Old enough to know better

[El-Moldo]

Weren't all the witnesses, etc sworn in with the Bible to start the trial? If so, why was the consulting of the Bible wrong? Can't have it both ways. If you swear on the Bible, then what's in it should be allowed for advise.

[once a runner]

No LP, I am pro life and yet still consider myself a liberal politically. I believe abortion to be wrong, but have a hard time knowing where to draw the line in the legilsation. There are circumstances where I do not believe it to be wrong.

I did hear Condi Rice state on Meet the Press a couple of weeks back that is she is "mildly pro choice". She doesn't believe in late term abortions and also believe parents should be notified, but at the same time, doesn't believe the law can be leglislated.

[LionPride]

Runner, I think you're just a closet Republican :lol: . We'll bring you out of the dark side yet :lol: .

[redfishbluefish]

I'll have to agree with LionPride on that one.

[The Ancient Enemy]

Hey LP you messed that up, what you really meant to say was "we'll bring out the dark side in you yet."

[DCPassarelli]

Note that Runner talked about one issue. One that he is borderline on. Note the, "There are circumstances where I do not believe it to be wrong."

Besides, there are many other issues.

Anyway, if we are going to keep throwing statistics out there, I am sure all of you heard that the crime rate actually goes up for a while around where someone is executed.

[El-Moldo]

I never heard that. Another made up statistic? If you did it once, how can we believe any stat you give from now on?

[LionPride]

[quote="DCPassarelli";p="86340"]Note that Runner talked about one issue. One that he is borderline on. Note the, "There are circumstances where I do not believe it to be wrong."

Besides, there are many other issues.

Anyway, if we are going to keep throwing statistics out there, I am sure all of you heard that the crime rate actually goes up for a while around where someone is executed.[/quote]

You know Passarelli, runner and I have been arguing politics before you even joined this site. NOTE, the smiley faces on my posts. I think I know Runner's position isn't going to change.

We often told each other when arguing politics before the election, that if you make an off the wall point, you better be able to back it up.

Let's see it kid. Back up your point that the crime rate goes up after someone is executed. If that's true, we should see it after Terri Schiavo dies.

[DCPassarelli]

The Brutalization Effect of the Death Penalty

Neither incapacitation nor deterrence theories are supported by the scientific research on capital punishment. In most public policy debates the burden of proof is on those advocating a measure to demonstrate its effectiveness. If that were the case in the death penalty debate adherents would fail miserably. But the fact is that the death penalty not only doesn’t deter murder, it encourages people to kill.

Studies of capital punishment have consistently shown that homicide actually increases in the time period surrounding an execution. Social scientists refer to this as the "brutalization effect." Execution stimulates homicides in three ways: (1) executions desensitize the public to the immorality of killing, increasing the probability that some people will be motivated to kill; (2) the state legitimizes the notion that vengeance for past misdeeds is acceptable; and (3) executions also have an imitation effect, where people actually follow the example set by the state, after all, people feel if the government can kill its enemies, so can they (Bowers and Pierce, 1980; King, 1978, Forst. 1983).

Let me clear here. The scientific evidence on the brutalization effect is compelling. We are not talking about one or two speculative studies. We are talking about a body of research that has found over and over again, in state after state, that the use of the death penalty increases, and often sharply increases, the number of homicides. Let me be specific:


1. OKLAHOMA: Oklahoma’s return to capital punishment in 1990 was followed by a significant increase in killings that involved strangers, with an increase one stranger homicide per month for the year following an execution. In addition, the analysis also showed a brutalization effect for total homicides as well as a variety of different types of killings that involved both strangers and nonstrangers (Bailey, W.C. 1998. Deterrence, Brutalization, and the Death Penalty: Another Examination of Oklahoma’s Return to Capital Punishment. Criminology 36, 4: 717- 733; Cochran, J.K., M.B. Chamlin, and M. Seth.1994. Deterrence or Brutalization? An Impact Assessment of Oklahoma’sReturn to Capital Punishment. Criminology 32, 1: 107-134).

2. ARIZONA: Studies in Arizona found an increase in specific types of homicides following an execution in that state. In particular the Arizona study found large increases in spur-of-the-moment homicides that involve strangers and/or arguments and a large increase in gun-related homicides (Thomson, E. 1997. Deterrence Versus Brutalization: The Caseof Arizona. Homicide Studies 1, 2: 110-128).

3. GEORGIA: A study in Georgia fount that a publicized execution is associated with an increase of 26 homicides, or 6.8 percent increase, in the month of the execution. Overall, publicized executions were associated with an increase of 55 homicides during the time period analyzed (Stack, S. 1993. Execution Publicity and Homicide in Georgia. American Journal Of Criminal Justice 18, 1: 25-39).

4. ILLINOIS: A study of capital punishment in Illinois found that the net effect of executions was to increase rather than decrease Chicago first degree murders and total criminal homicides (Bailey, W.C. 1983. Disaggregation in Deterrence and Death Penalty Research - The Case of Murder in Chicago. Journal of Criminal Law andCriminology 74,3: 827-859).

5. CALIFORNIA: In California studies have found that the number of murders actually increased in the days prior to an execution and on the day of the execution itself. In addition homicides rates were even higher in the weeks after executions (Bowers, W., G. Pierce, and J. McDevitt. 1984. Legal Homicide: Death as Punishment in America, 1864-1982. Boston, Northeastern University Press)

6. PENNSYLVANIA: A study looking at data for both California and Pennsylvania found that each execution studied was followed by a two- to threefold increase in the number of homicides the next month (Bowers, W, and G. Pierce. 1980. Deterrence or brutalization: What is the effect of executions? Crime and Delinquency 26: 453-484). And in the earliest study demonstrating a brutalization effect, Robert Dann found an average increase of 4.4 homicides for each execution (Dann, Robert. 1935. The deterrent effect of capital punishment. Friends Social Service Series 29).

Once again the scientific research provides compelling evidence against the death penalty as public policy. The death penalty does, invariably and without exception increase the number of homicides in jurisdictions where it is applied. This has been proven in Pennsylvania, California, Oklahoma, Arizona, Illinois and other jurisdictions. The brutalization thesis is not mere speculation. It has been verified in study after study. If a legislature were looking at the impact of a pharmaceutical drug and only one study suggested that the drug killed more than it cured, legislators would no doubt ban the drug. The evidence with regard to the brutalization theory is far stronger, with at least eleven unrefuted, replicated and valid studies clearly showing a brutalization impact. In the case of the death penalty the cure is clearly worse than the disease, and like a dangerous drug, this cure should be banned.

I think that should be good enough. If you still believe otherwise, please show your information.

Also, that article is also very good. I highly suggest reading all, or most, of it. (click on the guy's name)

[LionPride]

[web]http://aei-brookings.org/admin/authorpd ... hp?id=1131[/web]