I give you points for use of ridicule. If you cannot get someone to agree with you, that's a good backup strategy.

Yes, I think I mentioned above, there have been people on DR who were later acquitted. It's important to distinguish acquittal from "not guilty of the actual crime". And indeed, they may have been as innocent as a lamb. So, yes, to avoid this, I said the standard of proof has to be a lot higher than it has been in the past. I said that three times now. The state should not sentence someone to DR unless the proof is certain.

And what is "certain"?
In all cases, they were quite certain, were they not?

It doesn't work.
It isn't safe.

http://cdn.static-economist.com/site...8_WOM936_0.gif

http://geocurrents.info/wp-content/u...nalty-Map2.jpg

When reading some of your post I remembered a debater, who was a very strong supporter of the death penalty

if it came to execute innocent, this person had no problems with it.


Markus

By the existing standard of proof, they thought so, but they were wrong.

What is certain? I believe I have mentioned two example in the last few posts.

If you are speaking to me, you're thinking of someone else, I am not that guy. I do not want to see an innocent person executed. I do want to see guilty executed.

Oberon, charts. Explain?

Just really some information to bring to the debate, in a way it shows that corporal punishment does not necessarily affect crime rates in any meaningful manner. If you compare homicides per person in nations with and without it, there is no noticable correlation.

For example, a good portion of Western Europe doesn't use corporal punishment (if not all of it) and the homicide rate is lower than the US, and yet Russia, who also doesn't use corporal punishment has crime rate which is higher than the US, but a lower one than Uganda which has the death penalty.

Of course, you might say that this is because of the quality of life difference between Uganda, Russia, Western Europe and the US.
So, a more accurate comparison would be between two More Economically Developed Countries, but obviously population wise we cannot compare a single nation of Western Europe with that of the US...so instead it would be better to compare the whole of Western Europe with a population of around 397 million with the United States with a population of around 318 million.
So, Western Europe (without corporal punishment) vs the US (with [although I realise it varies from state to state]), and if you compare the murder rates per 100,000 inhabitants you find that in Western Europe it is 0.9 and in the United States it is 4.8, so even with a comparable population size and comparable living quality there is a greater murder rate in the US than in Western Europe. Therefore, one could certainly draw the conclusion that corporal punishment is no deterrent to those committing homicides.

Of course, there are possibly other factors that are outside of this threads scope that might affect the homicide rates in comparison between the US and Western Europe, but nevertheless it does show that corporal punishment does not necessarily equal a lower homicide rate.

It wasn't about you Neal, it was a general post. It was a Danish male person who wrote this on a Danish forum many years ago.

Markus

In any case, I think we are witnessing the end of capital punishment in the US. Murderers and rapists will rejoice.

Yes, but how do you separate the cases where they are certain they are certain from cases where they are certain they are certain but wrong?
After all they made special provisions not long ago for dealing only with the worst of the worst, then ended up locking up a huge bunch of nobodies in Cuba.
With your 30 day limit single appeal you are just asking for miscarriages of justice.
Miscarriage of justice doesn't serve the population, it doesn't serve the victims of the crime or their family, the only people it serves are the real criminals.

@ Tribesman:

so i've gone full Buchenwald. :haha:
Nice analogy.
So are we now going down the often-trodden road of going full-on nazi name-calling now?
Hope so, this should be enjoyable.
You think my moral fibres are terrible?
Yet you liken me to Buchenwald.
I can't be that bad then.

You keep on championing for your lovely death row inmates.
It's ok, because i know it will make you feel better in the end, like most moral crusaders.
They can't help themselves, by picking up on something that has been sensationalised and immediately persuaded to come out in full and go all non-Buchenwald and in this case, champion the anti-lethal injection bandwagon, because you know, it's barbaric :haha:

3 'botched' injections in the last 6 mths in the United States.
Not a bad hit rate if you ask me.
Certainly doesn't seem like the execution via lethal injection is in crysis mode.

