Conservativism & Capital Punishment

[Geoist]

Help me understand,

Conservatives believe we need to keep government small. They believe government is corrupt and that it cannot be trusted to do the right thing. They believe government is fallible and often screws up...

So how the hell does it make sense for someone who believes those things to think that same corrupt and fallible institution should have the power to execute human beings based on that corrupt and fallible institution's own trials?

 

[Emily L]

Good question, Geoist--I'm a conservative, but I'm against the death penalty, mostly on moral grounds, but also because our legal system just aren't perfect enough.

 

[Spakian]

Help me understand,

Conservatives believe we need to keep government small. They believe government is corrupt and that it cannot be trusted to do the right thing. They believe government is fallible and often screws up...

So how the hell does it make sense for someone who believes those things to think that same corrupt and fallible institution should have the power to execute human beings based on that corrupt and fallible institution's own trials?

Because the same "pro-life and pro-God and pro-Country" party think's its OK to behead an American citizen who is also one of God's children

 

[AmNat]

Help me understand,

Conservatives believe we need to keep government small. They believe government is corrupt and that it cannot be trusted to do the right thing. They believe government is fallible and often screws up...

So how the hell does it make sense for someone who believes those things to think that same corrupt and fallible institution should have the power to execute human beings based on that corrupt and fallible institution's own trials?

The government has the "power" to do anything it wants. That's what it means to be the government (if there were some entity capable of restrain "the government", that entity would be the real government).

It is better for the government to use its power to repress crime than to tolerate it, since such repression makes life better for decent people.

 

[Geoist]

The government has the "power" to do anything it wants.

And?? That doesn't stop cons from speaking out against the minimum wage, universal health care, free college, etc etc. Cons overwhelmingly SUPPORT the death penalty because they like it, not because they think, 'oh well, gubmint gonna do what gubmint does.'

That's what it means to be the government (if there were some entity capable of restrain "the government", that entity would be the real government).

You apparently have no point to make.

It is better for the government to use its power to repress crime than to tolerate it, since such repression makes life better for decent people.

It isn't repressing crime to kill someone who is already imprisoned for life without parole. And no, the death penalty is not a deterrent. Even law enforcement agrees.

 

[AmNat]

And?? That doesn't stop cons from speaking out against the minimum wage, universal health care, free college, etc etc. Cons overwhelmingly SUPPORT the death penalty because they like it, not because they think, 'oh well, gubmint gonna do what gubmint does.'

We oppose socialistic policies because we believer them to be bad for the country. Obviously the government has the power to do those things, otherwise there would be no need to argue against them.

It isn't repressing crime to kill someone who is already imprisoned for life without parole. And no, the death penalty is not a deterrent. Even law enforcement agrees.

The correlative evidence indicates that it is somewhat of a deterrent, though whether the death penalty as practiced in America today is a deterrent isn't really relevant. Washing your hands a few times a year won't deter disease either.

 

[Geoist]

We oppose socialistic policies because we believer them to be bad for the country. Obviously the government has the power to do those things, otherwise there would be no need to argue against them.

Is it bad when the fallible and corrupt government executes an innocent man?

The correlative evidence indicates that it is somewhat of a deterrent,

No it doesn't.

But I find your response interesting. 'Somewhat a deterrent' isn't exactly a staunch defense.

though whether the death penalty as practiced in America today is a deterrent isn't really relevant.

Why not and what does it have to do with the present?

Washing your hands a few times a year won't deter disease either.

Are you saying you only wash your hands a few times a year?[/quote][/quote]

 

[AmNat]

Is it bad when the fallible and corrupt government executes an innocent man?

Sure. It's also bad when the fallible and corrupt government causes innocent people to die by tolerating crime.

No it doesn't.

The Death Penalty Deters Crime and Saves Lives

My name is David Muhlhausen. I am Senior Policy Analyst in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation. I thank Chairman Russell Feingold, Ranking Member Sam Brownback, and the rest of the subcommittee for the opportunity to testify today. The views I express in this testimony are my...

www.heritage.org

Are you saying you only wash your hands a few times a year?

Cute. I think the analogy was pretty clear.

 

[Geoist]

Sure. It's also bad when the fallible and corrupt government causes innocent people to die by tolerating crime.

I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who said, "It is better 100 guilty men go free than one innocent person to suffer."

The Death Penalty Deters Crime and Saves Lives

My name is David Muhlhausen. I am Senior Policy Analyst in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation. I thank Chairman Russell Feingold, Ranking Member Sam Brownback, and the rest of the subcommittee for the opportunity to testify today. The views I express in this testimony are my...

www.heritage.org

So you link a testimony using admittedly controversial studies to defend the deterrence theory.

