Thoughts on the Death Penalty

[Further]

Retribution and... What? Read it to me, please.

(e) Retribution and the possibility of deterrence of capital crimes by prospective offenders are not impermissible considerations for a legislature to weigh in determining whether the death penalty should be imposed, and it cannot be said that Georgia's legislative judgment that such a penalty is necessary in some cases is clearly wrong. Pp. 183-187.

It does go to show that those who were in favor of the death penalty were making those arguments. It also means the courts couldn't or wouldn't consider that argument. But clear as day, you are wrong, the pro DP side used tha deterrence argument.

 

[Denny Crane]

In Gregg v Georgia, back in 1976

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1970-1979/1975/1975_74_6257/

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregg_v._Georgia

The fact that juries remained willing to impose the death penalty also contributed to the Court's conclusion that American society did not believe in 1976 that the death penalty was in all circumstances a cruel and unusual punishment.

The Court also found that the death penalty "comports with the basic concept of human dignity at the core of the [Eighth] Amendment". The death penalty serves two principal social purposes—retribution and deterrence. "In part, capital punishment is an expression of society's moral outrage at particularly offensive conduct". But this outrage must be expressed in an ordered fashion, for America is a society of laws. Retribution is consistent with human dignity, because society believes that "certain crimes are themselves so grievous an affront to humanity that the only adequate response may be the penalty of death". And although it is difficult to determine statistically how much crime the death penalty actually deters, the Court found that in 1976 there was "no convincing empirical evidence" supporting either the view that the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime or the opposite view. Still, the Court could not completely discount the possibility that for certain "carefully contemplated murderers", "the possible penalty of death may well enter into the cold calculus that precedes the decision to act".

 

[Further]

Stop changing the debate, I never claimed that it was a deterrent. I simply disagreed with your assertion that deterrence was never an argument given by the pro death penalty side.

 

[Further]

You, in your last quote, proved your assertion was wrong

 

[Denny Crane]

It does go to show that those who were in favor of the death penalty were making those arguments. It also means the courts couldn't or wouldn't consider that argument. But clear as day, you are wrong, the pro DP side used tha deterrence argument.

So if the lawyers wanting to keep the death penalty abolished argued it was no deterrent, the legislature and attorney defending the law shouldn't argue it?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furman_v._Georgia

In the following four years, 37 states enacted new death penalty laws aimed at overcoming the court's concerns about arbitrary imposition of the death penalty. Several statutes mandating bifurcated trials, with separate guilt-innocence and sentencing phases, and imposing standards to guide the discretion of juries and judges in imposing capital sentences, were upheld in a series of Supreme Court decisions in 1976, led by Gregg v. Georgia. Other statutes enacted in response to Furman which mandated imposition of the death penalty upon conviction of a certain crime were struck down in cases of that same year.

...

So the Georgia legislature threw everything it could into the legislation to defend against challenges. They were restoring a penalty that had been in place for centuries and that had nothing to do with deterrence before.

 

[Denny Crane]

You, in your last quote, proved your assertion was wrong

No, I didn't.

The court upheld the DP. Deterrence or lack of was no consideration.

#winning

 

[Minstrel]

If there were widely no respect for the law, nobody would follow any of the laws.

You're conflating too many things. There is respect for law because things like jail time and fines do have a deterrence effect. It's not that nothing deters people. What's been generally found is that the death penalty itself has little to no deterrence effect. So laws have teeth due to concepts like jail and fines and those sorts of things. The death penalty adds no additional "teeth" whether your wording for what that means is deterrence or respect. Both mean "changing behavior of potential transgressors" and it doesn't.

 

[Further]

And yet they made the argument. You can argue they never did before, never did after, they didn't mean it, they never never made the argument with a banana on their nose. But you can't say it wasn't an argument, because clear as day it was.

You were wrong Denny, admit you were wrong, it happens to everyone. And for you, it might even be a healthy step, like a crack addict going a day without a fix.

 

[Further]

No, I didn't.

The court upheld the DP. Deterrence or lack of was no consideration.

#winning

But it was an argument.


Sign sealed delivered.

 

[Denny Crane]

But it was an argument.


Sign sealed delivered.

An argument. Not a compelling one. Not the source reasoning for the death penalty.

Just an argument that arose in the 1960s when pointy headed liberals sought to abolish it because it was no deterrent.

It is not why we ever had the death penalty. Retribution and to guarantee the person never would commit another crime, even killing another inmate if he were imprisoned for life.

I agree with the judges and lawyers and justices who have dealt with the matter.

The issue of deterrence has never ever been a factor in any court case that I know of. 8th amendment cruel and unusual punishment is the sole reason given by the left wing justices.

 

[Denny Crane]

You're conflating too many things. There is respect for law because things like jail time and fines do have a deterrence effect. It's not that nothing deters people. What's been generally found is that the death penalty itself has little to no deterrence effect. So laws have teeth due to concepts like jail and fines and those sorts of things. The death penalty adds no additional "teeth" whether your wording for what that means is deterrence or respect. Both mean "changing behavior of potential transgressors" and it doesn't.