And the British ban on sodium thiopental was purely on moral grounds.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11865881

i know i know, i don't need to prove your assumption wrong again and again that the Eu based their ban on other factors, such as the ineffectiveness of the drugs used for example, rather than their oh so mighty moral stance.
Perhaps you should work for them.
Seems you and them share the hazy and oh so realistic view that lethal injections are barbaric.
They certainly won't go all Buchenwald on you at least.
Unless of course the drug company wants to apply for a license to sell a drug that is on the current EU Torture ban, which can enable that drug company to go totally Buchenwald and start supplying states in the US for the executions via lethal injections.

Which they have done.

Texas uses pentobarbital, has done so since 2012, has carried out 33 executions since then, with no complications.
Oh my, sounds barbaric doesn't it?
They are going full Buchenwald, yet, with no complications, Buchenwald sounds peaceful and serene doesn't it.

I really think that people way too easily jump on the moral high horse and to make themselves feel better and to think that this will count a point for them to improve their chances to go to heaven perhaps need to re-evaluate really why they are championing this cause.
The so-called barbaric treatment of lethal injections, which i have shown to be anything but, although Tribesman thinks i'm a Buchenwald intern.

Tribesman:
So you think the Criminal's Victims were quite entitled to suffer more agonizing deaths than your barbaric treatment of lethal injection?
Where a botched treatment shows in a lot of cases a clenched fist, wheezing, gasping for air, chest raising up from the gourney, rem, as barbaric and that this should not occur because Crminals deserve much much better than what their victims did?

Time to for a hard self-evaluation again i think for you.
If it makes you feel better to be a champion for the lovely and dear crims, that have wreaked wait for it......barbaric acts of violence against their victims, and all you want to do is argue that clenched fist and wheezing, or gasping for air is barbaric and that the execution took longer than the normal time, then i think there';s not much point in continuing to debate is there?

I mean i've gone full Buchenwald haven't i?

And you've gone full-delusional.

Right, because life in prison is so awesome, they're gonna have a ball and say "let's kill even more people!".

Pretty sure it's not how it works.

If you wanna bring numbers of homicides down, fix your society instead of experimenting with death-cocktails.

Unless you can find other clinical studies then yes you have.:down:

You set yourself up for it, if the cap fits:down:

Would you like some more straw to pack that with?

:har::har::har::har::har:

Yes but you don't think.

Like the ban on murder?
Weird that morals thing isn't it:rotfl2:

I hate to break it to ya, but US courts ruled on it, the drugs are being used for a purpose for which they have not been tested.
You are supporting fatal medical experimentation on humans, you don't have a leg to stand on.:down:


Must be a hell of a harvest for you to gather all that straw.

You mean Nembutol designed and tested for the treatment of epilepsy.
You really like your fatal experimentation on humans don't you.:hmmm:

You have proven that you are, your own words show you to be exactly that sort of person.

Lets see, you approve of fatal human medical experimentation on "sub humans".
Yep you really have. congratulations :doh:

Yoohoo planet earth calling FF....fatal medical experimentation on humans, get it yet?

Have you read your regular dose of The Daily Sheeple yet?
Please keep linking to it as its good for a laugh:har:

Ok, I think you two had probably better end it there before infractions start getting handed out again.

Fair enough, he already provided all the proof himself.
his definition....Barbaric-exceedingly brutal, savage, vicious, heinous, murderous, inhumane.
Now all you need to do is cross reference that with the legislation
covering these chemical substances and see how many of those other words for barbaric it contains.
After all he seems happy with the definition.:03:
Though maybe that's just European sensibilities, I suppose American based pharmaceuticals raising objections and withdrawing their products because they are not designed or tested for that purpose would be a clincher on the medical experimentation front.

Sorry to add again, but I just read this funny thing, and it ties nicely with the mention of Unit731 from earlier.

Why is there no proper testing? With the gas chamber you used to at least test the thing for leaks regularly so it would be effective; but as far as I am aware the patients are really also the guinea pigs. Moreover it does not appear adequate data is obtained from these live tests. At least the Japanese had the saving grace of properly documenting their findings.