it definitely will make other people think twice before they do the same thing
There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion.
There is no proof that the death penalty deters criminals. According to the National Academy of Sciences, “Research on the deterrent effect of capital punishment is uninformative about whether capital punishment increases, decreases, or has no effect on homicide rates.”
I believe that most developed countries have gotten rid of the death penalty, and a big part of that is because it doesn’t work as a deterrent.
Very few people decide whether or not to commit a crime based on the punishment. Most criminals think they won’t get caught at all, or if they do, they think they’ll get away with it in court.
This slightly misses the mark. The majority of crimes, including violent ones, are not committed by people performing a risk calculus. They’re done with minimal thought and more often than not in the heat of the moment. Effectively, they are not crimes that you can deter because for a crime to be deterred, the potential criminal has to assess whether it makes sense to commit the crime. This works in cases of like financial fraud and white collar crime. Someone shooting another person during an altercation, not so much.
Thanks here for this comment, I feel like I see where my stance might not make sense, ofc death penalty should not be given in cases like this where emotion takes over, I am rather taking about ppl like trump and gates and Netanyahu who are completely sane, they just kill for their own benefit
Ppl here have assumed that just because I said ‘I see reason’ means I feel like you need to kill everyone who commits this, No, I am saying that I don’t know the exact circumstance, it might or might not be justified, I hope we can clear this up moving forward
Yeah there’s a way to deter crimes and it’s increasing the certainty of punishment. Overly severe punishment actually has an unwanted effect of increasing the severity of crimes. If a rapist is going to die if caught that incentivizes murdering the victim who is inherently a witness.
No, they convince themselves it isn’t rape. Rape is a lot less dark alley and a lot more sober person and person too drunk to say no or pressuring or some other means of soft power. Look at studies which showed that if you don’t say the word rape a lot of admit they’re willing to do it.
So what you get from executing rapists is someone who raped their partner either in an emotional frenzy or a coercive stage gets accused or has a flash of realization and promptly gets violent lest they die.
Also, as a woman I’m a lot less likely to accuse someone of rape they actually did to me if I know it could lead to them hanging in the public square. Suddenly the weight of their life feels like it’s on my hands and I don’t want them dead.
And what level of certainty do you need? Keep in mind uncertainty means innocents are murdered by the state and 100% certainty is difficult enough that it will generally put you into the anti capital punishment camp.
Also it sounds like you have a failure of understanding how the rich get out of punishment. Yes sometimes it’s like Brock Turner where it’s blatant. But other times it’s because they can afford the means to hide evidence and sow doubts. And when all else fails they’re more likely to have ins with judges or the ability to flee preemptively.
No matter what follows this…yes, we do. You should need evidence to believe anything; understanding of course that the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence needed.
giving them merely some jailtime is not working either, but whatever
Then imprison them for life. Guess what, life imprisonment is cheaper than the death penalty, and can be overturned if there’s an error.
Yes, we should also be addressing the failings of our penal system(s). Unfortunately, many around the world, and clearly yourself included, are more interested in retributive “justice” than habilitative functions.
That is the same thinking that those who own hand guns think. They think they will be safer, yet all the stats indicate other wise including all the children accidentally firing a gun and killing a family member. If risk of death was a deterrent, the USA would be among the safest place in the world.
I used the search functionality, they have a degree in criminology, history, and law.
I don’t know how common that combo is, neither do I want to cast doubt on this person’s comments… but it doesn’t help that the majority of them defy logic at every turn.
Just yesterday, @JustZ@lemmy.world told me they know more than South Africa about apartheid, and thus Israel cannot be an undemocratic apartheid state. They also told me that when America didn’t allow women and black people to vote, it was “still a democracy”. But they also said that an apartheid rule is when a minority has control over a majority (this is the only definition they offered)… that would mean, by @JustZ@lemmy.world’s own definition, that America before suffrage for women and black people was an apartheid state.
I deleted my comment due to some drama, but I remember also having pretty long conversations with this guy, who thinks that just because hamas exists, Israel is free to genocide
Same here… for me it’s that the pretends to respect Palestinian life then says something that amounts to excusing genocide and 75 years of Israeli opression all in the same sentence.
Youre a moron and have no idea what you’re talking about. Please stop tagging me. I don’t care what you have to say any longer.
You post irrelevant links constantly, you lie about what they say, you lie about what you think I said, and it’s exhausting to try and correct you. I’m not your dad or your teacher are so kindly fuck off and leave me alone. Do you understand?
deleted by creator
There is absolutely no evidence to support that assertion.
US Department of Justice
deleted by creator
I believe that most developed countries have gotten rid of the death penalty, and a big part of that is because it doesn’t work as a deterrent.
