For example, at one time America’s capital punishment laws had teeth. That would make a criminal think twice before they would commit murder or rape. If they knew that they were going to hang or go to the electric chair. Now a convicted murder on average will sit on death row for up to 12 years before their sentence may be carried out.
If we are going to use the death penalty as punishment for crime, then it’s time to fix the system so it will be effective again by ending loopholes in state and federal laws, so cases will move faster.
Also, at the same time, better protecting civil liberties and ending mistakes in the judicial process. We need to add more crimes such as rape that the death penalty can be used for — again making the punishment harsh by bringing back the electric chair or hanging.
But if we have become a nation that it doesn’t want to pursue the death penalty, then put rapists and murderers in prison for life without parole as punishment for capital crimes.
We need to put an end to the long legal process for death penalty cases, where victims’ families go through years of emotional pain and we waste thousands of taxpayer dollars.
It’s not uncivilized to put dangerous criminals to death to protect society. But it’s criminal not to keep our streets safe when we can.
Sincerely,
Terry D. Adams
Once Upon a Time there was the theory of the deterrence of the death penalty.
This theory was easy to understand: “the more the State kills, the less there are homidices”, but it was a hoax.
Americans belive in death penalty even if in the Thirties, when executions were common, the homicide rate was very hight and in Forties and Fifties both executions and murders fall. They take for granted that the grow of homicides in the Sixties was linked to the suspension of executions (1967-1977) and forget that America was without capital punishment for a very short time after Furman. According to the hangmanfriends any drop in the homicide rate is the benefit of the soar of executions and they do not notice that both rise from 1984 to 1991.
Anyway.
Their mantra is that each execution saves 18 innocent lives (someone offers even more) and from 1991 to 1999 this seemed to happen: with more and more executions and less and less murders. The triumph of the executioner was 1999 with 98 executions, 300 death sentences and the lowest homicide rate in decades: 5,7.
So, they all lived happily ever after?
Not exactly.
Executioners’ triumphalism ends the following year.
Their bombastic confidence suddenly disappeared as the supposed deterrent effect of the death penalty vanished. Since 2000 we saw a breakneck drop both in death sentences as well as executions and, in the same time, we assisted to a remarkable stability in the homicide rate. Death sentences are now a little more than one hundred per year and executions were only 53 in 2006, 42 in 2007 and a mere 37 in 2008. On the other side the homicide rate looks nailed between 5,5 and 5,7.
This can be explained in two ways: prospective murderers do not know that the probability to be condemned to death is even rarer than before, or the whole theory of the deterrence of capital punishment is an enormous @#$$%^^.
I am inclined to the second explanation.
Americans hangmanfriends are very insular and do not like to get a look abroad: not even north of the border. It’s a pity because they could learn a lot.
In 2002 Americans were very happy because they had only 16.638 criminal homicides. They were right because, from 1984 to 1993, criminal homicides were 22.000 per year and 25.000 in 1991. Au contraire, in the same 2002, in Italy we were very afraid because, with a population that is grosso modo one fifth of the American one, we had 638 homicides. We were very concerned about it, even if those 638 were less than one third the 2.000 homicides we had in 1991. Americans love to think the drop in homicides is a benefit of the death penalty. We cannot agree because we are a death penalty free country. (In Europe this punishment is strictly forbidden and the majority of the world is abolitionist).
Actually Italy ended capital punishment in 1877 and had it again only under fascism. In those sad years the homicide rate was five times bigger that we have now, and, in the twenty years following the definitive end of the death penalty (1948-1968), the homicide rate dropped from 5 to 1,4.
Something very similar happened in Canada in the years that followed the end of capital punishment in 1976. Since then its homicide rate fell down constantly.
Curiously in the same July 1976 the US Supreme Court gave green light to the “new and improved” American death penalty and, with the shooting of Gary Gilmore (17th January 1977), the hangman was back in business and the experiment begun. Now, after more than 1.100 human sacrifices, we can say with Justice Blackmun: “the death penalty experiment has failed”.
Americans can see that capital punishment is not a deterrent even in their own country, where 15 jurisdictions are abolitionist (Michigan since 1837). A long time ago Thorsten Sellin observed that: “the states with executions chambers had rate or murder that were significantly higher than states that did not execute murders”. Possibly this is a consequence of the wild examples of brutality executions give, because: “ Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example.” (Justice Brandeis, dissenting in Olmstead).
Of course this does not satisfy hangmanfriends, so John Lott writes:
“This simple comparison really doesn’t prove anything. The 12 states without the death penalty have long enjoyed relatively low murder rates due to factors unrelated to capital punishment.”
And wins the chutzpah prize.
Everyone wants to TALK about doing something, but they never do anything that makes a difference.
