But if we take that route as use that as the sole reason to change our actions, then why not say that bleaching is a result of slavery and a post-colonial mentality that black is bad so we should not allow persons in the country to bleach their skin. Oh, and let us not forget weave or using perm in your hair. Not to mention our political and legal system, so lets do away with that too....

I dont have inferior complexes with my blackness. I dont bleach my skin i dont wear weave either and I can choose to not perm my hair or not- I dont have issues with my nappy roots. I love my hair Im wearing a "fro" now as we speak. come on now lets not be so cynical and silly we are talking about lives here. Whipping to draw blood and necks cracking aren't gruesome and inhumane to you? That's all im saying as a black person I state my argument that we shouldnt want to revisit those atrocities placed on our ancestors especially for what appears to be the same reason...punishment.
bread and water isnt punishment enough? I dont know about you but if that's all the nourishment i had while in prison coupled with strenuos labor and the bible beating by visiting pastors that would be more than enough for me to want to stay far away from fox hill. I respect your view but that's how I feel.

I dont have inferior complexes with my blackness. I dont bleach my skin i dont wear weave either and I can choose to not perm my hair or not- I dont have issues with my nappy roots. I love my hair Im wearing a "fro" now as we speak. come on now lets not be so cynical and silly we are talking about lives here. Whipping to draw blood and necks cracking aren't gruesome and inhumane to you? That's all im saying as a black person I state my argument that we shouldnt want to revisit those atrocities placed on our ancestors especially for what appears to be the same reason...punishment.
bread and water isnt punishment enough? I dont know about you but if that's all the nourishment i had while in prison coupled with strenuos labor and the bible beating by visiting pastors that would be more than enough for me to want to stay far away from fox hill. I respect your view but that's how I feel.


Ok, I agree I was being a little cynical and silly with this post, but at least you get my point...and I do respect your perspective on the issue as well by the way...but back to the issue at hand.

I agree that it may be inhumane, but I think all forms or capital punishment are inhumane to an extent. As to the gruesome aspect of it...isn't that why it was used in the first place? I mean having a public execution in the first place was supposed to be a deterrent. Making it gruesome was only supposed to add to this aspect of it. Since we now know that it doesn't work at all, why not try to revamp our judical system first, then revisit the idea of capital punishment.

Since we now know that it doesn't work at all, why not try to revamp our judical system first, then revisit the idea of capital punishment.

yes preemptive strikes!

why not try to revamp our judical system, then revisit the idea of capital punishment.

<insert huge belly laugh here>

Excellent idea, but the reality of such an endeavor ever taking place (or being completed in an efficient and proper manner) is an impossibility in such an ineffective and corrupt governmental system. Plus capital punishment does work. See below.


I dont know about you but if that's all the nourishment i had while in prison coupled with strenuos labor and the bible beating by visiting pastors that would be more than enough for me to want to stay far away from fox hill. I respect your view but that's how I feel.

Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter!

It may be more than enough for you, but to a hardened criminal it's a slap on the wrist. This is where everyone who objects to capital punishment tends to make their primary mistake in judging this matter. They wish to give these killers a chance. They want to preserve life. They think that these murderers think and feel like they do. They think that jail time and hard labour is enough punishment for taking a life and that the experience is devastating to a murderous criminal. Surprise! It isn't.

Human rights are important, but the same way that one sacrifices their freedom when they commit a crime should be the same manner that they sacrifice their life when they commit the ultimate crime of taking the life of another - murder.

Anyway, here's another way to think about capital punishment: If you were ever murdered, would you like your killer getting out of jail to possibly kill another?

----------------------------------------------

Oh well, so much for the idea that capital punishment doesn't work:

"The murder rate in Britain has been steadily increasing since abolition of capital punishment in 1964"

"the murder rate in the U. S. dropped from 24,562 in 1993 to 18,209 in 1997 the lowest for years (a 26% reduction) - during a period of increased use of the death penalty. "

"Texas carries out far more executions than any other American state (between 1982 and 2000 it executed 254 men and 2 women) and there is now clear evidence of a deterrent effect."

"Singapore always carries out death sentences where the appeal has been turned down so its population knows precisely what will happen to them if they are convicted of murder or drug trafficking - is this concept deeply embedded into the sub consciousness of most of its people, acting as an effective deterrent?
In 1995 Singapore hanged an unusually large number of 7 murderers with 4 in 1996, 3 in 1997 and only 1 in 1998 rising to 6 in 1999 (3 for the same murder). Singapore takes an equally hard line on all other forms of crime with stiff on the spot fines for trivial offences such as dropping litter and chewing gum in the street, caning for males between 18 and 50 for a wide variety of offences and rigorous imprisonment for all serious crimes."

