Excellent piece.

Left by No2Liberals on September 28th, 2008 at 10:40 pm

Obama — More Liberal Than He is Black
That’s probably a fair statement.
I mean, his mother was white so he’s as white as he is black anyway.
I guess because his skin is darker than the average Texan, he’s considered to be black.

Eitherway, it looks like the majority of Americans follow my way of thinking.

The Illinois senator extended his advantage to 49% to 44%, compared with last week, when the same respondents gave him a 48% to 45% edge.

I have to say, watching them both talking last week, Obama was a clear winner in my eyes. McCain seems to need a couple of jump leads attached to his balls to spark him up a bit - I though Bush was boring!

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 6:27 am

Go Obama!

All the way!

No stopping you now!

OBAMA’s BIG STATES (43% of GDP or US$6 trillion of $14 trillion economy)
Obama +13.3% up — California with 1,812,968 GDP
Obama +12.4 up — New York 1,103,024
Obama +17 up — Illinois 609,570
Obama +6 up — Pennsylvania 531,110
Obama +7% up — New Jersey 465,484
Obama +1% up — North Carolina 399,446
Obama +1.8% up — Virginia 382,964
Obama +6.6% up — Michigan 381,963
Obama +13.7% up — Massachusetts 351,514

You gotta love him!
I’m wondering if Robbie needs to buy the domain http://www.sourgrounds.com - because before long this place is gonna get as sour as a rejected lemon.

Can’t wait for President Obama

Jonny

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 7:30 am

To be fair, here are McCains:

MCCAIN BIG STATES FOR McCAIN (US$2.69 trillion)
McCain +17% up — Texas 1,141,965
McCain + even — Florida 734,519
McCain +1.2% — Ohio 466,309
McCain +12% — Georgia 396,504

At least he’s got Texas - not that it matters in the whole scheme of things.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 7:50 am

The good thing about Obama is that not only does he support the death penalty, he supports the death penalty even for noncapital crimes, i.e., the rape of children.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 8:21 am

When obama forgot the name of the soldier KIA during the debate, it must of given a thrill up the euroweenie’s leg.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 8:35 am

The good thing about Obama is that not only does he support the death penalty, he supports the death penalty even for noncapital crimes, i.e., the rape of children.

Although it’s good to hear that he admits the Death Penalty “does little to deter crime.”

I’d still back a liberal supporter of the Death Penalty in cases in which “the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage.” over another gun totting “kill ‘em all” righty.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 9:06 am

He’s wrong about deterrence but nevertheless he recognizes the death penalty as punishment. Take a life; you forfeit your own life. Every capital case is the community’s justified expression of its full outrage. Otherwise, all first degree murders would have an automatic death sentence. No surprise after years of trolling this place, you still don’t know jack sh*t about the subject you bore most of us on.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 9:27 am

He’s wrong about deterrence but nevertheless he recognizes the death penalty as punishment.

In your opinion. I my opinion he is right and the statistics support his/my opinion.

Take a live; you forfeit your own life

Says who? Again, your opinion.

No surprise after years of trolling this place, you still don’t know jack sh*t about the subject you bore most of us on.

I don’t know jack shit because I don’t agree with you?
That’s the redneck mentality I’ve come to love* about you Anon.

* and I mean love in the loosest of loosest terms.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 9:32 am

Death sentence executions carried out since 1982 (Texas).

1982 - 1
1984 - 3
1985 - 6
1986 - 10
1987 - 6
1988 - 3
1989 - 4
1990 - 4
1991 - 5
1992 - 12
1993 - 17
1994 - 14
1995 - 19
1996 - 3
1997 - 37
1998 - 20
1999 - 35
2000 - 40
2001 - 17
2002 - 33
2003 - 24
2004 - 23
2005 - 19
2006 - 24
2007 - 26
2008 - 9 (to date)

So, using your philosophy and these figures can you explain how the death sentence is a deterrent?
I would have thought you’d have seen a ‘decline’ in executions if the death sentence is a deterrent.
Correct me if I’m wrong.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 9:38 am

Earlier last year, there were studies reported on by the AP that found that the death penalty, expeditiously applied, not only prevents murders but deters them…

It may be a deterrent. It might not be. You’ll never know how many people decided not to kill somebody knowing that they could face the death penalty.

