The Death Penalty

[apothanein kerdos]

Lady C ans AK. We are all different and maybe it's just as well. Before I made my decision for Jesus.....my decision??....anyway I was right into blood sport, like deer stalking, duck shooting, wild boar hunting. ya know? kill kill,but now I haven't the heart for it. The only things I can exterminate are vermin, rats mice cockroaches and the like, but because Paul said that God doesn't approve of factions enmity or strife etc in the book of galations, I would'nt get up tight and protest vigourously wih someone who believes the DP is scriptually or morally the right thing to do. Ya get me??

I understand what you're saying. The only thing I would add is I have not been nor will I ever be hunting. The reason is I cannot really see myself enjoying killing God's creation needlessly. At the same time, I have no problem with the DP (which is admittedly ironic) because the person has often times killed in the most brutal fashion to the most undeserving person.

I understand what you are saying though.

[Kabowd]

I just wanted to clarify, Capital Punishment is not about vengeance, it's about justice. And if we accept the more recent research that I presented earlier that strongly suggests that it has a deterrent effect, then we should consider it as a protective measure as well. One guilty life is executed, but it's likely that as many as 18 innocent lives could be saved.

[CallMeBernard]

So, are you also against everything else in the world until everything else in the world is foolproof? Ban cops with guns until there is an absolutely foolproof way that they never shoot the wrong person?

I'm British & we have no death penalty or police with guns (we have a few, but only specialist units).

Some crime stats show us to be worse than the States for crime; other figures have the States worse. Which probably says something about the nature of statistics, but there you go.

An interesting document from the US Dept of Justice, here, comparing the US with England and Wales shows that England & Wales have been getting worse in many aspects of crime and indeed have overtaken the US in moderate crimes- burglary, common assault etc but are still below the US for major crimes- rape & murder.

This is despite a background of increasing sentence length for convicted prisoners- suggesting to me that punishment is not necessairly a deterrent to spontaneous/ opportunistic crimes. However, these are not crimes which are given the death penalty in US legislation, unless I am much mistaken.

It should be bourne in mind that this data is by now a decade old, but to those who state that the death penalty is a deterent: why is Britain's murder rate still so much lower per head than the US's?

That's right: gun control. If you are really suggesting that (one of) the reasons you support the death penalty is that it reduces the numbers of innocents killed, are you also in favour of gun control? If not- why not?

For my part, I am unconvinced by the death penalty. Rather, for me, I would prefer a life-long sentance. My feelings with regards the death penalty are nothing to do with statistics (they can be twisted to suit any arguement) but down to the fact that there is always a chance that a killer in a cell may turn to God; a killer in a grave can not. Neither could I look in the face of someone who lost a loved one who was executed after being found (falsely) guilty.

This does not mean I consider any less who do agree with it; it's just that I don't.

[CallMeBernard]

One thing I should add though: if you really want to increase the violent crime rate in Wales, then show them the link I posted. Saying- effectively- that Wales is part of England is guaranteed to upset our close- harmony singing brethren

[RebekahDavid]

I wonder how our brothers and sisters in Christ in the persecuted church would respond to this...

Love your sister in Christ,

Rebekah David

[Arthur Durnan]

Far more INNOCENT people have been executed by convicted-but-not-executed murderers than were ever wrongly executed by the State! I'd be most pleased to give a long list of names. The onus in every instance must lie in the abolitionist's court; what help for effective deterrent is it when a convicted killer in America has a 1-in-1800 chance of EVER BEING EXECUTED?! Convicted murderers today will die.......of Alzheimers before they suffer the just reward of their horrendous deeds. Must the farce continue?

P.S. I hope Governor Shwarzenegger reads this & commences the imperative "tidying-up" re his Death Row's hundreds & hundreds of convicted murderers...in the interest, quite properly, of social progress.

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[CallMeBernard]

That's right: gun control. If you are really suggesting that (one of) the reasons you support the death penalty is that it reduces the numbers of innocents killed, are you also in favour of gun control? If not- why not?

It's a constitutional right for Americans to own guns, so any ban on guns is a violation of the highest law (not that the Constitution isn't regularly violated in this and other regards). I also believe people should have a right to own guns to defend themselves (it's a great amount of peace of mind). I don't think even a complete ban on guns would be very effective in preventing murders. You can kill without guns. And, I'm sure criminals will always be able to get their hands on guns. I might even point out, that after you control for demographics, the murder rate in the UK is higher than in the US.

For my part, I am unconvinced by the death penalty. Rather, for me, I would prefer a life-long sentance.

People are killed every year by convicted murderers with life sentences. When it's someone like http://incestabuse.about.com/cs/legalsystem/a/Geoghan.htm is killed, I say justice is done (he was killed in a maximum security prison). Ironically, he didn't commit a crime that carried the death penalty. But, there are good people who are also killed by convicted murderers with life sentences.

