A drop in murders probably comes in part from removing the opportunity for reoffense.
However, having said that, I would like to look at your argument, "I'd rather have 1000 guilty murderers sit it out for a lifetime, than have society execute one innocent person." That would be true but it would be no benefit to the innocent man condemned to live his life in a 8x8 cell. Like you say, it may be a worse punishment to be forced to live 60 years in a box than to be killed for a crime you didn't commit.
There are only so many appeals allowed. After you have exhausted all your appeals, you're stuck. People sentenced to death can have appeals filed. That would postpone their execution, and give them every opportunity to pursue proof of their innocence.
There is also the pragmatic aspect. Keeping someone in jail for 60 years would seem to me to be more expensive than killing them. I have heard from others that it is actually the execution that is more expensive than incarceration, but I don't see how this is possible. No food costs, no costs for supplies and comforts, no entertainment costs, no guard salaries , no energy used to light and heat the cell.
That said, I am undecided myself.
Shane, I believe the higher costs that people typically attribute to people on death row are typically the legal/court costs. With someone on death row, the number of appeals and other assorted legal proceedings, which go on for many years, are what cost so much money. The execution itself can cost much less than a life of imprisonment.
I moved back into the pro-capital punishment side some time ago. The idea that you can rehabilitate murderers is nonsense. On the other hand, the idea that hanging causes criminals to be less likely to murder is extremely plausible. Now I see it's confirmed.
The reason it does not act as a deterrent is precisely as you say: "... with the lengthy trial and appeal process". When 15 years or so may go by between arrest, conviction, and execution, everybody's forgotten about the crime - except for the surviving relatives and friends of the victim (still dead after those 15 years).
I saw a bumper sticker the other day:
"Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?"
One thing about capital punishment is that it's irreversible. There have been more than a few cases of people found innocent after serving 10 or 15 years in prison.
I think the solution should be that capital punishment is only applied when there is incontrovertible evidence - no doubt about it. Then, execution within 14 days. On lesser evidence, life terms with or without possibility of parole.
And none of this nonsense about "gentle executions". Someone who has inflicted unbelievable pain and suffering on another should expect to be repaid in kind.
Another thing about the deterrent effect: in crimes of passion, the murderer doesn't think about the consequences. And in the "carefully-laid plan" crime, the murderer fully expects not to be caught.
So deterrence is only one aspect. The other has to be to see that he doesn't do it again. And if we put him in prison, he may very well do it again (after all, they can only hang you once), or be killed by someone in the same boat.
In the old days, punishment of all sorts was a deterrent because it was prompt and public. I think we've evolved past the stocks and hangings in the public square, but people on the outside need to know what life's like inside. Every now and again, a newspaper or magazine should run an interview - or a 2 or 3 day follow-along - of someone in maximum security, and someone in the general prison population. Let people know that that's not somewhere you ever want to go.
I've never bought the idea that the death penalty is not a deterant. We know it doesn't work for those who have committed murder, but what about the countless others who have not committed murder? Is the prospect of the death penalty not on in some way part of the reason for that? I don't know how we could test for that, but it seems to me that some types of murder, for which there is overwhelming evidence (DNA matches, eye witnesses, etc.) ought to be reinstated for certain classes of murderers, namely the Paul Bernardos, Clifford Olsons and that pig farmer in B.C., whose name I can't remember at the moment, ought to be put out of their misery ASAP. I don't think a single taxpayer dime should be spent keeping them in prison. Deterrents do not work on sickos like those monsters.
I was shocked at the Interview done by Charles Adler and the Federal Liberal MP Dosanji , the issue was over the Clifford Olsen cause and if this one was valid for the Death Penalty.
Dosanji claimed that nobody should be put to death for murder because it lowers us to their level, and I assumed he was defending his Sikh Brothers that slaughtered 240 Canadian civilians , and of couse he would defend the 9/11 Muslims that slaughtered 3000 people including 24 canadians.
This is the same Yahoo that was on MDL to say that if the Air India
murders were Air Canada and the poeple were all White , Canadians would be outraged and have demanded an Inquiry.
Except Bob Rae is a Liberal and his
report said there would be nothing new to add from an Inquiry , MP Dosanji himself also said on MDL that it was common knowledge among Sikhs in B.C. that a bomb-plot was being hatched and that was months befor the actual Bombing of Air India's 747.
Quite the nerve from 2 X-NDPer's that take the moral highground AFTER they are exposed as guilty for NOT acting on evidence to prevent a problem. The AdScam showed us how shallow Martin and Chretien were by claiming that they were too stupid to know what happened under them and expected that the Criminals in the Liberal Party should have turned themselves in after the fraudulent Elections that were paid for via Tax-Dollars in envolopes slipped across table during a Business Dinner.
Capital punishment for the true Guilty that admit it and all the evidence proves it has always been to bring Justice to the Victim that can no longer speak , it's never been to appease the Wealthy-Elite in power who get in Politics , nor should canada have been made into the Image of Trudeau and his version of reality .
Trudeau never condemned the Nazis during the War , he mocked our troops that fought and told the French that it was Britains problem and not France's issue.
BTW, how do we prove all the Murders that didn't happen during capital Punishment when the killer
made the choice to not go through with it , people never confess to their plots to murder someone because we has laws for Conspiring to kill or planning to kill .
The death penalty makes sure the killer doesn't do it again , plain and simple folks.
Commenting by HaloScan