You simply cannot measure that.

But deterrence is not the reason I whole-heartily support the death penalty. I support it because it is the ultimate application of justice for those who deserve it most.

I don’t care if an execution deters a single other person from committing a similar crime. I simply care that the person who committed this one has paid the ultimate price for his crimes.

Now, back to Barack Obama being an elitist snob who cared more about transforming our country into a socialist haven than he does about anything else…

Left by Robbie Cooper on September 29th, 2008 at 9:57 am

In your opinion. I my opinion he is right and the statistics support his/my opinion.

No, they don’t. And the facts and studies supporting deterrence it have been posted here numerous times before: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html

Additionally, it deters the murderer from murdering again.

Take a live; you forfeit your own life
Says who? Again, your opinion.

No, the law. No surprise you don’t believe in democracies.

I don’t know jack shit because I don’t agree with you?

No, because you constantly mistate facts and the law no matter how many times it is pointed out to you or linked. And you have been told this numerous times before, too. You just make up your own crap or copy something you found on the internet that you don’t understand and don’t have the brain power to analyze.

That’s the redneck mentality I’ve come to love* about you Anon. * and I mean love in the loosest of loosest terms.
Jonny

I’m don’t swing that way, buttboy.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 9:59 am

So, using your philosophy and these figures can you explain how the death sentence is a deterrent?

See posts above.

I would have thought you’d have seen a ‘decline’ in executions if the death sentence is a deterrent.

Typical. You only want to see a decline in executions, while we want to see a decline in murders. You just revealed your priorities.
Texas has a lower homicide rate than any nearby state. While their murder rate continues to drop, those states with no death penalty continue to rise.

Correct me if I’m wrong.

You are always wrong and you are always corrected. It is tiring when you constantly make the same discredited arguments over and over again. And this post is a good example of you only being able to copy and paste from the internet without any clue as to what you are arguing.

Seriously. Your crap and your topic hijacking is getting old.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 10:05 am

It may be a deterrent. It might not be. You’ll never know how many people decided not to kill somebody knowing that they could face the death penalty.

Fair point.
However, taking this to the most layman of layman terms, a course of action could be called a deterrent if less people are willing to follow through with an act that would lead to the said course of action being the consequence. The executions in Texas since 1982 show the exact opposite being true.

I don’t care if an execution deters a single other person from committing a similar crime. I simply care that the person who committed this one has paid the ultimate price for his crimes.

That’s as long a they the right guy for the crime.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 10:07 am

And the facts and studies supporting deterrence it have been posted here numerous times before: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html

The death penalty “is applied so rarely that the number of homicides it can plausibly have caused or deterred cannot reliably be disentangled from the large year-to-year changes in the homicide rate caused by other factors,” John J. Donohue III, a law professor at Yale with a doctorate in economics, and Justin Wolfers, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote in the Stanford Law Review in 2005. “The existing evidence for deterrence,” they concluded, “is surprisingly fragile.”
Gary Becker, who won the Nobel Prize in economics in 1992 and has followed the debate, said the current empirical evidence was “certainly not decisive” because “we just don’t get enough variation to be confident we have isolated a deterrent effect.”

From the same article. Funny how you consider the idea of the DP being a deterrent as fact.

No, the law. No surprise you don’t believe in democracies.

The law in Texas yes. But in the majority of democratic countries - thank goodness.

No, because you constantly mistate facts and the law no matter how many times it is pointed out to you or linked.

You’re a joke if you are using your linked ’studies’ as facts.
Can you not read the critisism?

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 10:18 am

From the same article. Funny how you consider the idea of the DP being a deterrent as fact.

It is fact. The executed murderer never murders again. That you cherry picked a few quotes from the article only cited to give an opposing view as authority, demonstrates that you do not have the brain cells necessary for any serious discussion. The people who conducted these studies and have found that the death penalty is a deterrent are some of the heavy hitters of the anti-death penalty movement. So, for them to concede to the findings, and you not to, again just show that you are an ignorant fool.

The law in Texas yes. But in the majority of democratic countries - thank goodness.