Bzzzzzt. Judges say this answer is full of crap.

I wrote what respect for the law means. You can try and pretend I wrote something else.

We agree about deterrent. It's no reason for or against the death penalty tho.

 

[Minstrel]

Bzzzzzt. Judges say this answer is full of crap.

I wrote what respect for the law means. You can try and pretend I wrote something else.

You wrote that the death penalty is necessary to give the law teeth. Since the death penalty doesn't create any greater respect for the law (i.e. deterrence effect), it doesn't add any teeth.

I know you try to evade when pinned dead to rights, but this is desperate even for you.

 

[Denny Crane]

You wrote that the death penalty is necessary to give the law teeth. Since the death penalty doesn't create any greater respect for the law (i.e. deterrence effect), it doesn't add any teeth.

I know you try to evade when pinned dead to rights, but this is desperate even for you.

Yes. The law is just words on paper if it's not enforced. It needs teeth in that sense.

You can pretend I really meant something else.

Retribution creates respect for the law. We have mighty fine laws, and they're fairly enforced.

If there were no such respect, people would be storming the White House and congress to overthrow the government.

 

[Minstrel]

Yes. The law is just words on paper if it's not enforced. It needs teeth in that sense.

You can pretend I really meant something else.

Retribution creates respect for the law. We have mighty fine laws, and they're fairly enforced.

If there were no such respect, people would be storming the White House and congress to overthrow the government.

If it doesn't change behavior (i.e. encourage people NOT to break the law), then it's a pretty useless concept of "respect."

If you're using some hippie-dippie Platonic concept of "respect," (people have an impossible-to-measure-but-totally-meaningful admiration for laws that are enforced by death), there's not much to discuss. In real life terms, people have "respect" for laws that they don't want to transgress. The death penalty doesn't add any measurable incentive to avoid breaking laws, so in real life terms, it creates no additional respect.

Your last line is a non sequitur regarding the "teeth" that the death penalty creates. People aren't avoiding storming the White House because of the death penalty. They're not doing it because actual deterrent penalties (like jail time) are already part of the law.

We were discussing the law-teeth that the death penalty creates and, as we've established, there are none. Laws already have teeth due to things like jail time and fines--the death penalty adds no value above and beyond those.

 

[Denny Crane]

If it doesn't change behavior (i.e. encourage people NOT to break the law), then it's a pretty useless concept of "respect."

If you're using some hippie-dippie Platonic concept of "respect," (people have an impossible-to-measure-but-totally-meaningful admiration for laws that are enforced by death), there's not much to discuss. In real life terms, people have "respect" for laws that they don't want to transgress. The death penalty doesn't add any measurable incentive to avoid breaking laws, so in real life terms, it creates no additional respect.

Your last line is a non sequitur regarding the "teeth" that the death penalty creates. People aren't avoiding storming the White House because of the death penalty. They're not doing it because actual deterrent penalties (like jail time) are already part of the law.

We were discussing the law-teeth that the death penalty creates and, as we've established, there are none. Laws already have teeth due to things like jail time and fines--the death penalty adds no value above and beyond those.

I don't see why you aren't grasping the concept of respect.

1. a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.

You seem to be using it in some other sense.

The qualities are that the laws are enforced, fairly as can be. Most everyone agrees.

 

[Minstrel]

You seem to be using it in some other sense.

Yes, in a meaningful sense. It's hard to make a real claim to respect if it doesn't prevent people from breaking the law.

 

[Denny Crane]

Yes, in a meaningful sense. It's hard to make a real claim to respect if it doesn't prevent people from breaking the law.

The laws don't prevent me from stealing or killing. It just never occurs to me.

Probably true for 99.9% of everyone here.

But when I see some news story about someone convicted of a crime, I don't doubt they got due process. That's my respect for the law.

 

[Minstrel]

The laws don't prevent me from stealing or killing. It just never occurs to me.

Then the laws for those aren't meant for you and don't require teeth. The teeth are required for people who might consider stealing or killing and the death penalty hasn't shown to be effective as such "teeth."

 

[Denny Crane]

Then the laws for those aren't meant for you and don't require teeth. The teeth are required for people who might consider stealing or killing and the death penalty hasn't shown to be effective as such "teeth."

The laws are meant to provide retribution (justice) to those who can't play nice in the society sandbox.

Those who steal or kill obviously are not deterred by the laws.

Trivia question time.

How many executions in the US in our history?

 

[Minstrel]

The laws are meant to provide retribution (justice) to those who can't play nice in the society sandbox.

Those who steal or kill obviously are not deterred by the laws.

Those who actually steal or kill aren't, but those who would have or might have if we had no laws at all are a much larger pool. Jail time and fines have been shown to have a deterrent effect. For a very prosaic example, it's been found that simply having a tiny co-pay (of even as small as a few dollars) makes a big difference in cutting down frivolous use of otherwise-free services. I would say that laws and punishments are primarily for deterrent effect--we'd like to avoid having crimes committed in the first place, rather than have them happen and then pursue retribution.

