Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Dry
DP has no deterrent effect on populations that do not believe in it.

I've read a lot of stupid things at poly but this has to be a top ten. "I don't believe in the death penalty therefor I'm not scared of the thought of being hanged."

The preservation of one's own life is one of the strongest motivators ever.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Arrian
that still doesn't deal with the obvious problem of executing innocents, which we know, for sure, we've done...

We have?

[dannubis]

For starters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The preservation of one's own life is one of the strongest motivators ever.

Yes, but the question is if all murderers go into a serious rational debate with themselves about all pros and cons of murdering anyone before they do it.

I really would like to know how they came to their findings in those studies. From the article that is rather unclear.

[Wiglaf]

I didn't read the original post because it is long and misses the point entirely. Deterrence does not matter. The point is that killing these people gives the families great satisfaction owed to them by the murderer, and it ensures the families have the last laugh. Deterrence is a nice bonus on top of this, it is like compound interest, just keeps getting better until you take it out of the bank.

Also traitors to the country should be beheaded. My only regret is the stringent constitutional requirements to convict obvious douches of the crime of treason. Two witnesses or a confession in open court? Why not a videotape of the ****ing crime while we're at it.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
The point is that killing these people gives the families great satisfaction owed to them by the murderer, and it ensures the families have the last laugh.

[Lorizael]

Oh man. What happened to the Post of the Week contest?

[dannubis]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
I didn't read the original post because it is long and misses the point entirely. Deterrence does not matter. The point is that killing these people gives the families great satisfaction owed to them by the murderer, and it ensures the families have the last laugh. Deterrence is a nice bonus on top of this, it is like compound interest, just keeps getting better until you take it out of the bank.

Also traitors to the country should be beheaded. My only regret is the stringent constitutional requirements to convict obvious douches of the crime of treason. Two witnesses or a confession in open court? Why not a videotape of the ****ing crime while we're at it.

You forgot your smiley

[Whoha]

Originally posted by dannubis
For starters:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg

I'm not seeing the evidence of innocence there.

[rah]

I like the death penalty when you're 100% sure. But alas, many innocent people have been killed so I'm against how it's currently administered.

I did some research many years ago for a debate and the one thing I remember the most was interviews with robbers in prison who used fake guns said they did because they were afraid of the death penalty. Since I've never heard of anyone being killed in a robbery when the robber had a fake gun. (except for the rare occasion where the robber was shot ) it's pretty conclusive that at least in that aspect the death penalty was a deterrent. Other arguements of how it act as a deterrent were less sure and subject to debate.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by rah
I like the death penalty when you're 100% sure. But alas, many innocent people have been killed so I'm against how it's currently administered.

How many?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by BeBro
Yes, but the question is if all murderers go into a serious rational debate with themselves about all pros and cons of murdering anyone before they do it.

I really would like to know how they came to their findings in those studies. From the article that is rather unclear.

I've never heard anyone claim all potential murderers are behaiving rationally. However, anyone who claims the death penalty has no deterent effect simply must believe that not a single potential murderer is capable of rational thought. As long as we agree that some potential murderers behaive rationally then we have agreed that the death penalty does indeed have a deterent effect.

[BeBMan]

I don't say all of those guys are incapable of rational thinking, but even when a guy generally does behave rationally it doesn't mean he thinks really about the consequences/punishment of the crime. I'd assume that many simply think they get away, because it would be even more irrational to commit a crime when you're absolutely sure that they get you. And in case you think that you indeed get away the form of punishment plus the deterrence it provides would seem secondary.

[Dinner]

Unless you can claim that every single potential murder believes there is no chance of him getting caught then you're still saying some portion of potental murderers are subject to a deterent effect.

[Dinner]

It's so hard to get some people to admit what most people already know via common sense.

You know you'd do much better making a value argument about the risks of executing an innocent man then with continuing this nonsense denying the deterent effect.