Very few people decide whether or not to commit a crime based on the punishment. Most criminals think they won’t get caught at all, or if they do, they think they’ll get away with it in court.
This slightly misses the mark. The majority of crimes, including violent ones, are not committed by people performing a risk calculus. They’re done with minimal thought and more often than not in the heat of the moment. Effectively, they are not crimes that you can deter because for a crime to be deterred, the potential criminal has to assess whether it makes sense to commit the crime. This works in cases of like financial fraud and white collar crime. Someone shooting another person during an altercation, not so much.
Thanks here for this comment, I feel like I see where my stance might not make sense, ofc death penalty should not be given in cases like this where emotion takes over, I am rather taking about ppl like trump and gates and Netanyahu who are completely sane, they just kill for their own benefit
Ppl here have assumed that just because I said ‘I see reason’ means I feel like you need to kill everyone who commits this, No, I am saying that I don’t know the exact circumstance, it might or might not be justified, I hope we can clear this up moving forward
Yeah there’s a way to deter crimes and it’s increasing the certainty of punishment. Overly severe punishment actually has an unwanted effect of increasing the severity of crimes. If a rapist is going to die if caught that incentivizes murdering the victim who is inherently a witness.
deleted by creator
No, they convince themselves it isn’t rape. Rape is a lot less dark alley and a lot more sober person and person too drunk to say no or pressuring or some other means of soft power. Look at studies which showed that if you don’t say the word rape a lot of admit they’re willing to do it.
So what you get from executing rapists is someone who raped their partner either in an emotional frenzy or a coercive stage gets accused or has a flash of realization and promptly gets violent lest they die.
Also, as a woman I’m a lot less likely to accuse someone of rape they actually did to me if I know it could lead to them hanging in the public square. Suddenly the weight of their life feels like it’s on my hands and I don’t want them dead.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
And what level of certainty do you need? Keep in mind uncertainty means innocents are murdered by the state and 100% certainty is difficult enough that it will generally put you into the anti capital punishment camp.
Also it sounds like you have a failure of understanding how the rich get out of punishment. Yes sometimes it’s like Brock Turner where it’s blatant. But other times it’s because they can afford the means to hide evidence and sow doubts. And when all else fails they’re more likely to have ins with judges or the ability to flee preemptively.
No matter what follows this…yes, we do. You should need evidence to believe anything; understanding of course that the more extraordinary the claim, the more extraordinary the evidence needed.
Then imprison them for life. Guess what, life imprisonment is cheaper than the death penalty, and can be overturned if there’s an error.
deleted by creator
Yes, we should also be addressing the failings of our penal system(s). Unfortunately, many around the world, and clearly yourself included, are more interested in retributive “justice” than habilitative functions.
deleted by creator
Crime is decreasing year after year except during the pandemic. What do you mean it’s not working?
That is the same thinking that those who own hand guns think. They think they will be safer, yet all the stats indicate other wise including all the children accidentally firing a gun and killing a family member. If risk of death was a deterrent, the USA would be among the safest place in the world.
deleted by creator
Can you rephrase as I am not understanding your point I think.
deleted by creator
I have a degree in criminology and there is no truth to this. People don’t ever rationally decide to do crimes.
Do you really have a degree in criminology? What kind of lawyer are you exactly?
deleted by creator
I used the search functionality, they have a degree in criminology, history, and law. I don’t know how common that combo is, neither do I want to cast doubt on this person’s comments… but it doesn’t help that the majority of them defy logic at every turn.
Just yesterday, @JustZ@lemmy.world told me they know more than South Africa about apartheid, and thus Israel cannot be an undemocratic apartheid state. They also told me that when America didn’t allow women and black people to vote, it was “still a democracy”. But they also said that an apartheid rule is when a minority has control over a majority (this is the only definition they offered)… that would mean, by @JustZ@lemmy.world’s own definition, that America before suffrage for women and black people was an apartheid state.
I deleted my comment due to some drama, but I remember also having pretty long conversations with this guy, who thinks that just because hamas exists, Israel is free to genocide
No worries, I understand.
Same here… for me it’s that the pretends to respect Palestinian life then says something that amounts to excusing genocide and 75 years of Israeli opression all in the same sentence.
Youre a moron and have no idea what you’re talking about. Please stop tagging me. I don’t care what you have to say any longer.
You post irrelevant links constantly, you lie about what they say, you lie about what you think I said, and it’s exhausting to try and correct you. I’m not your dad or your teacher are so kindly fuck off and leave me alone. Do you understand?
Removed by mod
https://lemmy.world/comment/7897946