Slashdot Mirror

Source for the relative life expectancy figures: http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_levitt_analyzes_crack_economics.html
Source for the total execution figures: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/FactSheet.pdf

#1 in murders per capita

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-peanalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates

#1 in illiteracy

Illiteracy is higher in California and New York State than in Texas.

http://nces.ed.gov/naal/estimates/StateEstimates.aspx

I'll leave it at that. Obviously, your statements are politically motivated fabrications.

We don't need his confession or his statements to convict and give him the death penalty 18 U.S.C. 1121, 1512, 2119, 2322a . Thus the question of Miranda is mute.

Besides he can't talk anyway, respiration tube/ throat injury/sedation..

We have convicted rapists and murderers that seem to get off with lighter sentences than people that do anything that involves a computer these days, even if the results don't hurt anyone and only embarrass a company or some govt. personnel.

Show me the numbers and then we can talk.

Real stats for the rapist and murderer. Real stats for the geek whose computer-related crimes earned him hard time.

In the American federal system, crimes of violence are almost always prosecuted under state law.

Execution List 2012 Each state on this list, for example, has executed between 1200 and 1300 death row inmates since 1976.

Federal Executions 1927-2003: 23.

The DOJ's Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section archives its press releases of charges and convictions dating back to 2000. It's a useful corrective to the notion that the geek's crimes are victimless. That he hasn't hurt anyone.

CCIPS Press releases

We have convicted rapists and murderers that seem to get off with lighter sentences than people that do anything that involves a computer these days, even if the results don't hurt anyone and only embarrass a company or some govt. personnel.

Show me the numbers and then we can talk.

Real stats for the rapist and murderer. Real stats for the geek whose computer-related crimes earned him hard time.

In the American federal system, crimes of violence are almost always prosecuted under state law.

Execution List 2012 Each state on this list, for example, has executed between 1200 and 1300 death row inmates since 1976.

Federal Executions 1927-2003: 23.

The DOJ's Computer Crime & Intellectual Property Section archives its press releases of charges and convictions dating back to 2000. It's a useful corrective to the notion that the geek's crimes are victimless. That he hasn't hurt anyone.

CCIPS Press releases

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/images/murderrate.png

In the early '90s the U.S. murder rate dropped significantly. One would think if video games made people violent that the opposite effect would have occurred.

I keep asking if this is so true then why does every nationality and US state that has stricter gun laws have a lower rate of gun death?

States that claim the privilege of killing their own errant citizens are correlated* with higher murder rates than those that do not. Considering (as I do) that state executions and gun control legislation are both authoritarian policies, I now wonder if it's possible that authoritarianism is objectively bad for society, rather than just something I vehemently oppose.

* My own examination was years ago, and I no longer have that spreadsheet, but this brief look is consistent with my prior conclusion.

If anyone has properly sourced data showing the aforementioned gun law/crime relationship, I'd appreciate a citation. If not, I'll post one if/when I get around to it.

You should find it scary. The odds of a false positive are probably much higher.

The DNA database in the US has found matches between a black man and a white man if you point it at itself. They only look at about 12 spots and sometimes use just 9 to identify someone.

"903 pairs of profiles matching at nine or more loci in a database of about 220,000. ...State officials obtained a court order to prevent distribution of the results."

http://news.lawreader.com/2008/07/22/dna-match-between-two-men-raises-question-about-validity-of-dna-tests%E2%80%A6fbi-seeks-to-block-inquiry/
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/accuracy-dna-matches-definitively-identify-suspects-questioned

" Mostly we just see circumstantial stories about somebodies innocence."

There are 140 of them.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

California could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment.
California taxpayers pay $90,000 _more_ per death row prisoner each year than on prisoners in regular confinement.
http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42

is the death penalty a deterrent against murder?

Yes, and of course prison is a deterrent for murders, too. However people commit murders anyway. That's to be expected, so you need to measure statistically whether the death penalty deters more people. Which is very difficult to measure, since all sorts of factors could affect murder rates. However looking at US states, there is no indication that the death penalty helps with that: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state

Well, apparently the idea that it increases murders is a response to those trying to distort statistics to show that it reduces them.

This article discusses that particular phenomenon: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/DonohueDeter.pdf

It also says that the evidence could easily be read to show that increased executions result in increased murders, though they are unwilling to directly draw that conclusion.

What I did find in my research is that any studies which claim to show a deterrence effect from capital punishment tend to fall apart under serious scrutiny. To show a deterrence effect requires massaging the numbers in such a way to get the results you want. So, at best, it does nothing to deter murders, and based on the available evidence, it looks like murders are actually increased, but that would require more study.

The vast majority of criminologists agree that there's no evidence of a deterrence effect from capital punishment, though.

Yes, that sounds like a pretty effective way to discourage corruption. Maybe we should try that here.

The death penalty doesn't discourage crime. In the US, execution rates correlate with murder rates. Maybe we should examine how things are done in societies that aren't oppressive shit holes? Western European governments abandon executing prisoners, yet they're generally more receptive to the will of the voters (as opposed to corporate interests and lobbyists — business as usual in the US).

Executed, but possibly innocent.

While official investigations tend to stop when someone is put to death, and there certainly won't (and can't) be another trial after, there are a lot of cases were people have strong evidence that suggests that they're innocent. In cases where to find someone guilty, there needs to be no reasonable doubt, there is quite a bit of reasonable doubt presented here.

China executes roughly 5000-8000 people each year for various crimes. The United States has been declining since 1999, and is currently somewhere around 40 per year. Accounting for (rather than ignoring) scale, China executes about 30 to 40 times as much of its own population as the United States. Of course, that's just one metric, but it's pretty illustrative.

China is big, but it's not big enough to dilute its atrocities.

The killing of the 17 year old was unintended damage as the missile was fired at al-Qaeda leader Ibrahim al-Banna and the minor happened to be there. By the way, even in the US 17 year olds have been tried and executed as adults.
To those who say innocent people are being killed as collateral damage is unacceptable I say that they or their parents/guardian chose to be close to a known target of the US government and thereby chose to put their life in danger. No one put a gun to their heads and forced them into a building with an al-Qaeda leader. It was their choice and they bore the grave consequences. Do we really want to encourage al-Qaeda leaders to use children as human shields?

So does just locking the murderer up, and there's no risk of accidentally killing an innocent, wrongly convicted, person.

Oh and the "it's cheaper to kill them" argument is false, too. Carrying out a death penalty costs more than life in prison.

Apparently there's a movement to change the traditional lethal injection protocol to one which would leave the organs intact. Also, US executions by method since 1976: 1114 lethal injection, 157 electrocution, 11 gas chamber, 3 hanging, 3 firing squad.

Execution in the US is too rare to make much of a dent in organ donation numbers. Under 50 executions took place in the last two years (source); in contrast, there's around 2000~2500 heart transplants in the US annually (see this page for more organs). As for China, from TFA,

Some human rights groups estimate that China puts to death thousands of prisoners annually, but official figures are a state secret, according to BBC correspondents.

Listing of states with and without the death penalty
Violent Crime Rankings by state

According to those sources, 15 states do not have the death penaly and 35 do. The avg ranking in the violent crimes tables is 29 for states without and 24 for states with, supporting your claim that violent crime rates are not impacted by the presence of the death penalty. This data does not take into account any differences in application, only if the law exists.

...all other days, knowing your rights or the laws means, essentially, nothing.

I guess that depends on who you ask...

Not in the US where those rednecks still have barbaric punishments like the death penalty for being retarded.

Yeah yeah, I know I'm replying to a troll, but...

He isn't on death row for being retarded. Saying that makes me question your mental abilities. He's on death row for murdering a 17-year-old. The fact that his IQ is 68 doesn't make the victim any less dead or his family any less bereaved at having to bury their child.

There are good arguments against the death penalty. The fact that so many people on death row turned out to be innocent (i.e. because of DNA evidence) is one of the most rational. After all, you can release someone who is in prison but you can't raise the dead. The logic here is quite straightforward. However, your emotional rhetoric and willingness to distort truth as you have done is only going to weaken your position.

There are no shortcuts to actually making a solid case about a worthy subject. No, you haven't discovered the first.

Not in the US where those rednecks still have barbaric punishments like the death penalty for being retarded.

What, are they nuts? Who would want to live in a place where barroom brawls give way to deluges of bullets? Or where would-be minor road rage incidents end up in cars full of corpses? The violent crime rate there must be through the roof!

Except that reality doesn't match left-wing fantasy, and Vermont has one of the lowest murder rates in the country.

