|
Post by beej76 on Jan 17, 2009 10:48:32 GMT -6
Huh? What a bizarre post. Still, let me break down my original response so that you can (perhaps) understand it. In a year where the United States Supreme Court put on hold ALL executions, i.e., NO state could execute while the hold was in effect, even when given the green light by all other courts, to use the number of executions to prove ANY point is misleading. I am assuming that even a 10 year old child that is not mildly retarded can understand the concept. A no from the Supreme Court means no. The moment the Supremes resolved the LI issue executions immediately resumed. I mean, you do have access to the Internet, right? ;D Love, RED I'm sorry - should I have lied? Like, "there was actually 73, though about half of them were imaginary in the great state of never-never land." You do have a point, there would have been more without the courts - which is unlike every other year in which the number of executions mostly has to do with court rulings. K - let's break this down for you then. How many executions were there last year? No need for further explanation. What was the number?
|
|
mst3k4evur
Inactive
Member of the Month - 4/09
Ameeerrrrrricaaa, F**k Yah!
Posts: 3,701
|
Post by mst3k4evur on Jan 17, 2009 15:46:18 GMT -6
But to use 2008 stats is misleading in and of itself. The Supreme Court imposed a moratorium on executions. Let's see how 2009 goes. Not that it matters. Fluctuations in death sentences and executions are no different from fluctuations in movie theater revenue, car buying and people going to the hospital. Each year has to be examined on its own. Regardless, for the 37 murderers that were executed in 2008 the fact that the numbers of executions were lower meant nothing. Love, RED I'm sorry - should I have lied? Like, "there was actually 73, though about half of them were imaginary in the great state of never-never land." You do have a point, there would have been more without the courts - which is unlike every other year in which the number of executions mostly has to do with court rulings. No Beej, there would have been considerably more executions without ONE court case. Ohio, for instance, stayed six non-volunteer executions in 2006 and 2007 because of the lethal injection challenge and didn't get back to scheduling executions until mid 2008. Therefor, the downturn in executions has more to with resolving this one long festering issue rather than a general decline in the death penalty.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 17, 2009 17:40:51 GMT -6
I'm sorry - should I have lied? Like, "there was actually 73, though about half of them were imaginary in the great state of never-never land." You do have a point, there would have been more without the courts - which is unlike every other year in which the number of executions mostly has to do with court rulings. No Beej, there would have been considerably more executions without ONE court case. Ohio, for instance, stayed six non-volunteer executions in 2006 and 2007 because of the lethal injection challenge and didn't get back to scheduling executions until mid 2008. Therefor, the downturn in executions has more to with resolving this one long festering issue rather than a general decline in the death penalty. And again...it's gotten so bad that the Pros are saying, "hey, it really wasn't that bad, I mean, throw a couple of cases out and we could have hit 45 or 50!" Yawn.
|
|
|
Post by RED on Jan 18, 2009 7:40:58 GMT -6
37. Right? Love, RED Huh? What a bizarre post. Still, let me break down my original response so that you can (perhaps) understand it. In a year where the United States Supreme Court put on hold ALL executions, i.e., NO state could execute while the hold was in effect, even when given the green light by all other courts, to use the number of executions to prove ANY point is misleading. I am assuming that even a 10 year old child that is not mildly retarded can understand the concept. A no from the Supreme Court means no. The moment the Supremes resolved the LI issue executions immediately resumed. I mean, you do have access to the Internet, right? ;D Love, RED K - let's break this down for you then. How many executions were there last year? No need for further explanation. What was the number?