I have no doubt that retribution is a large part of law and order for some, but I don't think that's the primary function of law in society.

 

[Denny Crane]

Those who actually steal or kill aren't, but those who would have or might have if we had no laws at all are a much larger pool. Jail time and fines have been shown to have a deterrent effect. For a very prosaic example, it's been found that simply having a tiny co-pay (of even as small as a few dollars) makes a big difference in cutting down frivolous use of otherwise-free services. I would say that laws and punishments are primarily for deterrent effect--we'd like to avoid having crimes committed in the first place, rather than have them happen and then pursue retribution.

I have no doubt that retribution is a large part of law and order for some, but I don't think that's the primary function of law in society.

Prove somebody might have. Are you a mind reader?

So now you are arguing that the death penalty is a deterrent?

Maybe it does. It's not relevant tho.

 

[Minstrel]

Prove somebody might have. Are you a mind reader?

No, but demanding hard proof is a pretty bizarre standard for someone arguing that the death penalty increases the admiration of the law in people. Can you prove that increase in admiration in the hearts of the population?

However, it doesn't really matter to my point. If you don't believe any penalty deters crime, that's fine. My point was that the death penalty doesn't add teeth to the law because it doesn't increase the respect people have to not break it, as we both agree (you've agreed there's no deterrence effect).

So now you are arguing that the death penalty is a deterrent?

Nope, I said jail and fines add teeth, not the death penalty.

 

[Mediocre Man]

What do you think about what's been happening lately?

Lately in the US there have been some botched executions mainly due to the fact that drug companies a couple years ago started realizing that their meds, which were designed to save lives, were being used to put people to death. Well, some of the companies considered that immoral while others just saw it as bad press, but either way all main pharmaceutical companies worldwide started refusing to sell if the purpose was to kill.

So, then the states started having a difficult time getting the meds they wanted, some states started using compounding pharmacies which are little labs that aren't required to meet the same standards, and meds from those pharmacies have proven many times to not work correctly, like an execution last night that took over 2 hours to work, with the person snorting and flopping around for that whole time. Other states even were found buying the stuff on the black market.

Some states have passed laws that require them to keep all information about how they get their drugs secret, along with keeping secret not only the identities of the ones administering the drugs, but also what credentials or training those people have. The secrecy mixed with spotty sourcing, the medical boards saying administering execution drugs goes against the Hippocratic Oath and can be grounds for losing ones license, has led to many executions being postponed or botched.

If only we could execute criminals with the same compassion that they murder, rape and torture men, women and children.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

If only we could execute criminals with the same compassion that they murder, rape and torture men, women and children.

Careful, I've already banned two people today.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Careful, I've already banned two people today.

Not sure if you're kidding or not?

What'd they get banned for?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Not sure if you're kidding or not?

What'd they get banned for?

Totally not kidding. I did ban two long time members today.

Okay, maybe I'm fucking with you. It appears that BenDavis and BenDavis503 were no longer banned so I re-banned him. It makes feel like I'm a badass.

Rawr!

How is your day going? I hear it's hot in Texas.

 

[Denny Crane]

No, but demanding hard proof is a pretty bizarre standard for someone arguing that the death penalty increases the admiration of the law in people. Can you prove that increase in admiration in the hearts of the population?

However, it doesn't really matter to my point. If you don't believe any penalty deters crime, that's fine. My point was that the death penalty doesn't add teeth to the law because it doesn't increase the respect people have to not break it, as we both agree (you've agreed there's no deterrence effect).



Nope, I said jail and fines add teeth, not the death penalty.

I don't say the death penalty increases the admiration of anyone.

If it's the law, and it is, and they don't enforce it, then the Law loses some measure of respect. I don't need to prove it or read minds. It is by definition.

I just don't think the death penalty as a deterrent means squat to whether we should have one or not. Though we should, IMO.

The answer to my trivia question is about 4500 executions in the US since 1930. About 1 a week. Even less since 1976, about 1 every 2 weeks.

It is reserved for the worst of the worst, and it is rarely used.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Totally not kidding. I did ban two long time members today.

Okay, maybe I'm fucking with you. It appears that BenDavis and BenDavis503 were no longer banned so I re-banned him. It makes feel like I'm a badass.

Rawr!

How is your day going? I hear it's hot in Texas.

It's fucking hot, and will be til week 3 of the NFL season.......literally, that seems to be when the humidity goes away.

 

[Minstrel]

I don't say the death penalty increases the admiration of anyone.

If it's the law, and it is, and they don't enforce it, then the Law loses some measure of respect.

You don't need a death penalty to enforce a law, or all laws.

 

[Minstrel]

It's fucking hot, and will be til week 3 of the NFL season.......literally, that seems to be when the humidity goes away.

God doesn't pay attention during training camp and exhibition season? Casual fan.