Ponder this statement:

"If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call." - John McAdams

<insert huge belly laugh here>

Excellent idea, but the reality of such an endeavor ever taking place (or being completed in an efficient and proper manner) is an impossibility in such an ineffective and corrupt governmental system. Plus cpaital punishment works. See below.


Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter!

It may be more than enough for you, but to a hardened criminal it's a slap on the wrist. This is where everyone who objects to capital punishment tends to make their primary mistake in judging this matter. They wish to give these killers a chance. They want to preserve life. They think that these murderers think and feel like they do. They think that jail time and hard labour is enough punishment for taking a life and that the experience is devastating to a murderous criminal. Surprise! It isn't.

Human rights is important, but the same way that one sacrifices their freedom when they commit a crime should be the same manner that they sacrifice their life when they commit the ultimate crime of taking the life of another - murder.

Anyway, here's another way to think about capital punishment: If you were ever murdered, would you like your killer getting out of jail to possibly kill another?

----------------------------------------------

Oh well, so much for the idea that capital punishment doesn't work:

"The murder rate in Britain has been steadily increasing since abolition of capital punishment in 1964"

"the murder rate in the U. S. dropped from 24,562 in 1993 to 18,209 in 1997 the lowest for years (a 26% reduction) - during a period of increased use of the death penalty. "

"Texas carries out far more executions than any other American state (between 1982 and 2000 it executed 254 men and 2 women) and there is now clear evidence of a deterrent effect."

"Singapore always carries out death sentences where the appeal has been turned down so its population knows precisely what will happen to them if they are convicted of murder or drug trafficking - is this concept deeply embedded into the sub consciousness of most of its people, acting as an effective deterrent?
In 1995 Singapore hanged an unusually large number of 7 murderers with 4 in 1996, 3 in 1997 and only 1 in 1998 rising to 6 in 1999 (3 for the same murder). Singapore takes an equally hard line on all other forms of crime with stiff on the spot fines for trivial offences such as dropping litter and chewing gum in the street, caning for males between 18 and 50 for a wide variety of offences and rigorous imprisonment for all serious crimes."

Ponder this statement:

"If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call." - John McAdams

i am rendered speechless

Excellent idea, but the reality of such an endeavor ever taking place (or being completed in an efficient and proper manner) is an impossibility in such an ineffective and corrupt governmental system. Plus capital punishment does work. See below.
I know. That was a bit of idealist thinking, but it is the best recourse. Now let me get to your so called proof because unlike Tiaesq, I am far from speachless.


"The murder rate in Britain has been steadily increasing since abolition of capital punishment in 1964"

"the murder rate in the U. S. dropped from 24,562 in 1993 to 18,209 in 1997 the lowest for years (a 26% reduction) - during a period of increased use of the death penalty. "

"Texas carries out far more executions than any other American state (between 1982 and 2000 it executed 254 men and 2 women) and there is now clear evidence of a deterrent effect."

"Singapore always carries out death sentences where the appeal has been turned down so its population knows precisely what will happen to them if they are convicted of murder or drug trafficking - is this concept deeply embedded into the sub consciousness of most of its people, acting as an effective deterrent?
In 1995 Singapore hanged an unusually large number of 7 murderers with 4 in 1996, 3 in 1997 and only 1 in 1998 rising to 6 in 1999 (3 for the same murder). Singapore takes an equally hard line on all other forms of crime with stiff on the spot fines for trivial offences such as dropping litter and chewing gum in the street, caning for males between 18 and 50 for a wide variety of offences and rigorous imprisonment for all serious crimes."

I recently wrote a paper on the decrease in crime in the US. From my research I learned several things. The most important is that several factors affect the crime rate (such as the economy, law enforcement presence, etc.) So just saying the crime rate increased in Britain tells me nothing without knowing what was going on in the country at the time. Plus, that is a generalization.

As to the US and Texas, the 90s was one of the biggest tech booms in history, expanding the US economy greatly. It has been proven that during economic expansion there is expected to be a reduction in crime and poverty. So the use of the death penalty doesn't show a clear correlation. Further proof of this was given by you. Looking at Texas, the state with the most executions, you would expect a large decrease in crimes punishable by the death penalty. While there was some decline, states in the New England area that have no death penalty, still have lower murder rates. In fact, in 1991 Texas was at a high for murders (right in the middle of the period you noted).

These links give some general info.
http://www.ncpa.org/pi/crime/cri1297h.html
http://www.ncpa.org/pi/crime/july98e.html

This book here also gives more insight: http://www.freakonomics.com/thebook.php

I know. That was a bit of idealist thinking, but it is the best recourse. Now let me get to your so called proof because unlike Tiaesq, I am far from speachless.

I don't aim on impressing you in particular, so no loss there. My responses in this thread are simply a matter of knowing my peeps in da hood and what scares the b'Jesus out of them.


I recently wrote a paper on the decrease in crime in the US. From my research I learned several things. The most important is that several factors affect the crime rate (such as the economy, law enforcement presence, etc.) So just saying the crime rate increased in Britain tells me nothing without knowing what was going on in the country at the time. Plus, that is a generalization.

No, the paper that those quotes came from analyzed all of the various factors and those were simply excerpts from it. It was far from a generalization and definitely on point. You and the writer, who is a criminologist I do believe, disagree in that regard.


As to the US and Texas, the 90s was one of the biggest tech booms in history, expanding the US economy greatly. It has been proven that during economic expansion there is expected to be a reduction in crime and poverty. So the use of the death penalty doesn't show a clear correlation. Further proof of this was given by you. Looking at Texas, the state with the most executions, you would expect a large decrease in crimes punishable by the death penalty. While there was some decline, states in the New England area that have no death penalty, still have lower murder rates. In fact, in 1991 Texas was at a high for murders (right in the middle of the period you noted).
These links give some general info.

But New England is one of the richest areas in the US! It is expected that their murder rate is one of the lowest. I lived in CT for 5 years and the only real problems with violence came out of Bridgeport (lower class, black families).

In any event you're still taking data from a first-world nation and applying it to a third-world nation, saying that "according to your data" capital punishment didn't work for them. Other studies by more accomplished criminologists say otherwise.

What you fail to realize is that the ripple affect from a hanging in this society is much bigger in this "small pond" than in a large country like the US. If someone gets hanged here, there is a good chance that 1. you know the person, 2. you know one of their family members, 3. one of your family knows someone in their family or 4. a friend or co-worker is related or somehow affliated with the person or their family. This mesh of connectivity makes hangings a much more effective deterrent than in a country of millions. It isn't only about deterrent anyway. It is about punishment - pure and simple. If you put it in economic terms, the current cost of the life of a murdered person seems to only be the price of freedom for X amount of years, plus however much it costs to feed, clothe and sustain the murderer. If they behave themselves, they can get out only 10 years later - to kill again.

Small price to pay for ending the life of another. Don't you think? No wonder it's often done so effortlessly. Did you see the newspaper pics of the boys who assisted in killing the young man in Waterloo? No remorse.

What you fail to realize is that the ripple affect from a hanging in this society is much bigger in this "small pond" than in a large country like the US. If someone gets hanged here, there is a good chance that 1. you know the person, 2. you know one of their family members, 3. one of your family knows someone in their family or 4. a friend or co-worker is related or somehow affliated with the person or their family. This mesh of connectivity makes hangings a much more effective deterrent than in a country of millions. It isn't only about deterrent anyway. It is about punishment - pure and simple. If you put it in economic terms, the current cost of the life of a murdered person seems to only be the price of freedom for X amount of years, plus however much it costs to feed, clothe and sustain the murderer. If they behave themselves, they can get out only 10 years later - to kill again.

Small price to pay for ending the life of another. Don't you think? No wonder it's often done so effortlessly. Did you see the newspaper pics of the boys who assisted in killing the young man in Waterloo? No remorse.


This is one point that I have no data on to refute. Consider this. When there is a gang rivalry and someone gets shot, or one drug dealer gets shot by another, isn't that the same situation? In many cases we know the person or we know a family member of the person. Does that decrease the gang numbers or the number or drug dealers? Certainly not. It is obvious that fear of death is not the issue. Yes, to an extent it might prevent the wealthy from committing a murder, but how many murders do the rich commit anyhow? You were looking at the poor, the destitute in society. For them, in many cases, they feel so disheartened that they don't care. If they would risk being shot by another drug dealer, or chopped by another gang member, do you think getting hanged is going to scare them? Especially considering the criminal knows he or she will get off by bribery, threats, or some other heinous act.

When you state that the issue is "punishment-pure and simple" there is a huge problem. This goes right back to the original issue that there is no way to know if you are in fact punishing a person that committed the crime. In many instances, the person can and probably is innocent. Why not look at other methods such as the rehabilitative aspect. Why not work harder to improve the criminals themselves, to educate them, give them hope for a better life and a future.

i dont care if captial punishment is a deterant or not.

a person who can kidnap a little girl, rape her, then kill her. NEEDS TO BE KILLED

a person that could kidnap a little boy, rape him, cut his body up and stuff it in a barrel needs to be killed

a person that can execute a home envasion or store robbery, take ALL the people money, but still shoot them point blank in the face. NEEDS TO BE KILLED.

a man that can kill his pregnant wife. NEEDS TO BE KILLED

what do we do with dogs that go around attacking little kids and families. WE PUT THEM TO SLEEP. y cuase we dont want them kind of animals in society.

i understand the arguments against capital punishment but come on:

1-does a person who could commit such acts deserve HUMANE treatment?

2-does it make sense to house such people at the tax payers expenses for the rest of their life

3-do yall honesly think justice was served for the person who's life they took?

4-do yall relise how serious it is to take someone life FOR NO REASON. BTW- puttin someone down for takin someone elses life is a reason and justifiable, just as self defense is

5-how would yall want the person who followed you home, forced his way in your home, tortore u for 10hrs, and then brutally murder taken care of.

also i dont think the capital punishment doesnt change n e thing argument is very valid. i say it is a deterrant but the way it is carried out doest show evidence of that. if the judical process for murder was speed up, and after final appeal the person was put down in 12 months, the muder rates would drop.

we as humans (even those crazy killers) are afraid of death, it is not a natural human characterstic to want to die (unless the person was deathly ill, and wanted to get it over with). there for if the death penalty was expidited persons WOULD THINK TWICE ABOUT COMMITING MURDER.

they way the death penalty is carried out is like a kid doing something bad today becuase they know their mum or dad will spank their hand 30yrs later.

FOR THE RECORD IF N E BODY KILL ME, I WANT THEM DEAD AS WELL

i dont care if captial punishment is a deterant or not.
a person who can kidnap a little girl, rape her, then kill her. NEEDS TO BE KILLED
a person that could kidnap a little boy, rape him, cut his body up and stuff it in a barrel needs to be killed
a person that can execute a home envasion or store robbery, take ALL the people money, but still shoot them point blank in the face. NEEDS TO BE KILLED.
a man that can kill his pregnant wife. NEEDS TO BE KILLED
what do we do with dogs that go around attacking little kids and families. WE PUT THEM TO SLEEP. y cuase we dont want them kind of animals in society.
i understand the arguments against capital punishment but come on:
1-does a person who could commit such acts deserve HUMANE treatment?
2-does it make sense to house such people at the tax payers expenses for the rest of their life
3-do yall honesly think justice was served for the person who's life they took?
4-do yall relise how serious it is to take someone life FOR NO REASON. BTW- puttin someone down for takin someone elses life is a reason and justifiable, just as self defense is
5-how would yall want the person who followed you home, forced his way in your home, tortore u for 10hrs, and then brutally murder taken care of.
also i dont think the capital punishment doesnt change n e thing argument is very valid. i say it is a deterrant but the way it is carried out doest show evidence of that. if the judical process for murder was speed up, and after final appeal the person was put down in 12 months, the muder rates would drop.
we as humans (even those crazy killers) are afraid of death, it is not a natural human characterstic to want to die (unless the person was deathly ill, and wanted to get it over with). there for if the death penalty was expidited persons WOULD THINK TWICE ABOUT COMMITING MURDER.
they way the death penalty is carried out is like a kid doing something bad today becuase they know their mum or dad will spank their hand 30yrs later.

aint much of them these days scared of death though .. at least they dont show it on the outside.


FOR THE RECORD IF N E BODY KILL ME, I WANT THEM DEAD AS WELL


let me know and ill take care of them :-)

When you state that the issue is "punishment-pure and simple" there is a huge problem. This goes right back to the original issue that there is no way to know if you are in fact punishing a person that committed the crime. In many instances, the person can and probably is innocent. Why not look at other methods such as the rehabilitative aspect. Why not work harder to improve the criminals themselves, to educate them, give them hope for a better life and a future.

You are back on this issue of possible innocence AGAIN?

You must not read the newspapers and see how the latest murder perpetrators are absolutely guilty. Moxey's killer took her to the hospital after he beat her to a pulp. The perps in Waterloo did their murder in full view of patrons of a crowded club. The case where the guy shot down his girlfriend at the bus stop was clean cut as well. He did it in front of her two daughters and shot one of them in the process! The one in Freeport where he killed his girlfriend in her apartment was done with passersby and neighbors hearing her screams.

