Quake3World

riddla wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:if killing is wrong then state sponsored killing sends the wrong message

/begin devil's advocate
please elaborate. how is the message wrong?

should we let killers loose in a room full of armed relatives of the victims instead?

or are you saying that you ascribe to the tenents of scripture that states "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord" or that Karma will somehow get them in the end?
/end devil's advocate

vengence isn't necessarily what's healthiest for a society and therefore not the most important factor here imo

the population, income and crime rates in general of the latter charts are wildly inconsistent... illinois / wisconsin and iowa / missouri, for Christ's sake

what a bunch of fags...gayer then that skateboarding dancer fag...

explain another example of how doing something wrong is okay when the state does it please?

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:okay fine lets look and see if urban density affects the outcome of this graph.



note: no significant difference in states with versus states without the death penalty in terms of murder rate per 100000.

with me so far?

rank of urban density year 2000

Wash DC 1
NY 2
Cal 3
Nev 4
Hawaii 5
Illinois 6
Col 7
Utah 8
NJ 9
Arizona 10
oregon 11
Nebraska 12
Maryland 13
ND 14
RI 15

Ind 35
Wy 36
Mon 37
Ken 38
NM 39
Conn 40
Alaska 41
Ver 42
Georgia 43
Ark 44
Miss 45
Tenn 46
WV 47
Maine 48
Alabama 49
NC 50
NH 51
SC 52

is density affecting a 'deterrence effect'? no.

You have to normalize it, not just compare it sice-by-side to a ranking of urban density. Take the percentage of the whole US population that each state represents, and then multiply that into the number of executions as well as the number of murders.

riddla wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:explain another example of how doing something wrong is okay when the state does it please?

whoa, semantics issues. dont act like the state invented killing.

it's not semantics


is killing wrong? we consider it the worst crime. how does it then become okay for the government to do it?

i never said the government invented killing

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:explain another example of how doing something wrong is okay when the state does it please?

Not all killing is wrong. Its not a positive thing, and most killing is wrong, but its not ALWAYS wrong.

Canis wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:okay fine lets look and see if urban density affects the outcome of this graph.



note: no significant difference in states with versus states without the death penalty in terms of murder rate per 100000.

with me so far?

rank of urban density year 2000

Wash DC 1
NY 2
Cal 3
Nev 4
Hawaii 5
Illinois 6
Col 7
Utah 8
NJ 9
Arizona 10
oregon 11
Nebraska 12
Maryland 13
ND 14
RI 15

Ind 35
Wy 36
Mon 37
Ken 38
NM 39
Conn 40
Alaska 41
Ver 42
Georgia 43
Ark 44
Miss 45
Tenn 46
WV 47
Maine 48
Alabama 49
NC 50
NH 51
SC 52

is density affecting a 'deterrence effect'? no.

You have to normalize it, not just compare it sice-by-side to a ranking of urban density. Take the percentage of the whole US population that each state represents, and then multiply that into the number of executions as well as the number of murders.

it's still not going to skew the outcome of that graph

Riddla, for starters, if someone isn't already deterred by the prospect of spending life in prison then I dont think capital punishment is going to deter them a great deal more.

Second, what criminal operates on the pretense of being caught? Perhaps on the lower levels of the severity latter, but even then I don't see much supporting evidence to show that the severity of a punishment reduces the volume of a crime being comitted. I openly invite you to find statistical research which refutes this.

Third if you're not willing to concede that life inprison is a serious deterrant in point #1, the equal and opposite claim to yours is that if a criminal thinks they'll get the death penalty, then there's no reason for them to refrain from murdering more.

Fourth, there isn't any statistical evidence that I'm aware of in the US that supports capital punishment being a deterrant. Indeed, there is statistical evidence to the contrary

Canis wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:explain another example of how doing something wrong is okay when the state does it please?

Not all killing is wrong. Its not a positive thing, and most killing is wrong, but its not ALWAYS wrong.

that's what people who live in a land with the death penalty end up believing. the brutalizing effect. i guess that's why the deaths of millions mean nothing to you

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

Canis wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:explain another example of how doing something wrong is okay when the state does it please?

Not all killing is wrong. Its not a positive thing, and most killing is wrong, but its not ALWAYS wrong.

that's what people who live in a land with the death penalty end up believing. the brutalizing effect. i guess that's why the deaths of millions mean nothing to you

Self defense, for one, isnt a wrong form of killing. If someone threatens my life then I'm more than willing to take his first. As for the death penalty pertaining to crimes, I believe its necessary, but thats kinda where the argument ends. Stats dont prove a thing, despite showing correlations. Yes one can correlate murder rates to incidents of execution, but its a shitload more complicated than that. There are all kinds of socioeconomic and political influences on murder rates, and the correlations are put up there as black and white indicators, almost as proof. Nobody validates the correlation by true statistical analysis or by normalizing them to other influencing data. Correlation is (and I hate to attribute it to him) Bush's "fuzzy math" crap, and means nothing in the long run.

