviction and sentencing); they are typically preceded by special motions and extra jury selection questioning.
- More investigative costs are generally incurred in capital cases, particularly by the prosecution.
- When death penalty trials result in a verdict less than death or are reversed, the taxpayer first incurs all the extra costs of capital pretrial and trial proceedings and must then also pay either for the cost of incarcerating the prisoner for life or the costs of a retrial (which often leads to a life sentence).
The death penalty diverts resources from genuine crime control measures. Spending money on the death penalty system means:


- Taking it away from existing components of the criminal justice system, such as prosecutions of drug crimes, domestic violence, and child
- Reducing the resources states put into crime prevention, education and rehabilitation, investigative resources, and drug treatment programs.


"Elimination of the death penalty would result in a net savings to the state of at least several tens of millions of dollars annually, and a net savings to local governments in the millions to tens of millions of dollars on a statewide basis." –Joint Legislative Budget Committee of the California Legislature, Sept. 9, 1999


answer to why the high co    Posted 12-14-2004 at 18:25:49       [Reply]  [No Email]
It is quite simple really, First, who makes the laws, lawyers. They have woven a maze of appeals, stays and god knows how many other ways to enrich their pockets. You got to know they don't give one damn about the accused, it is how long we can string this out. Unfortunately, it is not going to get better, only worse
REt


yes but-    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:12:01       [Reply]  [No Email]
you have not addressed the collective impact of justice not served in agrievous capital cases. those families that have lost innocent loved ones are too suffer because it saves a states assets?

the death penalty far outreaches monies saved.

mud


Zenia    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:26:50       [Reply]  [No Email]
My grandfather was murdered by some thugs who beat him, causing him to have a heart attack. He was walking the dog while my grandmother was in chemotherapy. She came out to find an empty parking space where their car had been, and her little dog Pogo waiting for her. My grandfather lay dead in the park across the street.

The three "kids" were caught after a police chase in the stolen car, but they got off. One (age 19) got two years, the other two nothing but probation for squealing on the 19 year old.

My best friend's sister was brutally raped and murdered, when I was 20, she was a 21 year old beauty, smart, full of life and had so much potentially ahead of her. They never caught the guy.

I can tell you more chilling stories, personal stories. I knew a beautiful woman who was shot dead in cold blood, along with two others just doing their job as meat inspectors. The guy who did it was very deliberate about it, he is probably going to get the death penalty.

Killing the killers is not justice, it is lowering to the level of those animals. It won't heal the families of the loved ones. An eye for an eye leaves the world blind, after all.

There is no justice, when it comes to punishing murderers. Nothing can be done to make things right. Not killing them, not locking them up for life. But locking them up keeps them from harming anyone again. I fully understand the bitter anger and wanting them dead, I have wished death on the worst of the worst but to actually kill them? I could not do that. I think it's morally wrong.


mud    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:57:22       [Reply]  [No Email]
first off, i am sorry to read of your grandfather.
it makes no sense.

i am no stanger to senseless death, and my guess is that others here have had their share of grief and loss. loss is loss.

that said: it runs counter to the safegaurds of society to repel the death penalty on grounds of exspense. that was your earlier point.

on another point: you say
"There is no justice, when it comes to punishing murderers". This is where you and I have differ, immensely.

regards-

mud



Zenia    Posted 12-14-2004 at 21:01:14       [Reply]  [No Email]
What I mean is no matter what you do to the murderer, the worst injustice has already been done, cannot ever be undone, nothing you can do to the killer, whether painless euthanasia or slow death by torture, nothing will ever make what he has done go away or ever be right again. That injustice the murderer has commited will never be righted, that is what I mean by there is no justice. Maybe I should have there will never be enough justice, no matter how far you take the punishment.

Thanks for your comment about my grandfather. Yes, I have seen too much senseless death and trajedy. Loss is loss, this is true. I have lost both parents, all grandparents, cousin and many friends. But the loss of a relative who is murdered, or a dear friend knowing she was brutalized and terrorized and then killed in a horrific way makes the loss harder to come to grips with in my experience. Perhaps, too because while I am still alive, I too have been a victim of that slow-motion complete shock and disbelief this could be really happening kind of violence. I have looked face to face into the deranged, criminally insane eyes of a mad killer, and it chills me to the bone to think of it. I learned to hate. But I got past it. It took nearly 20 years before I could even talk about it. I do not disagree that such a human is scarcely human any longer, but I still do not believe it is our right to take a life, however vile that person is.


mud    Posted 12-15-2004 at 06:52:43       [Reply]  [No Email]
zenia,
as we mourn those we have lost we will be comforted. i dont know how this happens, but i do beieve it does.
good memories of loved ones come to aid the trouble heart. i believe in this too.
i understand that you believe that society has no right in taking any life, however vile.
this is where we differ.


no it's not mark    Posted 12-14-2004 at 16:39:24       [Reply]  [No Email]
When someone commits murder they cease
to be human, they have become an animal.
The only thing to do with a killer animal is the
humane thing and put them down.


big al    Posted 12-14-2004 at 15:46:46       [Reply]  [No Email]
stop opening your mouth. every time you do you look like an equine posterior.


Fawteen    Posted 12-14-2004 at 15:45:29       [Reply]  [No Email]
Well, I guaran-damn-tee it deters at LEAST one person every time it's invoked.

That's good enough for me.


SusieQ    Posted 12-14-2004 at 17:35:06       [Reply]  [No Email]
Personally, those who commit murder, over and over can not be rehabilitated to become good citizens, lets face it, more and more prisons are being built and filled up, there has to be a better way.....chain gangs with prisoners chained doing highway work .....would save on a lot of tax dollars for one thing, and a few guards with shotguns to make sure no funny stuff occurs. Yep.


[Return to Topics]



[Home] [Search]

Copyright © 1999-2013 KountryLife.com
All Rights Reserved
A Country Living Resource and Community