Capital punishment is a punishment of the guilty person, not of an innocent one (at least in theory).

What you're talking about is anecdotal evidence. There are many reasons people kill, and some killers are cold-blooded and calculating too.

You can't prove to me that capital punishment is never a deterrent, just like I can't prove that it is. We simply don't know if the crimes that led to capital punishment would happen if it wasn't there.

bABA, normally the cleaning up of the crime is something that happens after the fact. That's why it's normally done sloppily enough to where they are eventually caught. They only think, "Gee, i'm gonna get in trouble for this" after they've removed their neighbors head.

makeshift, you're making that statement as a person who doesn't think about killing another. I've had a gun pointed at me .. and from the looks of it, the man who had that pointed at me has done it before and many times before. His only reason for doing it was because he KNOWS he can do it and get away with it, not because he felt like really killing me. if he didn't have that security, i'm sure he would have thought twice before even pointing that thing towards me.

Having represented many criminals over the past 15 years or so, please let me agree with this -- they never think through their consequences and most never even think about being caught. Crimes are committed in anger or under the influence of something in almost 100% of the cases. Mind you, I have never done a murder case though, but I am sure it's the same.

makeshift, you're being extremely naive if you think that people never plan crimes. Not all murders are at the spur of the moment. and some that also are, the murderer has the knowledge of the fact that he can somehow get away with it. Forget the states for the moment. Look aorund the world. How many murderers are actually caught??

Mike, what about the organized mob, for instance? They calculate very carefully when to kill and who to kill.

But you don't think like a criminal, who doesn't care. Seriously! I can't tell you how many times my clients have justified their actions to me by saying "Everyone does it" or "Everyone would do it if they could get away with it."

Besides, your examples are minor ones, and obviously laws prevent people from committing small crimes like you mentioned. But crimes of violence are different, and are usually committed in the heat of anger when rational thought doesn't matter. Or else they are committed by cold blooded murderers who think they are going to get away with it, so the punishment is actually irrelevant to them.

There you go Mike. Its not that they dont care about the consequences, its the fact that sometimes, they dont even think there WOULD be consequences. Whats stopping a lot of people from doing something if they dont think they'll ever be caught.

You're again echoiing what i'm saying. You just said people get away with it. Theres a difference between not caring about the consequences and thinking you wont have to face the consequences.

And Mike, coming from karachi where i've seen enough fights take place, i got a great story for you. My friend right, his gf just broke up with him. Shes promptly going out with one of my friend's friend. Let me tell you something. This dude has a death wish. I know right now that in about 3 months, a few of my friend's friends plan on going to karachi and roughing this guy up. My friend himself is decent and has told his friends repeatedly not to do anything terrible ... but needless to say, i'm pretty sure hes still gonna get roughed up.

I've seen numerous gang fights take place on particular streets that have been planned days in advance. Point being not everything is done in the heat of anger. I've seen enough people in my life who commit acts of violence that are completely planned. Hell, i have enough friends who dont think twice before telling me if they should beat another person up if they pissed me off .. and they're quite serious about it. Most of these people do this not because they dont care for the consequences but because they know they can get away with it. If they didn't think they could, they'd stop.

Another prime example .. most of my friends who got into these gang fights will never do it in Montreal or the states. They dont think they can get away with it. These guys are well aware of the consequences.

and its not right to say i dont think like a criminal. I've done a lot of stuff in karachi mike (nothing major or that would hurt anyone in anyway ... just broken some laws) that i wouldn't even think of doing in montreal.

yeah, I meant to have an "and/or" instead of an "and" in the line "and most never even think about being caught" -- I kind of clarified my point in a followup post, as you can see.

My take on the death penalty is it was brought back out of frustration over lax sentences in violent crimes. As Letterman used to parody-joke, commit a murder in NY and get 2 weeks in jail no ifs ands or buts.

So they went too far in the direction of being tough and I don't personally favor the death penalty and I"m glad for these recent restrictions. But as much as I don't like it, it's better than being overly lax about violent crimes which it certainly seemed was the case in the 70s and 80s.

A juvenile who shoots someone would for example plea bargain and get 2 years in a juvenile center then their record is sealed. Is that fair to the victim? Hell no. Nor to the community in general.

So count me on the side that is not for the death penalty but is also frustrated sometimes with the way juveniles and others have often literally got away with murder.

Much of the death penalty support was not to send a message to the public, it was (in my opinion) to send a message to politicians that the public wants serious crimes taken very seriously.

