USA Death Penalty

[PureX]

That's why we keep them in a place we call prison.

That cannot be guaranteed.

And those who kill repeatedly usually aren't doing it for ****s and giggles. They are very terribly and tragically sick with a dangerous psychopathology they didn't ask for.

The "reasons" are irrelevant. The threat they pose is very real, is horrific, and remains as long as they are alive.

I argue it's unethical to not use them for early detection and prevention of another serial killer.

You have no idea at all that that would occur.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That cannot be guaranteed.

Nothing in life save death is.

The "reasons" are irrelevant. The threat they pose is very real, is horrific, and remains as long as they are alive.

Actually the reasons are extremely relevant. Serial killers don't wake up one day amd decide to murder. They have a specific genetic trait amd brain structure, amd it's believed the horrific abuse they suffered as children (typically they're also bed wetters) activated a very dangerous psychology.
Wantint to learn why hasn't stopped it yet but it has developed criminal profiling sufficiently enough (with Ted Bundy himself helping to advance criminal profiling by leaps and bounds, so much so his insights helped to close other cases) to have an easier time discovering and locating them when one strikes.

 

[Revoltingest]

The people that we should execute will have committed multiple murders. And will have made it clear that they will continue to do so if they ever get free. It would be very unlikely that an innocent person would be convicted of this kind of crime.

Do you believe that executing such people is
worth wrongfully executing some innocent people?
A problem is that many innocent people have been
later found not guilty & even innocent upon discovering
justice system incompetence, errors, corruption, &
antiquated science. If they're dead, system failures
won't be found because no one will look for them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Do you believe that executing such people is
worth wrongfully executing some innocent people?
A problem is that many innocent people have been
later found not guilty & even innocent after discovering
justice system incompetence, errors, corruption, &
antiquated science. If they're dead, system failures
won't be found because no one will look for them.

The justice system is also detrimentally plagued with pseudoscience. Amd those eyewitness accounts that it turns out are actually among the least reliable evidence a court room can have.

 

[PureX]

Do you believe that executing such people is
worth wrongfully executing some innocent people?

I don't believe anyone would be wrongfully convicted of serial or multiple murder.

A problem is that many innocent people have been
later found not guilty & even innocent after discovering
justice system incompetence, errors, corruption, &
antiquated science. If they're dead, system failures
won't be found because no one will look for them.

Perfection is not possible. But imperfection should not excuse us from taking the appropriate action.

 

[Revoltingest]

The justice system is also detrimentally plagued with pseudoscience. Amd those eyewitness accounts that it turns out are actually among the least reliable evidence a court room can have.

"I Saw It with My Own Eyes." But Did You Really?

Studies continue to show that eyewitness testimony can be completely unreliable. How do we fix it?

www.psychologytoday.com

Why the Prevalence of Lying by Police is a Problem for the Innocent - Innocence Project

innocenceproject.org

Who Polices Prosecutors Who Abuse Their Authority? Usually Nobody

The innocent can wind up in prison. The guilty can be set free. But New York City prosecutors who withhold evidence, tolerate false testimony or commit other abuses almost never see their careers damaged.

www.propublica.org

These Judges Can Have Less Training Than Barbers but Still Decide Thousands of Cases Each Year

South Carolina’s system for magistrate judges is unlike any state in the country, creating fertile ground for incompetence and corruption. Most aren’t lawyers, but their decisions can have lasting effects on the vulnerable people who come before them.

www.propublica.org

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't believe anyone would be wrongfully convicted of serial or multiple murder.

But it will inevitably happen.
See post# 286 for the reasons.

Perfection is not possible. But imperfection should not excuse us from taking the appropriate action.

How is the death penalty appropriate?
- It doesn't reduce crime.
- It's spendier than life in prison.
- It's irreversible.
https://reason.com/2024/01/23/this-death-row-inmate-says-hes-innocent-the-supreme-court-has-agreed-to-hear-his-case/

New DNA Evidence Suggests Executed Man Was Innocent

Despite maintaining his innocence, Ledell Lee was executed in 2017 for a brutal murder. New DNA evidence from the murder weapon revealed the genetic material of a different man.

www.psychologytoday.com

‘He died in agony’: how mistaken identity led to a man’s execution

Shocking documentary The Phantom, the story of Carlos DeLuna, an innocent man accused of murder, shines a light on the many problems with the death penalty

www.theguardian.com

 

[PureX]

But it will inevitably happen.
See post# 286 for the reasons.

