Death penalty

[dudleysharp]

Yes, my idea is the legal definition of premeditated - mens rea.

When you talk of premeditation you mean lifestyle.

No, lifestyle is a type of premeditation. There are others.

mens rea is different. That is about criminal intent, knowing that what you are going to do is against the law.

Legally, premeditation need only a split second to form.

I have a choice to murder or not, to shoot or run, that’s all it takes, in law.

 

[triumphguy]

No, lifestyle is a type of premeditation. There are others.

mens rea is different. That is about criminal intent, knowing that what you are going to do is against the law.

Legally, premeditation need only a split second to form.

I have a choice to murder or not, to shoot or run, that’s all it takes, in law.

And this is the moment when deterrence ought to take place. But it doesn’t because most homicides/violent crimes are committed when the person’s ability to make decisions is incapacitated by drugs/alcohol.

And - apples to apples - USA to other civilized, modern, western democracies - the more deterrence, surely the lower the crime rate (In comparison to other civilized, modern, western democracies)?

As a deterrence neither the USA’s high incarceration rate, nor it’s capital punishment seem to work.

 

[starshiptrooper]

It’s not a ridiculous claim. It’s a well known assertion.

Those two things are not mutually incompatible.

Read my own post above for a few ideas of where I would go with this. forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10362097&postcount=94

I probably missed something in your post because I didn’t see any argument which supported your claim about the dehumanizing effects of capital punishment. All I picked up from that post was that you seem to think that poverty causes crime. If that was the case, then the rich would be paragons of virtue.

We are not operating under a justice system, but on a forum. I’m not suing you or charging you with a crime. If you are really interested in the issue then do some research, and IF you do some research you will find all the proof you need to support my assertion.

You made the claim, you ought to back it up.

If you are not really interested in the issue, but are merely promoting your POV, then all the evidence I bring to the table will just be ignored or discounted.

I grew up in a very conservative pro-death penalty household. However I am interested in understanding how anti-death penalty people think and that is why I am posting in this thread.

 

[triumphguy]

…If that was the case, then the rich would be paragons of virtue.
According to the rich they are paragons of virtue. And as proof of their claim let me ask this question - how many rich people are on death row?

You made the claim, you ought to back it up.
Apparently I don’t have to - just read Dudley’s post.forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10370444&postcount=127

I grew up in a very conservative pro-death penalty household.

However I am interested in understanding how **anti-death penalty **people think and that is why I am posting in this thread.

Like orthodox pro-life Catholics? That’s how they think.

BTW I grew up in a very conservative pro-death penalty household too. I guess getting a law degree, studying theology and working in prison, and working with homeless kids helped change my mind.

 

[dudleysharp]

And this is the moment when deterrence ought to take place. But it doesn’t because most homicides/violent crimes are committed when the person’s ability to make decisions is incapacitated by drugs/alcohol.

And - apples to apples - USA to other civilized, modern, western democracies - the more deterrence, surely the lower the crime rate (In comparison to other civilized, modern, western democracies)?

As a deterrence neither the USA’s high incarceration rate, nor it’s capital punishment seem to work.

A lot of folks are confused by this. I’ll try to explain.

Some are deterred some aren’t.

1. All prospects of a negative consequence deter some. It is a truism.
2. 99.7% of those murderers, subject to the death penalty, do everything in their power to stay alive.

What about those more reasoned folks, those potential murderers who chose not to murder?

Do they not also, greatly prefer life over death and fear death more than life? Of course, just like all of us, save the determined suicidal.

1. All criminal sanctions, regardless of crime rates, deter some. Just because crime/murder rates are low in one jurisdiction and high in another, doesn’t mean that no one is deterred in the jurisdiction with higher rates. We all know that within different states or countries, there are towns, cities and neighborhoods which have varying crime/murder rates. All sanctions deter in all of those jurisdictions, but they have different rates because of different circumstances.
2. Even some anti death penalty scholars find that the death penalty is a deterrent. They just don’t think it deters more than a life sentence, even though the anecdotal evidence says otherwise.
3. No death penalty deterrence study says the death penalty deters none. They cannot. No one would be so foolish.
4. The burden of proof is on those who say the death penalty deters none. We all know they cannot prove such.
5. The question is not “Does the death penalty deter?”. Of course it does, just as all negative consequences do.
6. The valid question is, “How much does the death penalty deter?”. There will never be a consensus answer to that question.

Even the 28 studies that have found for deterrence since 2000, have widely different findings, that from 1-28 murderers are deterred per execution.

While 1-28 deterred per execution represents the savings of many innocent lives, it also represents a near imperceptible effect on crime rates.

– LIFE: MUCH PREFERRED OVER EXECUTION:
99.7% of murderers tells us “Give me life, not execution”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1…execution.html

– Of course the Death Penalty Deters
See sections C and D within
The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0…-innocent.html

– “DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE CLARIFIED”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1…clarified.html

– DETERRENCE, THE DEATH PENALTY & MURDER RATES
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1…der-rates.html

– Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0…out-death.html

– “Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let’s be clear”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/0…der-rates.html

 

[dudleysharp]

Swiss Guy:

How do you folks get to make comments in between different sections of quotes?

 

[triumphguy]

A lot of folks are confused by this. I’ll try to explain.

Some are deterred some aren’t.

1. All prospects of a negative consequence deter some. It is a truism.
2. 99.7% of those murderers, subject to the death penalty, do everything in their power to stay alive.

What about those more reasoned folks, those potential murderers who chose not to murder?

Do they not also, greatly prefer life over death and fear death more than life? Of course, just like all of us, save the determined suicidal.

1. All criminal sanctions, regardless of crime rates, deter some. Just because crime/murder rates are low in one jurisdiction and high in another, doesn’t mean that no one is deterred in the jurisdiction with higher rates. We all know that within different states or countries, there are towns, cities and neighborhoods which have varying crime/murder rates. All sanctions deter in all of those jurisdictions, but they have different rates because of different circumstances.
2. Even some anti death penalty scholars find that the death penalty is a deterrent. They just don’t think it deters more than a life sentence, even though the anecdotal evidence says otherwise.
3. No death penalty deterrence study says the death penalty deters none. They cannot. No one would be so foolish.
4. The burden of proof is on those who say the death penalty deters none. We all know they cannot prove such.
5. The question is not “Does the death penalty deter?”. Of course it does, just as all negative consequences do.
6. The valid question is, “How much does the death penalty deter?”. There will never be a consensus answer to that question.

Even the 28 studies that have found for deterrence since 2000, have widely different findings, that from 1-28 murderers are deterred per execution.

While 1-28 deterred per execution represents the savings of many innocent lives, it also represents a near imperceptible effect on crime rates.

– LIFE: MUCH PREFERRED OVER EXECUTION:
99.7% of murderers tells us “Give me life, not execution”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1…execution.html

– Of course the Death Penalty Deters
See sections C and D within
The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0…-innocent.html

– “DEATH PENALTY DETERRENCE CLARIFIED”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1…clarified.html

– DETERRENCE, THE DEATH PENALTY & MURDER RATES
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/1…der-rates.html

– Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0…out-death.html

– “Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let’s be clear”
prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/0…der-rates.html

Statistically - executions per capita, versus murders per capita in comparison to other western G7 countries. How does the USA compare?

If there is very little difference then capital punishment does not work as a deterrence.

If the murder rate AS WELL AS the capital punishment rate is higher in the USA then you could conclude that capital punishment actually promotes more homicides.

 

[BroomWagon]

Statistically - executions per capita, versus murders per capita in comparison to other western G7 countries. How does the USA compare?

If there is very little difference then capital punishment does not work as a deterrence.

If the murder rate AS WELL AS the capital punishment rate is higher in the USA then you could conclude that capital punishment actually promotes more homicides.

First off, using the G7 countries represents the same kind of pitfall as comparing us to Europe.

