Capital punishment not an effective deterrent, say experts

[Yinglove]

3 minutes ago, Pdaz said:

DNA and forensic evidence is far more certain than previous methods of investigatione. If you re-read my post you will see I said death for second conviction. So rape once go to jail. Do it again, go to hell. It cases where there is irrefutable evidence of guilt. ie caught red handed or witnessed by many ( like in a terror attack ) I wouldn't even waste money on a trial. 

Most of the scum in jails have a long list of prior convictions and will never be "reformed" They have chosen to break the law and live outside of society. No pity or hand wringing needed just get rid of them 

Oh, so if you have already been convicted and jailed for a crime it is impossible to be wrongly convicted for anything at a future date?

I would say anyone facing the courts with a criminal record is LESS likely to receive justice than one with a clear rap sheet.

The civilised world, with a few exceptions, has moved away from capital punishment -why do you think that is?

Edited August 13, 2017 by Yinglove

[gummy]

Just now, Yinglove said:

Yep, it's merely unfortunate when it's a stranger being wrongly executed - bet you your opinion would be rather different if it were you with your neck in a noose.

 

Well I am not that psychotic to feel the need to murder anyone so not likely to happen.  I would actually go further and suggest that the world of do-gooders should also be reviewed for potential aiding and assisting murderers to avoid capital punishment, but just my opinion.

[Yinglove]

1 minute ago, gummy said:

Well I am not that psychotic to feel the need to murder anyone so not likely to happen.  I would actually go further and suggest that the world of do-gooders should also be reviewed for potential aiding and assisting murderers to avoid capital punishment, but just my opinion.

Not sure you quite understand what being "wrongly convicted" means.

The fact that you are not a psychotic with a need to murder does not provide you with immunity from wrongful conviction.

[shady86]

Well, that's just not true.
Just four countries considered to be industrialised still execute criminals: the US, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan. 
 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/maps-and-graphics/countries-that-still-have-the-death-penalty/
 
Death penalty is for uncivilised tinpot countries

Singapore, Japan and Taiwan are few of the safest countries in the world. When education doesn't work, only capital punishment will.

[Yinglove]

1 minute ago, shady86 said:

1 hour ago, Yinglove said:

Well, that's just not true.
Just four countries considered to be industrialised still execute criminals: the US, Japan, Singapore and Taiwan. 
 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/maps-and-graphics/countries-that-still-have-the-death-penalty/
 
Death penalty is for uncivilised tinpot countries

Singapore, Japan and Taiwan are few of the safest countries in the world. When education doesn't work, only capital punishment will.

Oh you want to use Singapore, Japan and Taiwan as your evidence for the death penalty working.

Out of curiosity why do you not use China, Iran and Pakistan - the world leaders in numbers executed?

 

The US is the only country in the chart below with the death penalty and look at its murder rate

It really does look like the death penalty doesn't work all that well

 

[Pdaz]

While clearing out all the murderers, terrorists and rapists maybe we could get rid of some liberals too ?  

Since the police and the courts have started to go soft on crime in the UK we have seen a lower incidences of non violent crime but violent crime has risen. So a comfy cell, social workers and nannying hasn't worked to prevent knife crime, shooting, child abuse and gang violence.  So commit a violent crime and receive a painful death. None of these people are innocent first offenders. They are hardended criminals with a long history of crime.

We simply just don't need these people. The World is overpopulated and if they don't want to fit in and behave they should be got rid of.

[Watchful]

2 hours ago, hansnl said:

The "kill-kill-kill-kill" will be out in force today.

When will the light be switched on for the death brigade so that they can see that the state endorsed killing is not a deterrent, at all.

Don't they understand that by uttering those death curses they lower themselves to the barbaric ISIS level?

Lifelong prison sentences are a deterrent, give a nice revenge feeling, and if the convicted in a later stadium is found to be innocent, can be released.

If executed, and found not guilty later, then the executing was just murder.

What then, trial of judge, jury, prosecutor, police?

In short, killing is never an answer!

 

How can the death penalty be a detergent when it is administered 18 years after the crime? Nobody can even remember the crime and often many of the victim's family have passed away. Then the "penalty" is administered in a room like a hospital suite with no witnesses.

 

The whole thing is a joke!

 

Yes, you have a valid point about the potential for executing innocent people and there should be a level of proof or certainty about guilt before someone can be sentenced to death. Today with DNA and CCTV we know who committed the killing, yet the appeals still drag on for years and years. This isn't justice. It's just nonsense!

 

For a death penalty to become a real deterrent it should be:

1. Administered reasonably after the crime (4 to 5 years)

2. Should be administered in public and televised  

3. No lethal injections - hangings, firing squads, etc. (In short a violent end to a violent crime. I don't give a damn if the killer experiences some pain. They didn't care about the pain experienced by their victims.)