I don't understand why people can't leave the shooting of criminals to the police

Because when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

Actually, it's not true.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/international-polls-and-studies - support for death penalty in most progressive countries is either low or declining.

And yes, death penalty is a neanderthal throwback.

And then we talk about it's lack of deterrent effect. I say give them one appeal in a court distant from their original trial to help weed out miscarriage of justice, and then get on with it, and make it public and make it bloody.

I think you should read some of the statistics. Something like one in ten of people on death row are innocent. The average length of time from being sentenced to death to being exonerated (if they are even lucky enough to get off) is 9.8 years. There's a reason why there is such a lengthy appeals process. Mistakes can and do happen.

Don't trust the "justice" system.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row

The death penalty hasn't worked to deter extremely violent crimes. If it doesn't work for the scum of the earth, why do you think it would work for an even lower life form?

Honestly, what are the odds that a violent criminal will get the death penalty? Serial rapists can't unless they murder someone. A criminal who cuts off all the limbs of his victims can't get the death penalty unless one of the victims dies.

The Supreme Court found in Kennedy v. Louisiana that the victim must die for the death penalty to be an option. Basically you can rape and brutalize millions of women (and children!) knowing full well that the U.S. government cannot execute you kill one of the victims.

That, to me, is a tragedy.

Saying that is like saying that Obama killed 52 people in 2009. (52 people were executed by different states in 2009 citation: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions-united-states-2009 )

See, that number your tossing around was performed by Los Angeles, and it was 7.76 jobs. http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100917/bs_yblog_upshot/report-los-angeles-spent-70-million-in-stimulus-funds-to-create-7-76-jobs

Obama is the American president, not a Los Angeles mayor, nor a California governor.

Fact.

So you reply to an article about an innocent man being executed by saying I don't have a single name. I believe that man has a name.

Here's 138 people that were on death row while innocent, and later exonerated.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty

There's of course no similar list of innocent people that were actually executed, because once they die, it's very rare for people to continue to defend them, given how little that can accomplish. Pair that list with the article I previously posted though, and I think we can safely say there's been at least a few dozen... and one is too many.

As I said, there are many cases at http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/

As I said, there are some people who will never accept facts they don't agree with, no matter how strong the evidence.

As you may gather, I think you are one of them.

I've said everything I have to say to you on this subject.

If you would like to know more about what I believe, I invite you to re-read my earlier posts more carefully.

Oh, really? Yet, that is exactly what is implied by your posts.

The implication of my posts is in your mind. It wasn't in my posts. If you see that implication, that's your problem with reading comprehension.

I said that my first objection to the death penalty is that innocent people were executed.

Name them.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Todd_Willingham is the best-documented

Do you mean that if I valued the lives of the victims, I'd want to execute an innocent person?

False dichotomy.

I said that my first objection to capital punishment is that innocent people are executed. You accused me of believing that the life of a murderer is worth more than the lives of his victims. How do you go from my statements to your conclusion?

First a guy loses his children in a fire (at least sometimes through no fault of his own). Then, on top of that tragedy (and losing your child is the worst tragedy in the world) the district attorney falsely accuses him of murder, prosecutes him, gets a stupid jury to convict him, and executes an innocent man for arson.

Appeal to fear, appeal to emotion, and hypothetical worst case scenario which is a form of cherry picking.

I'm afraid and outraged that innocent people have been executed. What's wrong with an appeal to fear and emotion? Prosecutors do it all the time to get convictions in those same cases. It's not hypothetical; many such cases have been documented with evidence stronger than the original conviction. The worst case happens frequently. If citing the cases with the strongest evidence is cherry picking, then there's nothing wrong with cherry picking.

You sound like someone who read a popular book on "How to Argue." I recommend that, after you graduate high school, you take a college freshman English course. If you've already taken a college freshman English course, I recommend that you demand your money back. If you're home schooled, there may be no hope.

Alternately, you could become a Tea Bagger and run for Congress. In that case, your inability to distinguish between fact an opinion, and your lack of understanding of logic and argument, will not be a problem and may even be an advantage.

The rest of your post is based on those false premises and outright lies.

You are unable to cite a false premise or lie, because there are none. As I say, you don't seem to understand what a fact is. When you disagree with someone, you just throw out a lot of inflammatory language.

And, even if he doesn't face the death penalty, he would still prosecuted.