USA is a large, diverse country, some states have no capital punishment, some states have capital punishment and among those, some are leaders, Texas, Louisiana and Florida. So then, you would look at those individual states and see if it has brought the murder rate down, then you might consider if issues such as gun laws plays a part too.

Let’s take Florida as an example:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Florida#List_of_individuals_executed_since_1979

6 executed in 2000, 1 in 2001, 3 in 2003, 2 in 2004, 1 in 2005, 4 in 2006, 0 in 2007, 2 in 2008, 2 in 2009, 1 in 2010, 2 in 2011, 3 in 2012.

It looks like these stats tell us little.

And rolling out some sort of set of countries to compare us with again.

G7, USA and UK, latter much smaller than the US land-wise and population-wise, the most diverse in ethnic populations, you could say that I suppose for France too with a much smaller population too. In fact, with the USA have 300 million people, population wise, the next closest country is probably largely homogenuous population Japan with around 100 million.

Japan, Germany and Canada have an overwhelming percentage of one race in those countries, none of these countries either shares a border with a 3rd World Nation as the US has a 1200 mile or so border with Mexico which also is significant in that you could compare the USA as much to other countries in the Western Hemisphere including Mexico who I don’t think has the death penalty and other Latin American countries.

So once again, we see the use of skewed statistics.

 

[dudleysharp]

Statistically - executions per capita, versus murders per capita in comparison to other western G7 countries. How does the USA compare?

If there is very little difference then capital punishment does not work as a deterrence.

If the murder rate AS WELL AS the capital punishment rate is higher in the USA then you could conclude that capital punishment actually promotes more homicides.

A lot of folks have the same misunderstanding.

What clarifies it is that “The prospects of a negative outocme deter some.” It is a trusim.

So how does that mix with deterrence of incarceration or execution? Obviously most folks would prefer avoiding both. Because of that some will be deterred from criminal activity, but some will not.

I don’t know the answer for the G7 question, but it does not go to deterrence.

For example, let’s look at an even tighter group:

“Henderson, Nev., takes the No. 2 spot (America’s Safest Cities) despite its location within the Metropolitan Statistical Area of Las Vegas-Paradise, which ranked ninth this year on Forbes’ list of America’s Most Dangerous Cities.” (2)

Does this mean no potential criminals are deterred in Las Vegas-Paradise and yet some are deterred in Henderson?

Of course not. Some are deterred in both.

It means that there are different factors in each jurisdiction which provide for different crime rates, as with all jurisdictions, inclusive of the deterrent effect of criminal sanctions, within both jurisdictions.

This should come as no surprise. It is the same with all jurisdictions.

The evidence is that negative outcomes deter activity, not promote it. Positive outcomes produce more activity.

Again, no surprise.

I advise you read the deterrence links I provided, re murder rates and “clarified”. I think they will be helpful.

 

[dudleysharp]

So once again, we see the use of skewed statistics.

The statistics, themselves, are not skewed, unless fabricated. The problem is their interpretation.

Many things affect crime rates.

Just look at any individual state or between states or countries, with or without the death penalty. You will find neighborhoods, zip codes, small towns, big towns, small cities and large cities, within the same state or country, whether with or without the death penalty, with hugely varying crime and murder rates, between those varying jurisdicitions.

Why? Because each jurisdiction has many factors that contribute to those rates, only one of which is criminal sancitons.

 

[dudleysharp]

How do you folks get to make comments in between different sections of quotes?

 

[triumphguy]

How do you folks get to make comments in between different sections of quotes?

You have to manually break up the post you are quoting by inserting this quote code at the end of the section and

at the beginning (remove the space between QUOTE and = for it to work).

I’ve done it below with one of your posts - however you can’t see the codes because they are now invisible.

 

[triumphguy]

The statistics, themselves, are not skewed, unless fabricated. The problem is their interpretation.

Many things affect crime rates.