Yeah, but organized crime isn't afraid of life in jail either, they' act outside of our system and have created an alternative of thier own. It worked for awhile, you think Capone was worried about the chair? I doubt it. They never could trace him, they had to get him on something that wouldn't warrant a death penalty regardless.

As to the minors, that's fine. First, I don't believe in the Death Penalty, and second, I think minors aren't fully formed. Thats not to say all minor crime is random, some of it might be premeditative, but as a society we already said we don't trust them until 18/21. If we think minors can't be trusted with voting or drinking, why do we suddenly assume their in full grasp of the mature mental capabilities when they shoot someone?

As to the ruling, sure it was activist, every ruling is, laws are malleable. We just covered this in another thread where if one section of the law says someone is, 3/5 of another man, and the judges want to rule otherwise, they'll look to a different section that says something like "All men are equated equal." (I know, this is an example, don't grill). The point is they exerted a federal restriction over a state one, and that's the bigger issue. Is this really about minority capital punishment? Hell, 45/50 states probably already don't dish out that sentence to under-18 year olds, so to the 5 that do, it is about the "morality of it (in one way or another). To the other 45, alot of it has to do with encouraging a federal programme that allows them to make a decision in Vermont about what happens to kids in Texas.

Thats a tough one for me, and one of the problems I always had with state's rights is that I couldn't (through legislation and rulings) influence another part of the country, on the other hand, they can't do the same to me. I still err in the direction of centralized rulings, so for me this id doubly fine. Kids don't get capital punishment, and local courts don't get to do whatever the hell they want. But by this time next year when The ex-grande governor of death penalties persuades a slim majpority of this country that they're a good thing, then that ruling is going to come back with a vengeance. Its a tricky line to walk.

As to the backlash about people getting off, that could be resolved by jail with no bail, its doesn't need to result in execution. And if you really wanted to deal with "those crimes" people were outraged about, you can't latch the discipline on the back end, you'd have to dig far deeper and get to the roots of poverty and violence. Those people weren't freaking out about tougher sentences for a psycho in Witchita, because death penalty or no death penalty, there are always going to be an unsettling couple of those. They were outraged about random violent crime, and thats part of a bigger problem that needs to be dealt with.

Dolce - my point is that no matter how little of a factor death penalty is in deterring people from commiting capital crimes, it exists, and to deny it for purely ideological reasons is foolish. Yes, I am too against death penalty, but I can always explain that it's not because I don't believe it's a deterrent, but because I believe people, whether through the authority of the government or otherwise, do not have the right to take other people's lives.

And yes, the main reason for supporting states' rights is not having Vermont influence the laws in Texas, because you don't want ot mess with Texas

Yes I do. I just don't want it to mess with me. :wink:

I think its crazy, if a mentaly retarded person or a minor did something wrong that would have a man or woman executed than they damn well better be executed also.

Since mentaly retarded people are not able to be exectuted we are just going to have a lot of dishonest criminals plead insanity which is basicaly saying that they are mentaly retarded and getting off without a very harsh punishment, than a few years later when they are qualified as a cured patient they can walk free with nothing more than clinically insane on their record. Personaly I think thats nuts, mentaly retarded people that commit very bad crimes know exactly what they are doing, they may not completly understand the nature of there crime but they should still be held responsible and executed like any normal man or woman.

As for the kids, I dont care how young they are if they have commited a serious enough crime to be exectuted than I say execute them. I'm 16 and if I were to do something that was very wrong such as murder, even at my age I would expect the death sentence, I feel thats common sense. Getting rid of the death sentence for kids my age is giving that person another chance to do someting wrong. I'm not the kind of person that believes in second or third chances especially with very serious crimes. The person(s) who performed the wrong doing should expect full consequences for thier actions other wise I feel they will learn nothing, and if its the death sentence that will make them and all the other criminals around them learn than I say let it be.

Always expect consequences for your actions, and i also think the harsher the punishment the better people will learn not to do bad things and if they dont than its thier problem so they should expect punishment.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

From what you have posted above you feel my opinion is barbaric why is that?

why do you feel the death penalty is barbaric?

and why do you feel that America/U.S. should become more like other countries?

Personally I think American/U.S. should not try to rejoice with the International countries afterall most of them hate American/U.S. anyway.

You may think that I am being ignorant and I probably am but I see no reason why America/U.S. should have anything to do with any other country in the whole world for anything other than trade.

So can you also please explain why that opinion is wrong.

again this is just my opinion and I'm not tryng to harp on anyone :wink: