Re: I'm reminded of the Life of Brian "Jehovah" sketch

I think the intent is to deter the first offence (no murder is better than one murder after all). Whether deterrence works is always open to debate and interpretation.

As to the cost? Well, this is directly attributable to massively long and expensive appeals processes that can lead to death row inmates being banged up longer than a UK life sentence.

Depending on your perspective, life without parole could be considered a far crueler sentence than death. Can you imagine 70 years or so in a prison, knowing you aren't getting out?

Re: I'm reminded of the Life of Brian "Jehovah" sketch

I believe that many on deathrow are psychopaths or psychopathic tendencies. I can't remember where I saw that.

Which means they place no value on life, neither their victims or their own, so I agree - the death penalty is ultimately useless as a deterent.

In an ideal world you'd gene test for the psycho gene, and make the appropriate environment adjustments to ensure that gene doesn't get 'oxygen to burn'. Naturally, some will have moral objections to this, so downvote away...

Re: I'm reminded of the Life of Brian "Jehovah" sketch

Actually, my objection is that the existance of a "psycho gene", or anything else that can serve as a somewhat reliable test for murderous tendencies, is a massive, unlikely assumption.

Re: I'm reminded of the Life of Brian "Jehovah" sketch

Well presumably if they've been caught for the first, they shouldn't have much opportunity to commit a second. And if they haven't been caught for the first then it's more or less irrlevant unless they are.

But really, the penalties for murder et al are so high (unless your governments says these people are okay to kill and pays you for it), that you'd already have to be unable to rationally factor in consequences to do it anyway, unless you thought you'd get away with it. Basically, to any person behaving rationally, committing murder or similar is already a bad idea. If someone discards the risks of years in prison, they're almost certainly going to discard the risk of execution.

Re: I'm reminded of the Life of Brian "Jehovah" sketch

@Kenno:

The US nearly profits from the prison system. Some ridiculous percentage of "US-made" products are made by in-mates in prisons. We're talking billions of dollars of products every single year. They are effectively used as slave-labour.

Never seen the Shawshank Redemption? The way the prison governor basically blackmails the local craftsmen because all his prisoners can actually steal his work from him any time they want? It's not entirely fiction, and still happens today.

Which is hilarious given that U.S. law has banned imports of goods made in foreign jails since 1890.

@Silverburn

There was a program on TV about the psycho gene. The guy in the program had it. It didn't manifest in making him a murderer, because of his surroundings, nurture. It did make him aggressive and very competitive.

Re: @Silverburn

Programme is here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014kj65

Profits from prison labour

"The US nearly profits from the prison system. Some ridiculous percentage of "US-made" products are made by in-mates in prisons. We're talking billions of dollars of products every single year. They are effectively used as slave-labour".

http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175531/tomgram%3A_fraser_and_freeman%2C_creating_a_prison-corporate_complex/

Re: moral objections to this, so downvote away

Yeah, because all us neanderthal Bible thumpers are SO into eugenics.

/end sarc.

Re: I'm reminded of the Life of Brian "Jehovah" sketch

The study isn't about recidivism. Nobody said anything about letting murders walk free.

Californian stats based on murders who aren't murdered by the state (and other crimes, quite interesting actually):

http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/reports_research/offender_information_services_branch/Annual/RECID2/RECID2d2004.pdf

Re: you'd already have to be unable to rationally factor in consequences

actually the converse is true. If you rationally work out the odds of being caught, convicted, and imprisoned for life/executed it's a logical choice, particularly if it is a stab and grab. Of the murders that get solved, they are mostly crimes of passion where victims knew killers or paid hits where somebody bragged.

It's still wrong to kill, but contrary to the popular meme, it's a moral issue, not a logic issue.

Re: @King Jack

Right, because nobody would ever make anything up for TV. And no documentary has ever been proven to be completely bogus.

Re: Can you imagine 70 years or so in a prison,

knowing you aren't getting out?

Good point. I sometimes wonder if even for the likes of Khadafi or Saddam Hussein, being put in prison for the long haul and being treated as if you were ordinary would not be the worst possible punishment for those types.

@Silverburn - Re: I'm reminded of the Life of Brian "Jehovah" sketch

Suppressing the genetically unfit individuals. Hmm, I wonder where have I heard this before ? Something about a beautiful, perfect race... Oh, what's that you say, he had to actually commit suicide inside his bunker ?

@King Jack - Re: @Silverburn

This means very proficient at killing, if he's given the chance.