However, I'm finding recently that stats that have been thrown in my face have been bullshit. I was surprised to find more white folks were on death row countrywide than black folks. The opposite has been thrown at me for years, causing me to question the system on the basis of racial prejudice.

Canis, here's a strange statistic I read in a men's journal about 6 months ago:
Atlanta, population about 85% black (like 96 stats), 4 million
Columbus, OH, 30% black, like 20% other, and less than a million (~same year, bad memory, me)
Cols had 10 TIMES the violent crime of Atl!!!
ten fucking times
white folks is some crazy motherfuckers, lemme tell you

Canis

Canis wrote:[I was surprised to find more white folks were on death row countrywide than black folks. The opposite has been thrown at me for years, causing me to question the system on the basis of racial prejudice.

For a guy asking for for proper statistics, you conveniently fail to mention that the black population of the US constitutes.... what? 15%


canis

n "U.S.: Death by Discrimination - The Continuing Role of Race in Capital Cases," Amnesty states that:

* Even though blacks and whites are murder victims in nearly equal numbers of crimes, 80% of people executed since the death penalty was reinstated have been executed for murders involving white victims.
* More than 20% of black defendants who have been executed were convicted by all-white juries.

Foo wrote:

Canis wrote:[I was surprised to find more white folks were on death row countrywide than black folks. The opposite has been thrown at me for years, causing me to question the system on the basis of racial prejudice.

For a guy asking for for proper statistics, you conveniently fail to mention that the black population of the US constitutes.... what? 15%


canis

I actually overlooked that, which is just more evidence these "stats" can be taken out of context, and further validates my argument. I did it out of error, not out of convenience. Additionally I just mentioned I was surprised by it, as it had always been thrown at me that there were more black folks than white folks on death row. In totals, this is the case, but when its normalized to the percentage of the population that is black its a definite larger number of that population. It is for this exact reason that I'm asking for proper statistics.

Underpants? wrote:Canis, here's a strange statistic I read in a men's journal about 6 months ago:
Atlanta, population about 85% black (like 96 stats), 4 million
Columbus, OH, 30% black, like 20% other, and less than a million (~same year, bad memory, me)
Cols had 10 TIMES the violent crime of Atl!!!
ten fucking times
white folks is some crazy motherfuckers, lemme tell you

My my that is a strange statistic, and your point is rather unclear.

Foo wrote:http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article ... 67#STUDIES

This is a pretty good outline of my mindset regarding these issues (from that site): http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article ... 2&did=1176

Homicide Rates Fall in Canada After Abolition of Death Penalty
The abolition of the death penalty in Canada in 1976 has not led to increased homicide rates. Statistics Canada reports that the number of homicides in Canada in 2001 (554) was 23% lower than the number of homicides in 1975 (721), the year before the death penalty was abolished. In addition, homicide rates in Canada are generally three times lower than homicide rates in the U.S., which uses the death penalty. For example, according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, the homicide rate in the U.S. in 1999 was 5.7 per 100,000 population and the rate in Canada was only 1.8. Canada currently sentences those convicted of murder to life sentences with parole eligibility. (Issues Direct.com, 8/4/02).

was he not convicted of shooting 4 people point blank with a shotgun? the only problem with the death penalty is that its not used enough.

Good to see the pro-penalty side coming in with considered arguments.

riddla wrote:ignore basic human nature if thats what floats your boat.

Refraining from killing other people to get what you want isn't necessarily "basic human nature", either. We have forced social living upon ourselves, and with that comes the understanding that crime is detrimental. It's not instinct.

Canis wrote:Self defense, for one, isnt a wrong form of killing. If someone threatens my life then I'm more than willing to take his first. As for the death penalty pertaining to crimes, I believe its necessary, but thats kinda where the argument ends. Stats dont prove a thing, despite showing correlations. Yes one can correlate murder rates to incidents of execution, but its a shitload more complicated than that. There are all kinds of socioeconomic and political influences on murder rates, and the correlations are put up there as black and white indicators, almost as proof. Nobody validates the correlation by true statistical analysis or by normalizing them to other influencing data. Correlation is (and I hate to attribute it to him) Bush's "fuzzy math" crap, and means nothing in the long run.

However, I'm finding recently that stats that have been thrown in my face have been bullshit. I was surprised to find more white folks were on death row countrywide than black folks. The opposite has been thrown at me for years, causing me to question the system on the basis of racial prejudice.

Stats might be used to prove just about anything, but if the numbers are bullshit, then why haven't we seen any proof that it actually is working? Even if we go out on a limb and say that the numbers don't prove the death penalty doesn't work, we're still operating with a lack of any evidence at all. It's like saying, "Well, we don't know if it works or not, but let's just do it anyway." When you're talking about killing people, that's not good logic.

And to add to what Foo said about murderers not operating under the assumption that they'll be caught, the death penalty is only applicable for specifically "heinous" and premeditated crimes. If the criminal is willing to plan a particularly terrible crime, then I have a hard time believing that the thought of, "oh, I'd better not do this or I might get the death penalty" is going to sway their actions.