How does that do his children any good?

How does that do the surviving members of the victim's family any good?

Or, do you suggest that we not prosecute anyone, ever, because they might be innocent?

I suggest that we not execute anyone, ever, because they might be innocent. They have been innocent, many times.

And what happens if someone is executed the day after the trial and exonerating evidence is found 10 years later?

Do you know of a case where this has happened?

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty

The deterrent argument is scientifically invalid:

"There is no reliable, scientifically sound evidence that [shows that executions] can exert a deterrent effect.... These flaws and omissions in a body of scientific evidence render it unreliable as a basis for law or policy that generate life-and-death decisions. To accept it uncritically invites errors that have the most severe human costs." (Discussion of recent deterrence studies).

Sorry, can you reference the double blind test? The real problem is in our implementation. Public executions would certainly not have the same effect (or lack of it) as our current policy. Delaying executions for multiple years also defeats any deterrent affect. The odds of being executed for any premeditated murder in the U.S. are very slim, so there's virtually no deterrent when most of the criminals just end up getting three hots and a cot.

"There is no reliable, scientifically sound evidence that [shows that executions] can exert a deterrent effect.... These flaws and omissions in a body of scientific evidence render it unreliable as a basis for law or policy that generate life-and-death decisions. To accept it uncritically invites errors that have the most severe human costs." (Discussion of recent deterrence studies).

Actually, in the Beltway Sniper case the states fought it out amongst themselves. Virginia won, because it argued (convincingly) that it could put them to death most efficiently. But you are correct that the feds occasionally involve themselves in cases like it. This page tallies the current inmates on federal death row, including a breakdown by state where the crime was committed and noting which states lack a death penalty. I believe the site is anti-death penalty, but for factual information they are a useful source.

Example: white folks getting life and blacks getting the needle in murder trials during the days of racism.

Sadly, race still has much to do with who gets the death penalty today. (Source)

Good point. I find it fascinating that slashdot is quoting a web site called "iran video news" that is run out of Arizona. If this is the only source that is reporting Iran is "considering" the death penalty then why the fuck should we believe it? We already know that the United States runs an intense media propaganda network around the world, and used it domestically during the build up to the Iraq war. In terms of Iran's use of the death penalty, they are definitely more fascist than we are, and these executions should stop. At the same time, why don't we start looking at our OWN record? Wouldn't it be easier to end our own human rights transgressions before attacking those of other countries? We've imprisoned journalists, and we've executed people who were children when they committed their crimes, the mentally retarded, and have condemned to death many people who were probably innocent, so our high horse on capital punishment and the imprisonment of journalists is not particularly "high". We've also now started imprisoning without trial and even torture.

I am sad to see slashdot fall for this obvious propaganda. I thought you guys were good critical thinkers.

Try here for a start: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent

There's also many who were found innocent who were within days of being executed.

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/wrongfulconvictions/exonerations/txAdamsSummary.html
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/wrongfulconvictions/exonerations/txBrandleySummary.html
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/wrongfulconvictions/exonerations/txCookSummary.html
http://www.law.northwestern.edu/wrongfulconvictions/exonerations/txDeebSummary.html

As well as many on life sentences found innocent, found at the same site.

Capital punishment is probably cheaper than keeping somebody in jail for the rest of their lives

Actually, it's not. Because of the series of appeals required in most states, it actually costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to keep them in prison for the rest of their life.

How could putting someone to death (that is assuming that the person is put to death within a year) cost less then keeping them in jail for the rest of their lives?

Automatic appeals. Court time.

An anti-death penalty site which relies in large part on this study.

Cost to incarcerate one person, one year is about $50k, currently.

A $1 million trial thus costs about the same as 20 years of imprisonment. If the cost differential between a death penalty trial and a life incarceration trial exceeds about $3 million, the incarceration becomes more cost effective pretty much 100% of the time.

Statements like this make me VERY VERY happy I live in a country where there is no death penalty.

Not only is the death penalty a barbaric practice but it also costs more than simply locking people up ( http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty )

Though I wouldn't put it passed a population that watches steel buildings fall at the speed of gravity, and declare it a product of fire not demolition?????? Then go on a killing spree for oil and defense contracts.

The laws of the United State of America, INC apparently trump the laws of physics and the sovereignty of the rest of the world.