Economists have recently reexamined the “capital punishment deters homicide” thesis using modern econometric methods, with most studies reporting robust deterrent effects. The current study revisits this controversial question using annual state panel data from 1977 to 2006. Employing well-known econometric procedures for panel data analysis, our results provide no empirical support for the argument that the existence or application of the death penalty deters prospective offenders from committing homicide

https://personal.utdallas.edu/~tvk071000/death_penalty.pdf

 

[AmNat]

I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who said, "It is better 100 guilty men go free than one innocent person to suffer."

So abolish prisons?

So you link a testimony using admittedly controversial studies to defend the deterrence theory.

Something being controversial has no bearing on whether it is true.

 

[Geoist]

So abolish prisons?

Do you actually think that was what Ben Franklin was advocating?

At least a wrongly convicted man could be released from prison and given restitution. You cannot give restitution to an executed man.

Something being controversial has no bearing on whether it is true.

When a study is controversial amongst data scientists then there is reason to be skeptical.

 

[AmNat]

Do you actually think that was what Ben Franklin was advocating?

Ben Franklin was not opposed to the death penalty.

 

[Bullseye]

Help me understand,

Conservatives believe we need to keep government small. They believe government is corrupt and that it cannot be trusted to do the right thing. They believe government is fallible and often screws up...

So how the hell does it make sense for someone who believes those things to think that same corrupt and fallible institution should have the power to execute human beings based on that corrupt and fallible institution's own trials?

Because we don’t “believe” half of what you think we do.

 

[joko104]

Most Democrats love criminals. They insist that murderers be rewarded with being cared for all their life and given opportunity to terrorize, threatened, attack, rape and murder the rest of their lives at least in prison. But in fact they will release 95% of murderers - so their talk about life without parole so they can only be violence criminals in prison also is always a lie.

 

[joko104]

And?? That doesn't stop cons from speaking out against the minimum wage, universal health care, free college, etc etc. Cons overwhelmingly SUPPORT the death penalty because they like it, not because they think, 'oh well, gubmint gonna do what gubmint does.'




You apparently have no point to make.



It isn't repressing crime to kill someone who is already imprisoned for life without parole. And no, the death penalty is not a deterrent. Even law enforcement agrees.

1 in 4 convicted murderers serving time in minimum-security prisons

CTV News has learned that roughly a quarter of convicted murderers are serving time in minimum-security prisons -- open-concept, communal-style institutions that lack traditional wired fences with armed guards.

www.ctvnews.ca

There Has Been an Explosion of Homicides in California’s County Jails. Here’s Why.

Some California county jails saw their rate of inmate-on-inmate homicides triple or quadruple, and statewide the number rose 46% after 2011 prison reforms shifted responsibility from state prisons to county lockups. As sheriffs and jail staffs strain, some inmate crimes go undetected for hours.

www.propublica.org

“This Is Not Safe”: California Prisons' High Homicide Rate Makes Them Deadly for Sex Offenders

California state prisoners are killed at a rate that is double the national average — and sex offenders account for a disproportionate number of victims, according to an Associated Press analysis of corrections records.

www.nbclosangeles.com

 

[joko104]

Why do most Democrats love criminals so much?

 

[Rhakron90]

Help me understand,

Conservatives believe we need to keep government small. They believe government is corrupt and that it cannot be trusted to do the right thing. They believe government is fallible and often screws up...

So how the hell does it make sense for someone who believes those things to think that same corrupt and fallible institution should have the power to execute human beings based on that corrupt and fallible institution's own trials?

"Walk softly and carry a big stick."

Make a harsh enough example of those who do step out of line, and hopefully "less will be more" as far as government interference in day-to-day life is concerned. I think you will find that expedient capital punishment has quite a bit less "big government" bureaucratic overhead than maintaining giant populations of the perpetually imprisoned.

That is the theory/general mindset, anyway... Whether any of that actually bears out in the practice of our "half-measure and compromise" system is another matter entirely.

Also, for that matter, "law" is not necessarily "government" ...at least not in the sense Conservatives tend to oppose. We don't call it the "Night-watchman State" for nothing.

Because the same "pro-life and pro-God and pro-Country" party think's its OK to behead an American citizen who is also one of God's children

I'm sorry, but this ranks right up there with "Jesus was a Hippie" as far as obnoxiously stupid Leftist talking points go.

Yeah, no duh. We don't view the execution of some hardened criminal psychopath as being on anywhere near the same level as the senseless murder of an innocent unborn child. Why on Earth would we?