 

I guess by the above, it's clear I am a proponent for the death penalty. At the same time, I believe it should be reserved only for murderers. That is, if you commit the ultimate crime, you pay the ultimate price.

 

So would I favor death for drug dealers?   No way!   A far as I am concern when you have people trafficking in drugs, you have both a buyer and a seller. If you say we should execute the seller, I say you should also execute the buyer. This is a crime which requires two people and both are equally guilty.

 

We have a drug problem, because we fail to educate our people. That education also means our actions. When people show up at hospitals due to overdosing, we should simply wish them good luck. Hospitals are for the sick and trauma victims.

 

When the addicts die, they should be cremated and their ashes hauled to the city dump. Instead of glorifying drug use, we make it clear that if you succumb to drugs, 5 minutes after you die no one will know or care that you ever walked the earth. In short, we offer you ... extinction! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 13, 2017 by Watchful

[Watchful]

9 minutes ago, Yinglove said:

The US is the only country in the chart below with the death penalty and look at its murder rate

It really does look like the death penalty doesn't work all that well

 

 

No question, the US does it all wrong.  No argument there.

 

While I am a proponent of the death penalty, it should be done it a way to maximize the deterrent value.

 

At the same time, I have no problem with the Russian system - 20 years in the salt mines.  Of course, very few survived 20 years, but I'd be OK with that.

[rijb]

2 minutes ago, Yinglove said:

And all the murders occur in the other 19 states?

How silly.

 

States without the death penalty have lower murder rates than states with the death penalty.

 

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates

 

You appear to have shot yourself in the foot.

I don't believe there's a direct correlation.  And even if there was, I'm on the victim's side.

 

My foot is fine.  Thanks for your concern.

[Yinglove]

Just now, rijb said:

I don't believe there's a direct correlation.  And even if there was, I'm on the victim's side.

 

My foot is fine.  Thanks for your concern.

You don't believe there is a direct correlation in the fact that states with the death penalty have a higher murder rate than states without - how absurd.

Isn't the main claim for those that support the death penalty is that it acts as a deterrence?

If having the death penalty doesn't deter murder, why have it?

 

Your foot is not fine and I believe you had better now check the other one too.

[Salerno]

2 hours ago, hansnl said:

When will the light be switched on for the death brigade so that they can see that the state endorsed killing is not a deterrent, at all.

When will the light be switched on for the anti "death brigade" so that they can see that not all proponents of the death penalty believe it's a deterrent, in fact it could make things worse e.g. "they've got me bang to rights on that crime so I'm going to take as many people with me as possible" mindset.

 

4 minutes ago, Yinglove said:

Isn't the main claim for those that support the death penalty is that it acts as a deterrence?

Can't speak for everyone obviously but it certainly isn't mine (as per above).

[rijb]

8 minutes ago, Yinglove said:

You don't believe there is a direct correlation in the fact that states with the death penalty have a higher murder rate than states without - how absurd.

Isn't the main claim for those that support the death penalty is that it acts as a deterrence?

If having the death penalty doesn't deter murder, why have it?

 

Your foot is not fine and I believe you had better now check the other one too.

If my beliefs were so absurd we would not be having this discussion.

 

What's with the foot fetish?

[Yinglove]

6 minutes ago, rijb said:

If my beliefs were so absurd we would not be having this discussion.

 

What's with the foot fetish?

Pure avoidance.

Congrats.

[Yinglove]

9 minutes ago, Salerno said:

When will the light be switched on for the anti "death brigade" so that they can see that not all proponents of the death penalty believe it's a deterrent, in fact it could make things worse e.g. "they've got me bang to rights on that crime so I'm going to take as many people with me as possible" mindset.

 

Can't speak for everyone obviously but it certainly isn't mine (as per above).

So what is your position?

[rijb]

2 minutes ago, Yinglove said:

Pure avoidance.

Congrats.

You used disassociated facts to make a debatable conclusion.  I'm surprised you haven't also concluded that capital punishment is responsible for global warming, as well as a higher murder rate.

[Yinglove]

Just now, rijb said:

You used disassociated facts to make a debatable conclusion.  I'm surprised you haven't also concluded that capital punishment is responsible for global warming, as well as a higher murder rate.

Disassociated facts....what's that, another name the Trumps "alternate facts".

 

What facts were "disassociated"?

[BasalBanality]

Just now, rijb said:

You used disassociated facts to make a debatable conclusion.  I'm surprised you haven't also concluded that capital punishment is responsible for global warming, as well as a higher murder rate.

I believe the correlation of global warming and capital punishment is inversely proportional?

[Salerno]

Just now, Yinglove said:

So what is your position?

 

I believe the death penalty should be given for certain crimes only where the guilt of the accused can be shown to be 100% without doubt (e.g. caught in the act, caught on CCTV, irrefutable DNA evidence). That obviously would mean the death penalty would still be quite rare.

 

In those cases I still believe there should be an appeal system but not as drawn out as currently in the US (which is where the stats on it costing more to execute someone than keep them in jail tends to come from in these debates).