I think life in prison is cruel. And, it denies justice (a life for a life).

My feelings with regards the death penalty are nothing to do with statistics (they can be twisted to suit any arguement) but down to the fact that there is always a chance that a killer in a cell may turn to God; a killer in a grave can not.

I find that reasoning to not work for two reasons. First, God didn't accept that argument (he instituted the death penalty, anyway). Second, if (and it does) executions save lives, then you're denying other people - the murder victims you create - a chance to accept God (but, they're your invisible victims, so you don't worry about them).

Neither could I look in the face of someone who lost a loved one who was executed after being found (falsely) guilty.

Like it's so much better for an innocent person to spend decades tormented in a tiny cell? If a more liberal use of the death penalty were used, and thousands of innocent lives saved, your loved ones would be all that much less likely to be killed. And, if there are thousands of fewer murders and thus thousands of fewer murder trials, then there is that much less chance of a loved one being wrongly convicted.

The fact is, you don't even accept your own arguments because you don't apply them to other things.

You appear to misunderstand me. I didn't say life sentances, I said life-long. The systems in the US & the UK both allow for 'life' sentances which aren't life-long. I prefer a life sentance to mean a life sentance, not a few years. Therefore a murderer would not be released into the general population, allowing him/her to re-offend.

The difference between an innocent person being unjustly executed and unjustly incarcerated is that of course you can always release the incarcerated innocent upon realisation of the mistake.

You are correct, of course, that a complete ban on guns does not eliminate murder. But it does make a lot harder to commit. The figures from the link I posted showed that the US has a higher murder rate per 1,000 population- not sure what you meant saying that the US has a lower murder rate 'allowing for demographics', by the way- and firearms were used in 68% of US murders as opposed to 7% in England & Wales.

I am aware that the right to bear arms in the US is enshrined in Constitutional law but constitutions can be changed if the population wills it.

Limiting access to weopons, plus an improved economy all reduce crime rates far more than the fear of punishment. The fear of getting caught is also a better deterent than the fear of being punished. The economy went backwards in the '70s due to the oil price hikes; crime rates go up in response to poor economic conditions.

There is no solid, undisputable proof that death sentances are a deterent- or not. Your assertions, therefore, are not fact, merely your own opinions. And my opinions are my opinions. Your comment that I do not care for the 'invisible' victims of crime is not worthy of a debate amongst christians and one I must pray is something you said in the heat of the moment.

[Smalcald]

I must say I am not out of hand against imposing the death penalty or believe that Christians should be for or against the death penalty for faith reasons. I don't believe that, I think it is allowable for government to take life when needed. And yes God has allowed the death penalty as a means of justice.

My problem comes from how we implement the death penalty in the US. For example, in Saudi Arabia, they have a very low overall crime rate, the death penalty and the hand chopping etc, works for them because there is a high probability that a person committing these crimes will be punished and quickly.

This was mentioned above, but we really don't implement the death penalty well, in fact it kind of makes a mockery of the law, in that very few people are actually killed as a percentage of those sentenced, and there is NOT consistency in the death sentence. I don't think we carry it out in a just way. Also given the fact that in the US justice is often based on income and resources it would seem that a sentence of death would end up being unfair on its face. For example, OJ Simpson gets rich after killing people, while some gangbanger who commits the same crime is executed. The only difference being a good legal team.

I have seen statistics which both shows the death penalty deters, and it does not deter. I don't see how it could be a true deterrent in the US though in that we don't really do it very often.

So in general I would rather take the millions spent on processing executions, and spend it on more police to increase the odds of criminals getting caught.

[Guest LadyC]

You are correct, of course, that a complete ban on guns does not eliminate murder. But it does make a lot harder to commit.

no, it doesn't make it harder to commit. because the facts are, those who legally purchase guns rarely commit murder. those who commit murder almost always obtain their weapons illegally. and a ban on guns won't even put a dent in the availability of ILLEGAL guns.

[Arthur Durnan]

And continue to let convicted murderers lives for further decades upon decades at the beleagured taxpayers' expense in order to repeat their crimes in prison, on escape, or later on parole? The list is QUITE EXTENSIVE re convicted-but-not-executed killers ACTUALLY MURDERING FURTHER PEOPLE, innocent ones all!!

The FACT is that convicted killers have EVERYTHING going for them now. It is next-to-impossible to implement their just penalty due to jocular appeals upon appeals and more appeals. America must also come to see the vast difference between right & wrong, between innocence & guilt, and between a convicted murderer & the poor victim. As I never tire of stressing, crime will not decrease until it becomes more dangerous to be a criminal than a victim. A decision by the Supreme Court to IMPLEMENT the law re convicted murderers after one (turned-down) appeal would be most welcome. Another essential key to justice being well served would be to place additional Conservative Justices on the Court, ones who know the difference between making laws of their own as opposed to carrying out the laws as laid down by the legislators.

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com