Idiot. Apparently, you don’t even know the definition of a democracy. I live in the US. The majority of states have decided they want the death penalty. The majority of your so called “democratic countries” are denied the right to decide whether they want the death penalty or not. Instead, the EU decides for them. Not much of a democracy.

You’re a joke if you are using your linked ’studies’ as facts.
Can you not read the critisism?

Not only can I read it, unlike you, I have the brain cells to evaluate it.

Give it up, buttboy. You are still making your same old discredited argument and continuing to hijack the thread.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 10:34 am

While their [Texas] murder rate continues to drop, those states with no death penalty continue to rise.

Murders in Texas since 1982

1982 - 2,466
1984 - 2,093
1985 - 2,132
1986 - 2,258
1987 - 1,959
1988 - 2,022
1989 - 2,029
1990 - 2,389
1991 - 2,652
1992 - 2,239
1993 - 2,147
1994 - 2,022
1995 - 1,693
1996 - 1,477
1997 - 1,327
1998 - 1,346
1999 - 1,217
2000 - 1,238
2001 - 1,332
2002 - 1,302
2003 - 1,422
2004 - 1,364
2005 - 1,407
2006 - 1,384
2007 - 1,420

Declining? Prior to 1982 we where back down in the 1,000’s.
Not sure if you attended college/school/kindergarden however the data above clearly shows no sign of deterrent impact. Graphed with other crimes that don’t have the death penalty such as property and vehicle theft, you will see there is a direct correlation with murder/homicide. This again suggests no external effects (such as a death penalty deterrent) has any impact on the volume of crimes committed.

But I’m not expecting you to understand that.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 10:43 am

The executed murderer never murders again.

Nor does he if he has life serving hard labour.

That you cherry picked a few quotes from the article only cited to give an opposing view as authority, demonstrates that you do not have the brain cells necessary for any serious discussion

You want to get serious with this? Show me the point where your ‘deterrent’ has actually impacted on serious crime. You may see ‘dips’ and ‘highs’ but now compare these to crimes where there is no death penalty - an almost identical correlation.

Idiot. Apparently, you don’t even know the definition of a democracy. I live in the US. The majority of states have decided they want the death penalty. The majority of your so called “democratic countries” are denied the right to decide whether they want the death penalty or not. Instead, the EU decides for them. Not much of a democracy.

You’re a prick - come over to ‘Europe’ and get educated.

You are still making your same old discredited argument and continuing to hijack the thread

You’re the one who started talking about the DP - redneck.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 10:53 am

You’re a prick - come over to ‘Europe’ and get educated.

One doesn’t have to go to another country in order to know the definition of democracy and that european countries are not allowed to vote to reinstate the death penalty in their own countries. No, someone else is your master…

You’re the one who started talking about the DP - redneck.

No, I cited obama’s position on the death penalty in response to your off topic handjob of him. Since, his position is radically opposed to yours, you’ve demonstrated your death penalty position is not based on your true convictins but merely due to your hatred of the US.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 11:10 am

Since, his position is radically opposed to yours, you’ve demonstrated your death penalty position is not based on your true convictins but merely due to your hatred of the US.

What are you talking about?
To hate the US is to hate my relatives, which of course, I do not.
And stop avoiding the question; show me data that shows a direct impact of the Death Penalty being a deterrent over that of social trends in first degree murder AND other crimes.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 11:15 am

I see you edited your post:

Nor does he if he has life serving hard labour.

Are you really this stupid? Of course, you are. You think hard labor will stop them from killing prisoners? Killing correctional guards? Escaping and killing? Ordering people to be murdered on the outside? How many times does this have to be pointed out to you, dumbass? The bottomline, you don’t give a damn about reducing murders. All you care about is fluffing murderers.

You want to get serious with this? Show me the point where your ‘deterrent’ has actually impacted on serious crime. You may see ‘dips’ and ‘highs’ but now compare these to crimes where there is no death penalty - an almost identical correlation.

I’m always serious. As already stated and stated many times, the murder rate drops in relation to the use of the death penalty. Stop wasting everyone’s time and stop hijacking threads. There are forums that deal with nothing but the DP. I assume you don’t join because you know you’ll get your ass kicked.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 11:19 am

I’ve already have, dumbass. I also see that you are trying to move the goal posts. I have no more time to waste on an idiot like you. Everything you have posted has been refuted on this blog and other blogs and in studies many times before. If you didn’t only go to dpic you would know that, fluffer.