How is the death penalty appropriate?
- It doesn't reduce crime.
- It's spendier than life in prison.
- It's irreversible.
https://reason.com/2024/01/23/this-death-row-inmate-says-hes-innocent-the-supreme-court-has-agreed-to-hear-his-case/

New DNA Evidence Suggests Executed Man Was Innocent

Despite maintaining his innocence, Ledell Lee was executed in 2017 for a brutal murder. New DNA evidence from the murder weapon revealed the genetic material of a different man.

www.psychologytoday.com

‘He died in agony’: how mistaken identity led to a man’s execution

Shocking documentary The Phantom, the story of Carlos DeLuna, an innocent man accused of murder, shines a light on the many problems with the death penalty

www.theguardian.com

It ensures that people that have shown themselves to be likely to kill again if they get the opportunity cannot do so, because they will not get that opportunity. Something we cannot ensure by keeping them locked up. I do not believe that we have the right to expect society to bear that danger for the sake of a very rare possible wrongful conviction.

Keep in mind I am only referring to people that have shown by their actions that they are likely to kill again if they are able.

 

[Revoltingest]

It ensures that people that have shown themselves to be likely to kill again if they get the opportunity cannot do so, because they will not get that opportunity. Something we cannot ensure by keeping them locked up.

How many prisoners serving life sentences
without parole get out to kill again?

I do not believe that we have the right to expect society to bear that danger for the sake of a very rare possible wrongful conviction.

Keep in mind I am only referring to people that have shown by their actions that they are likely to kill again if they are able.

If this hasn't been shown to curb crime
or save money, why execute them?

 

[Heyo]

It ensures that people that have shown themselves to be likely to kill again if they get the opportunity cannot do so, because they will not get that opportunity. Something we cannot ensure by keeping them locked up. I do not believe that we have the right to expect society to bear that danger for the sake of a very rare possible wrongful conviction.

Keep in mind I am only referring to people that have shown by their actions that they are likely to kill again if they are able.

What is your take on my suggestion in post #269? Would you like to be on jury duty?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Other humans are not fodder for our lab experiments. Also, these people are very dangerous. The whole point of execution is to eliminate that ongoing danger.

No, it isn't. Imprisonment already addresses that danger. Someone securely imprisoned isn't going to go on any more murder sprees than someone who's dead.

And if it were about eliminating the danger of future crimes, elderly or medically infirm inmates would never get executed.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It ensures that people that have shown themselves to be likely to kill again if they get the opportunity cannot do so, because they will not get that opportunity. Something we cannot ensure by keeping them locked up. I do not believe that we have the right to expect society to bear that danger for the sake of a very rare possible wrongful conviction.

Keep in mind I am only referring to people that have shown by their actions that they are likely to kill again if they are able.

Please tell me that you sincerely believe that, if he hadn't been executed in 2022 by the State of Texas, Carl Wayne Buntion would have killed again.

Carl Wayne Buntion (pictured), a 78-year-old who spent 31 years on death row in Texas and who just days before had been taken to the hospital suffering from pneumonia and blood in his urine, was executed.

Buntion had sought to halt his execution on grounds that his death sentence was predicated upon a false prediction that he would pose a continuing threat if spared the death penalty. His clemency petition, which was denied April 19, argued the “Mr. Buntion is a frail, elderly man who requires specialized care to perform basic functions. He is not a threat to anyone in prison and will not be a threat to anyone in prison if his sentence is reduced to a lesser penalty.” In his 31 years sentenced to death, “he has been cited for only three disciplinary infractions,” the petition said, “and he has not been cited for any infraction whatsoever for the last twenty-three years.”

One Execution, One Reprieve: Scheduled Executions of Oldest Death-Row Prisoners in Texas and Tennessee Illustrate Aging of Death Row

The Death Penalty Information Center is a non-profit organization serving the media and the public with analysis and information about capital punishment.…

deathpenaltyinfo.org

 

[PureX]

How many prisoners serving life sentences
without parole get out to kill again?

If this hasn't been shown to curb crime
or save money, why execute them?

Because it guarantees that people who have shown themselves to be an ongoing threat to all of us, will not be. It's not about the money.