|
|
|
Post by RED on Jan 18, 2009 7:49:33 GMT -6
Actually, it wasn't bad at all. The anti-DP movement was counting on the Supreme Court to send the Baze case down for further development into the alternatives to the LI. That would have meant a long and prosperous moratorium. I'm assuming they felt peachy when the 7-2 decision came down. Regardless, I forgot that you're that dude who believes antis have won the DP debate in the U.S. because we don't execute hundreds of murderers. I think you should write a memo to AI and the never ending "coalitions" against the death penalty to let them know the good news. After that, you should send a cc of that memo to the graves of the 37 murderers who are now fertilizing some soil. Love, RED No Beej, there would have been considerably more executions without ONE court case. Ohio, for instance, stayed six non-volunteer executions in 2006 and 2007 because of the lethal injection challenge and didn't get back to scheduling executions until mid 2008. Therefor, the downturn in executions has more to with resolving this one long festering issue rather than a general decline in the death penalty. And again...it's gotten so bad that the Pros are saying, "hey, it really wasn't that bad, I mean, throw a couple of cases out and we could have hit 45 or 50!" Yawn.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 18, 2009 8:41:14 GMT -6
37. Right? Love, RED K - let's break this down for you then. How many executions were there last year? No need for further explanation. What was the number? There you go - for year end stats, that's good enough. It isn't misleading, it is what happened. Surely there will be 40-50 this year, and surely people will point to a big increase - statistically that is right - those who want to offer further explanations will always have court cases on their side when talking about fluctuations.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 18, 2009 8:44:11 GMT -6
Actually, it wasn't bad at all. The anti-DP movement was counting on the Supreme Court to send the Baze case down for further development into the alternatives to the LI. That would have meant a long and prosperous moratorium. I'm assuming they felt peachy when the 7-2 decision came down. Regardless, I forgot that you're that dude who believes antis have won the DP debate in the U.S. because we don't execute hundreds of murderers. I think you should write a memo to AI and the never ending "coalitions" against the death penalty to let them know the good news. After that, you should send a cc of that memo to the graves of the 37 murderers who are now fertilizing some soil. Love, RED And again...it's gotten so bad that the Pros are saying, "hey, it really wasn't that bad, I mean, throw a couple of cases out and we could have hit 45 or 50!" Yawn. I don't think the DP movement has been won by the antis yet - but you do have to admit that it appears to be dying an apathetic death. Sure, there were less executions because of a court case - but there were also about 1/3 less sentences handed down than just 9 years ago. The stats are there - the apathy has set in. Even on this board, pros seem fine with executions here and there - blinded by the bigger picture that 98% of murderers never get close to an execution.
|
|
|
Post by RED on Jan 18, 2009 8:53:02 GMT -6
Oh, come on now. The point is that the number is a compromised number. In 2008 the number of executions was artifically low because it HAD to be. Do you agree or disagree? Love, RED There you go - for year end stats, that's good enough. It isn't misleading, it is what happened. Surely there will be 40-50 this year, and surely people will point to a big increase - statistically that is right - those who want to offer further explanations will always have court cases on their side when talking about fluctuations.
|
|
|
Post by RED on Jan 18, 2009 8:57:35 GMT -6
But here we go with apples and oranges. First, many pros (like yours truly) simply want the right of a state to execute murderers to remain intact. If the people of the United States decide that only 10 murderers should be executed during a year, then so be it. Antis don't want that. They want ABOLITION. Right? Do we have abolition? Second, executions will go up and down depending on the year. Look at the 80's. The point is that one cannot try to figure out sentiment about a particular social policy by using stats in a vaccum. Love, RED Actually, it wasn't bad at all. The anti-DP movement was counting on the Supreme Court to send the Baze case down for further development into the alternatives to the LI. That would have meant a long and prosperous moratorium. I'm assuming they felt peachy when the 7-2 decision came down. Regardless, I forgot that you're that dude who believes antis have won the DP debate in the U.S. because we don't execute hundreds of murderers. I think you should write a memo to AI and the never ending "coalitions" against the death penalty to let them know the good news. After that, you should send a cc of that memo to the graves of the 37 murderers who are now fertilizing some soil. Love, RED I don't think the DP movement has been won by the antis yet - but you do have to admit that it appears to be dying an apathetic death. Sure, there were less executions because of a court case - but there were also about 1/3 less sentences handed down than just 9 years ago. The stats are there - the apathy has set in. Even on this board, pros seem fine with executions here and there - blinded by the bigger picture that 98% of murderers never get close to an execution.
|
|
mst3k4evur
Inactive
Member of the Month - 4/09
Ameeerrrrrricaaa, F**k Yah!