Just look at any individual state or between states or countries, with or without the death penalty. You will find neighborhoods, zip codes, small towns, big towns, small cities and large cities, within the same state or country, whether with or without the death penalty, with hugely varying crime and murder rates, between those varying jurisdicitions.

Why? Because each jurisdiction has many factors that contribute to those rates, only one of which is criminal sancitons.

 

[triumphguy]

The statistics, themselves, are not skewed, unless fabricated. The problem is their interpretation.

Many things affect crime rates.

Very true.

Just look at any individual state or between states or countries, with or without the death penalty. You will find neighborhoods, zip codes, small towns, big towns, small cities and large cities, within the same state or country, whether with or without the death penalty, with hugely varying crime and murder rates, between those varying jurisdicitions.

Again, very true.

Why? Because each jurisdiction has many factors that contribute to those rates, only one of which is criminal sancitons.

I agree.

My argument with you is that since criminal sanctions are only one part of the crime stat picture, and that it is more easy to prove that punishment as deterrence does not affect violent crime rates (than proving it does lower crime rates) then using the deterrence argument for capital punishment does not wash.

For instance: Since Canada dropped the death sentence homicide rates have dropped by 44%.

 

[dudleysharp]

You have to manually break up the post you are quoting by inserting this quote code

at the end of the section and

at the beginning.

I’ve done it below with one of your posts - however you can;t see the codes because they are now invisible.

Thank both you and Swiss Guy.

 

[triumphguy]

at the end of the section and

Thank both you and Swiss Guy.

It works! And makes debating individual points easier:thumbsup:

 

[dudleysharp]

My argument with you is that since criminal sanctions are only one part of the crime stat picture, and that it is more easy to prove that punishment as deterrence does not affect violent crime rates (than proving it does lower crime rates) then using the deterrence argument for capital punishment does not wash…

It’s easy to prove deterrence, because it is a truism that all prospects of a negative outcome deter some, plus many others, as I detailed.

It appears that you have not read the links.

For instance: Since Canada dropped the death sentence homicide rates have dropped by 44%…

One analysis, which I, now cannot, find, showed that “death penalty eligible murders” in Canada actually rose after death penalty repeal, even though all murders dropped.

But, as that is not how one measures deterrence, I am not sure that matters.

Since you gave the Canada example, let me ask you, does this prove death penalty deterrence in the US?

Please not that the percentages are even greater than what you found in Canada,

1. The United States has had double digit executions, annually, from 1984 - 2011 (3).

Murders are, now, at a 43 year low (1),

Murder rates are, now, at a 48 year low. (1).

It’s not surprising that death sentences are at a 37 year low (3).

1. Double digit annual executions stopped in the US in 1964 and resumed in 1984 (3).

During that period, murders increased by 100%

murders in 1964 9,360 (1)

murders in 1984 18,670 (1)

1. There was a moratorium on all executions in the US from 1967 to 1977 (3).

During that period, there was a 56% increase in murders (1).

murders is 1967 were 12,240 (1)

murders in 1977 were 19,120 (1)

1. In the US from 1991-20011

41% drop in murders
22% drop in rapes
48% drop in robberies all from (1)

As rape/murders, robbery/murders are by, far, the most common death penalty eligible crimes, those, likely, dropped from 60-80%

TEXAS

Capital murders may have dropped by 80% or more in Texas since 1991 (1).

Murder in combination with rapes and/or robberies makes up, by far, the largest percentage of death penalty eligible murders.

Murders have dropped 58%, rapes 20% and robberies 41% (1).

A much lower occurrence of rape/murders and robbery/murders equals a much lower number of death sentences.

The per capita rape/murders and robbery/murders will have dropped even more dramatically, because Texas has seen a population explosion during this period.

Murders rates have dropped 71%, rapes 46% and robberies 61% (1).

The drop in capital murders is but the most obvious and pronounced explanation for a drop in death sentences.