Personally, I'm tired of seeing everyone express opinions about how this should change or that should change, or about how this is wrong or that is wrong...but nothing ever changes (except for the worse!) because all anyone ever does is TALK about it.
People, if you don't like how things are, DO something that will make a change! Organize campaigns to write your elected officials! Run for office, get elected, make a difference!
What ever it is, do something besides just talking about it, because talking isn't getting the job done.
Appeals courts aren't set up to revisit the critical question of actual innocence. Their purpose is only to make sure that the trial met constitutional standards of fairness, not that the jury reached the right conclusion. That is why the appeals process can hinge on technical errors and why it takes so long. But it is the only way defendants can get evidence of actual innocence heard by an appeals court. In too many cases, prosecutors (to their great discredit) have fought against post conviction testing of DNA evidence. It is extremely difficult to get evidence of innocence considered by an appeals court.
Practically every state has life without parole on the books. It has at least three advantages over the death penalty:
-it costs much less
-innocent people can be released
-families of murder victims are spared the painful ordeal of the the death penalty process
How would you fell if you voted to kill someone ,,,,,,Lets call this CASE 2
How would you feel if you voted to kill someone ,,,,,,and they were innnocent,,,LETS CALL THIS CASE ,,,,INFINITY,,,Becasue by all rights you should never get over this incident in your life....
CASE 1 you would probably feel some guilt...but you would not dwell on it all the time.
CASE 2 You would probably have some feelings about your decision and you could rationalize,,,that you were doing your civic duty,,,,
Next case ,,,CASE INFINITY,,, These thoughts would be with you forever,,,you cannot rationalize that you were doing your ''civic duty'' because an innocent person has been killed,,,And if you had not been in favor of the death sentence,,,then this would have never happened,,,,,Until we have the ability to ''RAISE THE DEAD'' then we should not kill....if you disagree with this statement ,then really should you be on the jury???
Another thought ...do you rember the story about the Romans killing an innocent man.
1-Prosecutors are more concerned about their job,and appearing to be tough on crime rather than the guilt or innocence of any one person. They will insist on a persons guilt even with undeniable DNA evidence to the contrary.
Scumbags. All of them.
2- Lawyers love death penalties because they can pretty much retire after a nice little career representing a few death row cash cows. Checks in the mail,via the US gov't.
Guilty or innocent? Who cares?
3- I pity the fool that is subjected to a jury of his peers. Show me any group(not just jurors) of 12 people that doesn't include at least 6 idiots and I'll kiss your butt. I would plea bargin myself rather than face a jury.
In this case, America being the best in the world is nothing to brag about. It's shameful at best.
Indeed it does, really badly! In most places (except Europe, Japan, New Zealand or Australia), every time you turn around some official or policeman is attempting to extract a bribe from you. Lawlessness and chaos is unbelievably frightening; all you do is survive if you can. Even in reasonably tame places, bribes are business as usual. We here often forget that, in our quest for perfection, perfection is not possible. I would still rather be here.
The general attitude of criminals is I am commiting this crime because I have too.
Their is no remorse or feelings about the crime and it effects on the victums.
They generally feel bad about geeting caught.
I feel we should implement the death penalty more often.
Murder someone and lose you case plus three apeal's in 5yrs.
BAM your dead!
Kid nap anyone.
Bam your dead!
Any individual with three violent felony's
BAM your dead!
White collar crime over 100K.
BAM your dead!
Rapist 2nd offense
Bam your Dead!
Terrorists of anykind.
BAM your dead!
Our system has let out more guilty individuals then put away inocent
Why do we continue to waste on average $45K per inmate per year?
All prision does is make these individuals better educated crimials.
This case in particular, yes the legal system could have done a better job but there is no use in crying over spilled milk.
If I can get over OJ getting off and Bernie Madoff not being hanged.
I will forget about this jerk by tommorow!
I wish they would'nt say the "On behalf of the State of Georgia" when they execute someone. That implies they have my consent. I don't consent to killing anyone, period. Murder is murder is murder is murder. They're nothing more than legalized killers. If they are stupid enough to believe that their maker is going to look the other way just because they have their "reasons" for murdering, then they're sadly mistaken. They will be held accountablem for their actions, and so will the 12 jurors that cast their vote to kill. If the prosecutors wants the death penalty, I say let them do it themselves. I have a feeling if put in that position, they would be gutless cowards.
I agree with this. I understand those who would support the death penalty, but there are only two reasons, one simply practical and the other emotionally unhealthy. The former would be to save an enormous amount of money housing and caring for people who must be kept from society until their natural death. The latter would be purely revenge, which may make some feel better but is not conducive to mental health or to a civilized society (think the Middle East or the American Hatfields and McCoys).