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 11:23 am

I’m always serious. As already stated and stated many times, the murder rate drops in relation to the use of the death penalty.

No it doesn’t. You can’t simply say that and all of a sudden it becomes fact. The is a direct correlation to all other crimes without the death penalty which suggests there is NO impact of any external factor (death penalty) other than social trends.
You are simple if you think otherwise.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 11:44 am

Let me make it easier for you:

GRAPH - Homicide rates per 100,000 population in Texas, New York, and California.

Ok, now I’ll take this slow for you, you simple amoeba you.

See New York? No executions in New York.
See the correlation between Texas and New York?
Pretty similar eh? Can you do me a favour and point out where the death penalty ‘deterrent’ is effecting the number of murders?

Also interesting is the HIGHER number murders per capita in Texas.

Now go read a book and stop bloating your opinion as FACT.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 11:52 am

Dumbass. There are many factors affecting the murder rate. I know this is beyond your ability to comprehend, but the fact that Texas borders Mexico is only one of them. Texas has the lowest homicide rate of any state in the region. Lower than the neighboring states of Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Arizona and California. Comparing them to states in other regions with no Mexican border makes no sense. The only state in the South, Southwest region with a lower homicide rate is Oklahoma but it also has a higher rate of execution per capita.

This has also been pointed out to you in the past. Now stop wasting people’s time by requiring them to repeat things to you ad nauseum. And stop hijacking threads. Again, I dare you to go to join one of the major dp debate forums. Or, are you too afraid you will have your ass handed to you?

Left by Anonymous on September 29th, 2008 at 12:41 pm

Democracy is a wonderful thing.

Unless I am mistaken, the place where Jonny lives does not have a death penalty statute. Presumably, that’s the way the voters want it.

In certain parts of the U.S., there is a death penalty law, but it is rarely (if ever) used. Evidently, that’s the way the voters want it.

Where I live, we have a death penalty law, and (as anyone who visits this website knows) we damn sure use it. And I know for a fact that’s the way this voter wants it.

The point being this: it is possible to “prove” almost anything you want using statistics. But to hell with statistics; in the final analysis, societies have (or do not have) the death penalty because the voters want (or do not want) it.

In Texas, we want the death penalty, so we have it. If you don’t want it where you live, that’s your decision.

But outsiders who attempt to tell us Texans how to live will not find us to be very receptive.

If that makes me sound like an uneducated redneck, then so be it.

Left by Colin on September 29th, 2008 at 12:47 pm

There are many factors affecting the murder rate.

Yes. The death penalty being a deterrent isn’t one of them.

Texas has the lowest homicide rate of any state in the region

Per capita, it is higher than New York. Remember New York, that place without the death penalty.

Comparing them to states in other regions with no Mexican border makes no sense.

Why? Do mexicans commit all the homicides in Texas?

Anyway, you’re not able to address the FACTS so you talk about something else. Typical.

Any chance you could back up your idea that the death penalty acts as a deterrent? Did you see the graph that showed a clear correlation between that of a state WITH the DP and that of one without? Did you understand it? Do you want any more help from me in understand basic statistics?

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

The point being this: it is possible to “prove” almost anything you want using statistics. But to hell with statistics; in the final analysis, societies have (or do not have) the death penalty because the voters want (or do not want) it.

I’m only using factual statistics to show that the death penalty in no way acts as a deterrent. You are more than entitled to be of the opinion that regardless of this, you prefer to live where the death penalty is law.

In Texas, we want the death penalty, so we have it. If you don’t want it where you live, that’s your decision.
But outsiders who attempt to tell us Texans how to live will not find us to be very receptive.

Fair point. As I understand it (and I could be wrong on this) about 70% of Texans support the death penalty. This is all fine, but it doesn’t mean the rest of the world isn’t allowed to comment.
I’m certainly not ‘telling’ you how to live over there. I’m just commenting on how I see it - just as you are able to comment on anything that interests you.

If that makes me sound like an uneducated redneck, then so be it.