 

As mentioned, I don't see it as a deterrent; but I do believe there are some people that commit such heinous crimes that they should not be free to mix with the general public and put others at risk. On that point some in these types of debates agree but say they should get a life sentence. I personally believe caging someone for life is inhumane (yep, I get flamed for that), costly and in reality very few actually serve "life".  For those left behind from those crimes, they end up having to relive it every time the perp is up for parole.

 

That then leads to, what types of crimes ...

[connda]

He said the study found that the certainty of getting arrested was “very effective” in deterring people from committing crimes.

 

Like Red Bull "Boss" cop killer?  Certainty of getting arrested like that?  

[rijb]

3 minutes ago, connda said:

He said the study found that the certainty of getting arrested was “very effective” in deterring people from committing crimes.

 

Like Red Bull "Boss" cop killer?  Certainty of getting arrested like that?  

Maybe they forgot the finger pointing.

[Yinglove]

6 minutes ago, Salerno said:

 

I believe the death penalty should be given for certain crimes only where the guilt of the accused can be shown to be 100% without doubt (e.g. caught in the act, caught on CCTV, irrefutable DNA evidence). That obviously would mean the death penalty would still be quite rare.

 

In those cases I still believe there should be an appeal system but not as drawn out as currently in the US (which is where the stats on it costing more to execute someone than keep them in jail tends to come from in these debates).

 

As mentioned, I don't see it as a deterrent; but I do believe there are some people that commit such heinous crimes that they should not be free to mix with the general public and put others at risk. On that point some in these types of debates agree but say they should get a life sentence. I personally believe caging someone for life is inhumane (yep, I get flamed for that), costly and in reality very few actually serve "life".  For those left behind from those crimes, they end up having to relive it every time the perp is up for parole.

 

That then leads to, what types of crimes ...

The types of perp you mention gets life without parole - so that ends that argument about relatives re-living anything or the criminals being released into society.

The death penalty achieves nothing that can't be achieved with life in prison without parole.

 

 

 

[Lucky mike]

Certainly has great effect on repeat offenders !

[Ace of Pop]

Be nice to put the Lovie Dovie Drips on Guard Duty on Atica Death Row. Soon change their wimpy values.The Victims Family should have the right to say yes once the Human Scums been convicted , not a bunch of Lefty Apologists.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[PeCeDe]

Did anyone mention religion in this thread, oh, oh, sorry to bring up such a tacky subject. I'm not religious but I do know the first Commandment in Christianity is "Do not Kill." In Buddhism it's basically the same, "Do no harm,"  and sometimes being taken to the extreme. Nowhere to my understanding is there an exception.

[metisdead]

Please remember, this topic Capital punishment not an effective deterrent, say experts is about capital punishment not being an effective deterrent in Thailand.  Please stay on topic and stop with the comparisons with other countries. 

[Salerno]

Just now, Yinglove said:

The types of perp you mention gets life without parole - so that ends that argument about relatives re-living anything or the criminals being released into society.

The death penalty achieves nothing that can't be achieved with life in prison without parole.

That's a bit of a blanket statement, and somewhat flawed, what country/s are we talking about? Very few people get life without parole in the west.

 

Obviously I disagree with your last sentence, it achieves a cost reduction for a start and other than protecting society, (which the death penalty also does) what exactly does locking someone in a cage for what could be 50, 60, 70 years + do? As I said, I believe that to be inhumane.

 

 

[Salerno]

1 minute ago, metisdead said:

Please remember, this topic Capital punishment not an effective deterrent, say experts is about capital punishment not being an effective deterrent in Thailand.  Please stay on topic and stop with the comparisons with other countries. 

My apologies, was replying as you where posting. I hereby withdraw from participating in an interesting debate.

[Classic Ray]

The problem with capital punishment, and the reason that the UK and many other civilised nations abolished it, is its finality and inability to be overturned by new evidence to prevent miscarriages of justice.

 

It is also an ineffective preventive measure, as many previously capital crimes like murder are carried out in the heat of the moment or under high pressure circumstances where reason is not employed by the offender.

 

As has been stated already, diversionary measures both before and after offending and effective enforcement and sentencing with the availability of aftercare are the most effective measures.

 

[Ace of Pop]

56 minutes ago, PeCeDe said:

Did anyone mention religion in this thread, oh, oh, sorry to bring up such a tacky subject. I'm not religious but I do know the first Commandment in Christianity is "Do not Kill." In Buddhism it's basically the same, "Do no harm,"  and sometimes being taken to the extreme. Nowhere to my understanding is there an exception.

Eye For an Eye, rather wiped that out.

[Sydebolle]

"Capital punishment not an effective deterrent", well that might be true but capital punishment guarantees only one crime per culprit. No repeats on rapes, children molesting etc. anymore - guaranteed. And that is a step in the right direction and as far as one can go!