Contributions to that drop also include:

1. Plea bargains to life without parole (LWOP) , a plea only possible with the death penalty;
2. Two classes of murderers have been excluded from the death penalty, that being those under 18 and those with mental retardation; and
3. Depending upon conditions within individual jurisdictions, with a downturn in the economy, the up front costs of the death penalty may have caused some jurisdictions to offer either plea bargains or lesser than death penalty option trials, to a degree more than in the past.

many others

=================

1. United States Crime Data, from FBI UCR
   disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

The Disaster Center is a convenient and reliable source for crime data

Texas
murders rapes robberies
1991 2652 9266 47900
2011 1126 7439 28395
dif 1526 18 27 19505
less 58% 20% 41%

US
murders rapes robberies
1991 24,700 106,590 687, 730
2011 14,612 83,425 354,396
dif 10,088 23,165 333,334
less 41% 22% 48%

Source: Disaster Center
disastercenter.com/crime/

1. “Death Penalty, Deterrence & Murder Rates: Let’s be clear”
   prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/03/death-penalty-deterrence-murder-rates.html
2. Capital Punishment, 2010 - Statistical Tables, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Tracy Snell, Dec 2011, see Figure 1, page 1 and Table 8, page 12,
   bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp10st.pdf

 

[triumphguy]

Like you said in an earlier post - there are many factors involved.

Here’s some I can bring up off the cuff - homicides rose in the 2 decades after 1960 because demographics changed. Baby boomers skewed all stats for ALL categories. So more young testosterone-fueled-men around.

Here’s another - drugs. Illegal drugs hugely influenced crime from 1960-1980.

Another - Vietnam had an effect on the whole of society.

Another - the hippy, rock and pop-culture.

Another - breakdown in traditional family values due to more lax divorce laws.

Another - Roe vs Wade.

The reason why homicides fell after 1980:

Roe vs Wade - babies which would have been born into tough economic and social conditions were aborted.

Demographics - baby-boomers aging and becoming less violent.

etc., etc…

I don’t know if any or all these factors had a direct influence on the homicide rate… but in the same way you can’t use capital punishment stats as clear cut evidence of the efficacy of deterrence either.

 

[dudleysharp]

Like you said in an earlier post - there are many factors involved.

Here’s some I can bring up off the cuff - homicides rose in the 2 decades after 1960 because demographics changed. Baby boomers skewed all stats for ALL categories. So more young testosterone-fueled-men around.

Here’s another - drugs. Illegal drugs hugely influenced crime from 1960-1980.

Another - Vietnam had an effect on the whole of society.

Another - the hippy, rock and pop-culture.

Another - breakdown in traditional family values due to more lax divorce laws.

Another - Roe vs Wade.

The reason why homicides fell after 1980:

Roe vs Wade - babies which would have been born into tough economic and social conditions were aborted.

Demographics - baby-boomers aging and becoming less violent.

etc., etc…

I don’t know if any or all these factors had a direct influence on the homicide rate… but in the same way you can’t use capital punishment stats as clear cut evidence of the efficacy of deterrence either.

Actually, deterrence of the death penalty or other sanctions is clear cut. They do deter, as reviewed in detail, with none of those rebutted.

What isn’t clear cut is the measurement of that deterrence, as reviewed. It never will be.

All prospects of a negative outcome deter some, an unrebuttable trusim, as well as my list of other support, none of which you rebutted.

 

[triumphguy]

Actually, deterrence of the death penalty or other sanctions is clear cut. They do deter, as reviewed in detail, with none of those rebutted.

What isn’t clear cut is the measurement of that deterrence, as reviewed. It never will be.

All prospects of a negative outcome deter some, an unrebuttable trusim, as well as my list of other support, none of which you rebutted.

OK - mosquitoes deter some people from having a bbq. Is it a statistically significant number? Are the ways of having your bbq without mosquitoes?

To refine my point.

If we are to look at what Blessed John Paul and Pope Benedict say about the death penalty prudentially, then prudentially the deterrence argument weighs a very insignifcant amount in the death penalty debate.