Yeah, they're all innocent. :sarcastic

You want to improve, educate and give hope to these cold-blooded killers? Hutchinson had just done TEN years for the previous shooting murder of his ex-wife's boyfriend! What hope of rehabilitation does he have when this time he didn’t use a gun, but beat his victim to death instead!

In a way you are a murderer's best friend, because you dare to defend these people who have violated the lives of others in such gruesome ways. I'm sure that if you were the only thing between these murderers and freedom, they would kill you too, the same way they killed their victims - in cold blood.

You have no ground to stand on. You cannot expect to rehabilitate these people - Especially in such clear-cut, violent cases. Examples need to be made or else criminals will know that they will not be punished for their actions. Many death row killers turn into sobbing crybabies when they realize that they will die for what they have done. Justice is served in that case, for the public and for the victim.

i dont care if captial punishment is a deterant or not.
a person who can kidnap a little girl, rape her, then kill her. NEEDS TO BE KILLED
a person that could kidnap a little boy, rape him, cut his body up and stuff it in a barrel needs to be killed
a person that can execute a home envasion or store robbery, take ALL the people money, but still shoot them point blank in the face. NEEDS TO BE KILLED.
a man that can kill his pregnant wife. NEEDS TO BE KILLED
what do we do with dogs that go around attacking little kids and families. WE PUT THEM TO SLEEP. y cuase we dont want them kind of animals in society.
i understand the arguments against capital punishment but come on:
1-does a person who could commit such acts deserve HUMANE treatment?
2-does it make sense to house such people at the tax payers expenses for the rest of their life
3-do yall honesly think justice was served for the person who's life they took?
4-do yall relise how serious it is to take someone life FOR NO REASON. BTW- puttin someone down for takin someone elses life is a reason and justifiable, just as self defense is
5-how would yall want the person who followed you home, forced his way in your home, tortore u for 10hrs, and then brutally murder taken care of.
also i dont think the capital punishment doesnt change n e thing argument is very valid. i say it is a deterrant but the way it is carried out doest show evidence of that. if the judical process for murder was speed up, and after final appeal the person was put down in 12 months, the muder rates would drop.
we as humans (even those crazy killers) are afraid of death, it is not a natural human characterstic to want to die (unless the person was deathly ill, and wanted to get it over with). there for if the death penalty was expidited persons WOULD THINK TWICE ABOUT COMMITING MURDER.
they way the death penalty is carried out is like a kid doing something bad today becuase they know their mum or dad will spank their hand 30yrs later.
FOR THE RECORD IF N E BODY KILL ME, I WANT THEM DEAD AS WELL


:hot: So true, child molesters/killers, if no one else, should suffer the death penalty.

With child rapes and matters of incest so prevalent in our society, the penalties for these matters should be greater...public beatings, name and shame, sexual offender register, etc...all should be implemented.

I have already told my family, the day someone touches my child improperly, is the day I go up fox hill. I will hurt, maim, disfigure and even kill whoever it is. Yall could hang me all you want after that. I will plead self -defence and will get off with a coupla years up on Crazy hill, just like everyone else.

:hot: So true, child molesters/killers, if no one else, should suffer the death penalty.
With child rapes and matters of incest so prevalent in our society, the penalties for these matters should be greater...public beatings, name and shame, sexual offender register, etc...all should be implemented.
I have already told my family, the day someone touches my child improperly, is the day I go up fox hill. I will hurt, maim, disfigure and even kill whoever it is. Yall could hang me all you want after that. I will plead self -defence and will get off with a coupla years up on Crazy hill, just like everyone else.
:jawdroop:

poverty and crime go hand-in-hand. quick fix solutions wont work. its necessary to get to the root of the problem! we're going in circles here...but as someone said...pre-emptive strike is in order!

poverty and crime go hand-in-hand. quick fix solutions wont work. its necessary to get to the root of the problem! we're going in circles here...but as someone said...pre-emptive strike is in order!

For some reason you believe that capital punishment is the only solution recommended for implementation. We focused on it in this conversation, but it is only one small piece of the pie in getting this society under control - Obviously.

Quick execution of hardened and violent criminals, combined with educating our youth so that they do not become criminals, is what we need in this society. The current Urban Renewal project is making great strides and should also be introduced to every neighborhood in this country. Any one of these solutions is useless by itself, for singular solutions will leave us either neglecting the future and dealing with the present or vice versa.

It's simply a matter of sharply and harshly dealing with perpetrators, but making sure that we reduce the possibility of persons like that growing up in our society.