 

[jotathought]

Help me understand,

Conservatives believe we need to keep government small. They believe government is corrupt and that it cannot be trusted to do the right thing. They believe government is fallible and often screws up...

So how the hell does it make sense for someone who believes those things to think that same corrupt and fallible institution should have the power to execute human beings based on that corrupt and fallible institution's own trials?

Do you believe that government is corrupt and/or cannot be trusted?

 

[LadyMoonlight]

I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who said, "It is better 100 guilty men go free than one innocent person to suffer."

I wonder if he would still have thought that, if 10 of those guilty men attacked him and his family...murdered his family, beat him to within an inch of his life!

I support the death penalty. When a person makes a choice to commit a crime so heinous, so evil, and there is sufficient evidence to prove it (and forget a mental illness defence, if they cover the crime up, they know what they are doing is wrong) then execution is just. If i was in prison for a capital crime, then I would DEMAND to be executed. A lifetime in prison is vicious (I imagine) and not something I would wish on myself. I don't understand the mentality of anyone who would incarcerate a person for life, to deprive them of any kind of freedom, knowing that they are going to be beaten and raped for the rest of their life. Condemning a person to that is cruel. A quick death and justice is done, and no, not everyone in prison is innocent.
Why do I oppose abortion and support the death penalty? Because a new life should not be blamed for a person having sex,
and then executed as punishment; on the other hand, someone who chooses to commit a crime should be punished.

 

[Antiwar]

Conservatives claim they are for limited government, yet they're more than okay with government violence. They seem to get some perverse satisfaction from the government bombing and killing people in other countries. A little domestic government killing is the icing on that cake. And it's always the victims' fault when cops kill people. You know, "Pro-life."

 

[Antiwar]

For a good case against the death penalty (besides the obvious), one needs to go through about four concerns. I think that's too complex for most conservatives. It's easier for them to default to supporting the death penalty.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Help me understand,

Conservatives believe we need to keep government small. They believe government is corrupt and that it cannot be trusted to do the right thing. They believe government is fallible and often screws up...

small government does not mean no government or weak government.

So how the hell does it make sense for someone who believes those things to think that same corrupt and fallible institution should have the power to execute human beings based on that corrupt and fallible institution's own trials?

Because the death penalty is perfect justice and the state is vested with the power of the sword to do justice. It is a necessary duty of the state to provide rule of law even when fallible.

Also you’re making an illogical claim when you rhetorically ask “why should the government have the power to execute” the government has the power to execute. Every government has this power by virtue of being a government. Some countries do not presently utilize this power, however they all possess it and may choose to do so at any time. For example, Norway abolished the death penalty in the 1920s, after Germany invaded in 1940 the King and Stortinget authorized the death penalty for treason, and after the war Vidkun Quisling was executed for treason. In Finland after the civil war the government had to use the power of execution to punish communists for their attempt to destroy society.

Governments have this power by nature.

 

[Spakian]

Most Democrats love criminals. They insist that murderers be rewarded with being cared for all their life and given opportunity to terrorize, threatened, attack, rape and murder the rest of their lives at least in prison. But in fact they will release 95% of murderers - so their talk about life without parole so they can only be violence criminals in prison also is always a lie.

I personally feel we should rehabilitate criminals instead of releasing them. Many countries do it and the percentage of criminals and the recidivism rate is much lower here in the US

 

[lwf]

I wonder if he would still have thought that, if 10 of those guilty men attacked him and his family...murdered his family, beat him to within an inch of his life!

I support the death penalty. When a person makes a choice to commit a crime so heinous, so evil, and there is sufficient evidence to prove it (and forget a mental illness defence, if they cover the crime up, they know what they are doing is wrong) then execution is just. If i was in prison for a capital crime, then I would DEMAND to be executed. A lifetime in prison is vicious (I imagine) and not something I would wish on myself. I don't understand the mentality of anyone who would incarcerate a person for life, to deprive them of any kind of freedom, knowing that they are going to be beaten and raped for the rest of their life. Condemning a person to that is cruel. A quick death and justice is done, and no, not everyone in prison is innocent.
Why do I oppose abortion and support the death penalty? Because a new life should not be blamed for a person having sex,
and then executed as punishment; on the other hand, someone who chooses to commit a crime should be punished.

Would you feel that way if the one innocent person that was sacrificed on the altar of bringing ultimate justice to the 100 guilty men was your father or brother? Or you? Would you demand execution if you were wrongly imprisoned for a capital crime that only you knew that you didn't commit?

 

[joko104]

I personally feel we should rehabilitate criminals instead of releasing them.

That doesn't even make sense.