No, it isn't. Imprisonment already addresses that danger.

Imprisonment cannot be guaranteed.

Someone securely imprisoned isn't going to go on any more murder sprees than someone who's dead.

They could kill other prisoners or guards. They could escape. Trump could pardon them. We cannot guarantee they will not kill again so long as they remain alive.

And if it were about eliminating the danger of future crimes, elderly or medically infirm inmates would never get executed.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because it guarantees that people who have shown themselves to be an ongoing threat to all of us, will not be. It's not about the money.

Money is important though. Spending extra of
one's budget to execute them is money that
could've been spent on something of
demonstrated value, eg, prisoner health.

Imprisonment cannot be guaranteed.

Executions aren't guaranteed either.
It can take 30 years to clear the hurdles
& get the job done. And the executions
sometimes fail.
What is the rate of someone sentenced
to life without parole getting out to
kill again? Is it above 0.000000000%?

They could kill other prisoners or guards.

Has this happened?
Does it happen more often than wrongly
convicted prisoners sentenced to death?

They could escape.

But do they?

Trump could pardon them.

But has he?

e cannot guarantee they will not kill again so long as they remain alive.

Perfection is the enemy of good.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Imprisonment cannot be guaranteed.

It can be reasonably guaranteed with a properly functioning and competent government.

... and I would argue that a government that isn't properly functioning or competent shouldn't be given the authority to execute people.

They could kill other prisoners or guards. They could escape.

So can inmates on death row.

Trump could pardon them.

Trump actually ended the moratorium on federal executions and had 13 people killed. The moratorium has been reinstated since he left office, so at this point, all executions in the US are happening at the state level.

We cannot guarantee they will not kill again so long as they remain alive.

To a reasonable, practical level of certainty, we can.

And if we don't constrain ourselves to what's reasonable and practical, we can come up with scenarios where executing a murderer causes more deaths (e.g. maybe on hearing the news of the execution, an accomplice sets off a bomb somewhere).

 

[Rational Agnostic]

I have long opposed the death penalty as there's other forms of punishment, plus ignores the fact that people may be rehabilitated.

What strikes me as hypocrisy is that so many Christians are for the death penalty and yet Jesus not only talked about redemption but also said "Let he whom is without sin cast the first stone" when a woman was about to be stoned for prostitution.

I'm not opposed to the death penalty in cases where there is absolute, irrefutable proof that someone committed a murder. I think there are some people who are simply too evil and sadistic to be rehabilitated. Having said that though, I agree in general about rehabilitation, the prison system has way too much of an emphasis on punishment for non-violent crimes (that in the majority of cases only increases the chance of re-offending).

 

[Sand Dancer]

That the US still has the death penalty says a lot about the country.

We have first world money but many "third world" ideas. Ugh.

 

[metis]

I think there are some people who are simply too evil and sadistic to be rehabilitated.

But how could you or anyone else know if Joe Schmoe can't be rehabilitated?

As one Methodist minister I listened to said [paraphrased]: I oppose capital punishment but will admit that some deaths don't particularly grieve me.

 

[PureX]

It can be reasonably guaranteed with a properly functioning and competent government.

... and I would argue that a government that isn't properly functioning or competent shouldn't be given the authority to execute people.



So can inmates on death row.



Trump actually ended the moratorium on federal executions and had 13 people killed. The moratorium has been reinstated since he left office, so at this point, all executions in the US are happening at the state level.



To a reasonable, practical level of certainty, we can.

And if we don't constrain ourselves to what's reasonable and practical, we can come up with scenarios where executing a murderer causes more deaths (e.g. maybe on hearing the news of the execution, an accomplice sets off a bomb somewhere).

I think you're confusing the various kinds of killers. But you make a point. No system is perfect. So all we have to rely on is reasoned opinion. My reasoned opinion is that some murderers pose an ongoing threat that the rest of us should not have to accept.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think you're confusing the various kinds of killers.

I'm looking at the recent track record of the death penalty in the US and the entire spectrum of who has been executed.

But you make a point. No system is perfect. So all we have to rely on is reasoned opinion. My reasoned opinion is that some murderers pose an ongoing threat that the rest of us should not have to accept.

For an example of what this looks like in practice: the justification for Carl Wayne Buntion's death sentence was that he posed an ongoing threat.