Re: @Silverburn - I'm reminded of the Life of Brian "Jehovah" sketch

@ AC 20/04 15:25 (and other posters thinking the same)

Actually, I didn't mention gene suppression at all.

If you'd watched the program others have provided the link for, you'd realise that having the gene does not automatically make you a killer. One of the researchers even had the gene, yet was not a killer (though did display some strange behaviours), mainly due to the environment he was raised in. The program theorised that a good percentage of people have the same gene, yet don't become killers, for the same reasons - a nuturing environment.

Which was my point - if you knew someone had the gene, you'd be especially careful to cultivate their enviroment so as not to give 'oxygen to the flame'.

"is there much of a difference?"

Yes, very much - in fact the figure is in the article :) This is due to higher security, less social interaction (meaning more staff and more stressed inmates), higher costs of appeal, etc etc. Remember also there will be a very long time (often 15 or more years) between initial conviction and execution.

I read the figure phrased differently somewhere a couple of years ago, but I think it costs about $1.5 million more to execute an inmate than to jail them for life without parole.

Murder = Murder

State condoned premeditated murder is no example to the rest of society on how to behave and only reinforces the belief that premeditated murder is acceptable. I as a juror could not give a guilty verdict if I knew the penalty was going to be death as mistakes do happen. A good example of such a travesty of justice is Stefan Kiszko (see A Life for a Life 1998) who would have undoubtedly received the death penalty if it had still be on the statute books in the UK.

"It's a hell of a thing, killing a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever gonna have. "

Will Munny, Unforgiven (1992)

Re: Murder = Murder

One of my all time favourite lines from a Movie, that. one.

Re: "is there much of a difference?"

"...often 15 or more years..."

I remember reading that the leading cause of death for Death Row inmates is actually old age.

Re: Murder = Murder

And a brilliant movie, from start to finish, which is almost guaranteed to change any reasonable person's ideas about death and killing. In my book, Clint Eastwood repaid society for any foolish ideas about vigilante killing he may have spread through the "Dirty Harry" series.

Re: Murder = Murder

"...only reinforces the belief that premeditated murder is acceptable."

So, you are saying we can't put the mad dogs down. But does that also mean we cannot lock them up, as it would be showing that it is acceptable to hold someone against their will thus promoting kidnapping? Its an extension of your argument.

And we have the Hannibal Lecter types in permanent lockdown. If they get loose and gnaw a guard's face off there isn't much more they can do to them. Safer to everyone if they get humanly put down.

@ Wize Re: Murder = Murder

Nice Daily Mail outrage there, however there is nothing humane about premeditated murder no matter what the perpetrators crime and you become the very thing that you demonize.

I suggest you watch the full series of Brass Eye, however I fear it will be over your head and you will take it literally.

PS Hannibal Lecter is a fictional character, he's not real you know.

Re: "is there much of a difference?"

Does imprisonment stink because it turns your country into kidnappers?

Should there be no enforcement of laws?

Mexico has no capital punishment, yet it has far higher assassination rates than Gringolandia. Y que?

Re: Shame on El Reg

It may or may not deter, but it certainly prevents recidivism. Outside Hollywood horror films, no murderer has ever killed anyone after he was dead.

We have to balance the need to protect potential victims against the need to give the alleged criminal a fair chance. I used to think the death penalty was a good idea in many cases of deliberate cold-blooded murder; then I discovered how often and how easily miscarriages of justice happen. Much as I was a big fan of nuclear power, until I realised how cynical, lazy, dishonest, slipshod and uncaring many of the people responsible for our safety can be.

Re: Shame on El Reg

Actually we do, but the anti-death penalty crowd don't want to admit it.

The death penalty does act as a significant and measurable deterrent, but only when it is:

- carried out in close proximity to the time at which the crime was committed (practically guaranteed not to happen in the current environment

- is carried out consistently so it is perceived as a roulette wheel type event

- is public and well publicized

That last one is even more important than the first two even though they are all critical. And given the current environment, guarantees something that could be an effective deterrent isn't.

Re: Shame on El Reg

So, basically you are arguing for Judge Dredd-style in the spot executions, as happened recently in Florida.

Meanwhile, we have many examples of people being found innocent of capital crimes after years of imprisonment. A pardon is little consolation after you're dead.

Re: @Norfolk 'n' Goode

Again, assuming they have the right guy!

Or does a lack of 'borderline autism' also remove the requirement for justice?