Death Penalty

The death penalty was abolished in most of Europe in recent decades, yet crime did not boom. In fact, as far as I know, crime is still higher in some parts of the US than in those European countries where the death penalty has been abandoned. Apparently crime has other causes than just the presence or absence of deterrents in the form of cruel punishment.

 

Which i believe i have pointed out in my earlier posts,education.

 

simon wrote:

Is there a serious move to return to use of the dp in Britain? If not then it's entirely moot.

You pointed it out yourself, they are different.The sometimes excessive safeguards built into our system and resulting from the Bill of Rights are not present in Britain. Do they exist in some other form? Perhaps, but that isn't clear.As far as the safeguards to prevent innocents being executed.They aren't liklely present in Britain because there is no dp in Britain. We keep returning to this point. Can't make it any clearer than that.

 

I do not recall being taught in school that I should not commit a crime.

 

For which i feel utterly sorry about.But where i come from,everyone is instilled moral values. A system which doesn't do that,in my opinion would be more prone to crimes than in system which have.Consider the effects of propaganda on North koreans for example.But countries can learn a milder form of "propaganda" to instill good values.

 

That is speculation and no more than the routine "nature vs nurture" argument.

IMO, media has alot to do with a person's good and evil judgement. Although the media in the US refrains from showing nudity on television (besides HBO, Showtime, etc), violence/crimes is the most common occurance on television and seems to be openly accepted as worthwile entertainment.

 

In that case,pardon me,but isn't that nurturing as well?Educating the public isn't only about books and schools i am afraid.It has to be a psychological defense as well.The media must have strict censorship except for information.Our media over here has some very strict censorship laws and yet we watch the same movies as you guys.If the media in the states sensationalize violence,then it is also the fault of the public as well as the government. It's either you get a safer place to live in or you lose some privileges.

Of course,it is debatable whether violent shows contribute to crimes.

 

I think that the violence in movies and video games numbs the senses of people. Thus, when they mimic certain violent and/or criminal acts, it's more of a game to them than reality. It gives them an air of unreality, if you will.

 

Which would need more education for the public and more responsibility from parents

 

Just heard an interesting snippet on the news, which has limited relevance.

Since the US death penalty was re-instated in 1976, 1,000 people have now been executed. (the 1,000th was this morning - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4490842.stm )


They had some guy from Amesty International on (a rather biased opinion, obviously ) who pointed out all the hundreds of people released from Death Row after 'new evidence was uncovered' etc etc.
Obviously he did not point out that new evidence was not uncovered on those who were killed.

Actually, that is an interesting point - does the US bother to re-try after a criminal is executed, like Britain has done on occaision?

 

ricky wrote:

Not a large number for 29 years when one considers that IIRC about 600,000 or so murders were committed over the same period. Raw numbers can be misleading when one is talking of a nation of almost 300 million people. Percapita figures would be more revealing.

Been there, done that. See my earlier comments regarding the nature of "new evidence" that results in new trials and how it does not equate to innocence. The news media and anti cp groups play on the ignorance of the public regarding the judicial system when they whine about "innocent" people being executed.

Seems rather pointless to me. If you do it right the first time what purpose is served by redoing it?

 

Aye, but there are too many liberal lawyers who are more concerned about lining their pockets while trumpeting the rights of criminals, than they are with justice, and seeing 'Right' done.

(Does that last phrase make sense to anyone besides me?)

 

Don't worry Grieg, I wasn't trying to use that to make any point!

Yes.

IF.

That is the problem. There have been several trials of people whose conviction was thrown into doubt by new evidence being discovered, or by accusations of malpractice, or new techniques, such as DNA testing, etc etc.

Few, if any, executed criminals have yet been pardoned through this process, but it does help to shut their supporters up when a re-trial with the much-vaunted new evidence still finds them guilty!

 

ricky wrote:

There is always some tiny grain of doubt. Perfection isn't achievable in this life. If all doubt were required to be removed then a conviction would be imposssible. It's why the legal standard of "beyond reasonable doubt" was adopted. A conviction can be thrown into doubt because of issues that have nothing to do with the question of guilt or innocence as I have repeatedly pointed out.

Those with an agenda would not be convinced by any number of retrials. They often aren't really concerned with guilt or innocence because they oppose the dp even where quilt is not a question. They wish to impose their own philosophical or religious views upon others.

 

Re-trials have generally been because a family member / old friend of the deceased didn't believe they did it, and they champion every bit of new evidence that comes in an attempt o clear their name. This also happens in non-dp cases. This also happens in dp cases where the executed criminal would be dead of natural causes by now anyway.

It is less an anti-dp thing than a 'must clear his / her name' thing.

Sadly, it tends to become a 'oh - the death penalty is wrong' thanks to the media circus. :roll:

Often, if guilt is again established, the 'justice-seeker' says 'I'll never give up fighting' and promptly disappear from the media (and therefore public conciousness), never to return.