Far from it Colin. An uneducated redneck, in my humble opinion, is someone who spouts their opinions as FACT even though they have no hard data to substantiate their ‘facts’. Then when presented with hard data, or FACTS, that show they are a million miles off the mark, they spit their dummies out and get all abusive.
That’s an uneducated redneck.
Stick around, you’ll see one posting in a few minutes.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 1:12 pm

What are the consequences of making a wrong decision on this subject?

If I am right, and Jonny is wrong (the death penalty DOES deter murders), but we make the wrong decision by not executing convicted killers, then more murders will be committed than would have otherwise. In this case the consequences of making a wrong decision will be that innocent people will die unnecessarily.

What if Jonny is right, and I am wrong (the death penalty does NOT deter murders), but we still make the wrong decision by executing convicted killers anyway? In this case the consequences of making a wrong decision will be that convicted killers will die unnecessarily.

Doesn’t seem to be that tough of a choice, to me.

Left by Colin on September 29th, 2008 at 1:13 pm

If I am right, and Jonny is wrong (the death penalty DOES deter murders), but we make the wrong decision by not executing convicted killers, then more murders will be committed than would have otherwise

Sorry Colin, not sure how you get to the point that more murders will be committed if murderers aren’t executed - can you clarify?

Jonny

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 1:16 pm

There is one irrefutable fact about the death penalty.

There are no repeat offenders.

Left by SB Smith on September 29th, 2008 at 1:35 pm

Sorry if I’m being unclear.

An exercise in logic.

Given: The death penalty deters murder.

If the death penalty is used, there will be fewer murders.

If the death penalty is not used, there will be more murders. QED.

If the original statement is true (the death penalty deters murder), then the conclusion is also true ( if the death penalty is not used, there will be more murders).

I am aware that you do not accept the original statement as true. But I trust you can follow my logic in reaching the conclusion.

To your way of thinking, of course, the original statement is false, therefore the conclusion is also false. But that’s one area where you and I disagree (sans rancor).

Regarding uneducated rednecks, “redneck” is a matter of opinion. I do not consider myself to be a redneck, but I know that some of my friends would disagree with me on that. And I do not have a formal education beyond high school.

Left by Colin on September 29th, 2008 at 1:36 pm

Unfortunately, although an eloquent theory, we fall at the first fence as I can’t see the proof that the Death Penalty acts as a deterrent.

As previously posted, this simple graph proves the point.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm

There is one irrefutable fact about the death penalty.
There are no repeat offenders.

But plenty more to fill the shoes SB.
Texas is averaging roughly 15 new inmates a year.
Therefore, even if you where to kill the same number as ‘new recruits’ each year, you’d still be be four times busier than your nearest rival.
And it’s supposed to be a deterrent?
Now that’s funny!

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Apparently I’m not doing a very good job of getting my point across.

If I am right, and you are wrong, then in the UK, some innocent people are dying unnecessarily.

If you are right, and I am wrong, then in Texas, some convicted killers are dying unnecessarily.

Both of these circumstances are tragedies. But which is the more tragic of the two?

This is where most people will say, “Your logic is impeccable; but you are not right, and I am not wrong, therefore your impeccable logic is irrelevant.”

Either that, or they’ll say, “Dude, what the #%^$ are you talking about?”

Left by Colin on September 29th, 2008 at 2:43 pm

Your logic is impeccable; but you are not right, and I am not wrong, therefore your impeccable logic is irrelevant.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 2:49 pm

Thank you Jonny.

BTW, how come something can be, “impeccable”, but not, “peccable”?

Left by Colin on September 29th, 2008 at 2:52 pm

We are all peccable Colin.
One of us here, who shall remain ‘anonymous’, is actually a pecker*.

* British slang.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 2:56 pm

Obama now certain to win.

It’s almost like the republicans don’t want to be in power anymore.
Why would a republican president back a plan to introduce $700 billion to the treasury so they could buy some of this crap, for it to be rejected by his own party?
And why would the majority of democrats support it?
Because the democrats (and Bush on this occasion) know what makes sense.
Don’t get me wrong, it should never had got this far, but the Bush plan to back the funding was the right thing to do.

The republicans haven’t got a chance now.

Jonny

Left by Jonny on September 29th, 2008 at 3:29 pm