The *States* have the death penalty, not the U.S. government.. It's also why U.S. law no longer includes a death penalty, but places like Texas do.

You have no idea what you're talking about. The US Government does have a federal death penalty as well as a whole host of laws which provide for it. Here's a *small* sample:

8 U.S.C. 1342
18 U.S.C. 32-34
18 U.S.C. 36
18 U.S.C. 37
18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 245, 247
18 U.S.C. 794
18 U.S.C. 844
18 U.S.C. 924
18 U.S.C. 930
18 U.S.C. 1091
18 U.S.C. 1111
18 U.S.C. 1114 (murder of a federal judge)
18 U.S.C. 1201
18 U.S.C. 1203
18 U.S.C. 1503

You can find more here.

Furthermore, the federal death penalty can be enacted in any state or territory of the US even in states that do not have a death penalty.

Additionally, the US military also has a death penalty. According to Amnesty International: As of January 2008, nine men are on military death row. Six are African-American. They are held at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Ft. Leavenworth in Kansas.

And finally, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 provides for the death penalty for detainees of Guatanamo Bay for certain crimes.

So you are saying that instead of killing people who will remorselessly kill as much as they get the chance* to, we should spend thousands of dollars a year securing them and keeping them alive in a high security prison, where we'll have to potentially staff extra to keep them away from other inmates?

First off, it has been known for decades that it is much more expensive to execute prisoners than to incarcerate them. Here is a collection of stats that are very well attributed:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

Between the cost of the death penalty and the subject of the article, it makes complete sense to me to try to study them and try to find ways of rehabilitation and prevention.

And how long until they go after an innocent person?

Like these?

You know, there are other issues that can occupy a person's time.

In Oklahoma (where I live) firing squad is option #3, used if both lethal injection (the method we currently use) and electrocution are both found unconstitutional.

It's similar in Idaho; A firing squad is used if lethal injection is "impractical". I'm not sure what that means, and I'm not curious enough to look it up.

In Utah, if you chose to be executed by firing squad before May 3rd, 2004, you can be executed that way - otherwise, it's lethal injection. Firing squad is the backup if lethal injection is found unconstitutional.

Personally, I'd rather get the firing squad than electrocution. Someone is bound to hit your heart, and you die pretty quickly. It's more humane than hanging (which is difficult to do - a hangman has to get it just right for it to be humane) which was legal in Delaware until 1986, can be requested in Washington, and is the backup to lethal injection in New Hampshire.

So really, Utah isn't that backward compared to several other states when it comes to the death penalty. It's a backup method, used only if lethal injection becomes infeasible. Their primary method of execution is usually considered more humane than electrocution, which is an option in a few states.

(data from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/methods-execution)

And Washington and New Hampshire still have hanging as an option. What's your point? How is the chosen method of execution many years in the past in one state in any way related to this article? Did you just find out this bit of information recently and finally found an opportunity to show off your knowledge or what?

Actually, that's not fair... it ain't just Texas: citation.

I'm questioning whether that case actually exists. I've googled for Texas death penalties for retarded minors and all I can find is the case I mentioned, another guy who shot somebody trying to buy coke, a 40 year guy that strangled a 3 year old to death with his underwear... give me a name, let me google the case from both sides, and we'll see.

But I would still love him and I wouldn't disown him and his boyfriends could hang out at my house and I would make them feel welcome.

think homosexuality is a symptom of hypersexuality gone rampant, and not the other way around. So many gays I know are just consumed by sex. It was that which honestly disgusts me more than anything else. But then again, I don't like hypersexual heteros either. It's just the hyper part which is deviant, I think.

Life should not be too excess, in anything, and excess is a sign of mental illness.

Which means you have gay friends and don't know it.
Not really.

Like you, I am not a US citizen.

Thank God.

I have long regarded the US Justice system as terribly flawed; not only does a cast iron alibi not prevent a guilty verdict, (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=109) but irrefutable evidence (think OJ), does not necessarily ensure a conviction.

It really does depend, like most things appear to in the US, on the size of your bank balance and in particular the capability of your defense lawyer.

No matter how weak the case against him would seem, I'll be surprised if Rieser does not swing.

Ascribing moral equality between the governments of China and the USA is an insult to the innocent people executed and imprisoned by the vile, corrupt government of China.

Because the US would never consider executing innocent people now, would they?

BTW, I understand your point, just playing devil's advocate.