Posts: 3,701
|
Post by mst3k4evur on Jan 18, 2009 10:12:30 GMT -6
No Beej, there would have been considerably more executions without ONE court case. Ohio, for instance, stayed six non-volunteer executions in 2006 and 2007 because of the lethal injection challenge and didn't get back to scheduling executions until mid 2008. Therefor, the downturn in executions has more to with resolving this one long festering issue rather than a general decline in the death penalty. And again...it's gotten so bad that the Pros are saying, "hey, it really wasn't that bad, I mean, throw a couple of cases out and we could have hit 45 or 50!" Yawn. Actually beej, those cases HAVE been thrown out. States that haven't executed for years can now resume and this year we will almost certainly see an increase in executions over 2007 and 2008. What will you say if and when that happens?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2009 10:36:40 GMT -6
And again...it's gotten so bad that the Pros are saying, "hey, it really wasn't that bad, I mean, throw a couple of cases out and we could have hit 45 or 50!" Yawn. Actually beej, those cases HAVE been thrown out. States that haven't executed for years can now resume and this year we will almost certainly see an increase in executions over 2007 and 2008. What will you say if and when that happens? Curious ~ If they haven't executed in years, then isn't there a case for 'unusual' that attorneys can argue?
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 18, 2009 10:54:31 GMT -6
Curious ~ If they haven't executed in years, then isn't there a case for 'unusual' that attorneys can argue? I think that argument might perhaps have more traction if it wasn't the often-frivolous appeals filed by the attorneys themselves causing the delays.
|
|
mst3k4evur
Inactive
Member of the Month - 4/09
Ameeerrrrrricaaa, F**k Yah!
Posts: 3,701
|
Post by mst3k4evur on Jan 18, 2009 11:27:42 GMT -6
Actually beej, those cases HAVE been thrown out. States that haven't executed for years can now resume and this year we will almost certainly see an increase in executions over 2007 and 2008. What will you say if and when that happens? Curious ~ If they haven't executed in years, then isn't there a case for 'unusual' that attorneys can argue? SCOTUS has twisted the idea of Cruel and Unusual so much it's certainly possible. Still, if one of those in California hasn't been able to make the argument then I don't imagine anyone can. Robert Coe would have been a good candidate for that too. More than twenty years after the reestablishment of the death penalty in Tennessee, 40 years after the last execution there, one of over 100 inmates on death row and he's the first to go.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 18, 2009 12:00:01 GMT -6
Oh, come on now. The point is that the number is a compromised number. In 2008 the number of executions was artifically low because it HAD to be. Do you agree or disagree? Love, RED There you go - for year end stats, that's good enough. It isn't misleading, it is what happened. Surely there will be 40-50 this year, and surely people will point to a big increase - statistically that is right - those who want to offer further explanations will always have court cases on their side when talking about fluctuations. How is the number of dead people artificially anything - line them up and count them. "If if's and but's were candy and nuts it would be Christmas all year round". Sure, there's reasoning behind the drop - just like the numbers will go up for a while and it was because the pipeline unjammed. A number is a number though - spin it how you want. I don't even think it is the most important on the list I posted - not even close.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 18, 2009 12:05:30 GMT -6
But here we go with apples and oranges. First, many pros (like yours truly) simply want the right of a state to execute murderers to remain intact. If the people of the United States decide that only 10 murderers should be executed during a year, then so be it. Antis don't want that. They want ABOLITION. Right? Do we have abolition? Second, executions will go up and down depending on the year. Look at the 80's. The point is that one cannot try to figure out sentiment about a particular social policy by using stats in a vaccum. Love, RED I don't think the DP movement has been won by the antis yet - but you do have to admit that it appears to be dying an apathetic death. Sure, there were less executions because of a court case - but there were also about 1/3 less sentences handed down than just 9 years ago. The stats are there - the apathy has set in. Even on this board, pros seem fine with executions here and there - blinded by the bigger picture that 98% of murderers never get close to an execution. Well, then you aren't a typical pro and I'm not a typical anti. I'm fine if every state has it on the books - I wouldn't even cry if it were rarely used. We are probably already to the point where executions and deaths by lightning strikes are pretty close. My concerns are: - I don't want my state to get the DP. - I want the DP to be as rare as possible (to the point of not being used in many states, if not all) I don't care about abolition quite frankly.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 18, 2009 12:07:22 GMT -6
And again...it's gotten so bad that the Pros are saying, "hey, it really wasn't that bad, I mean, throw a couple of cases out and we could have hit 45 or 50!" Yawn. Actually beej, those cases HAVE been thrown out. States that haven't executed for years can now resume and this year we will almost certainly see an increase in executions over 2007 and 2008. What will you say if and when that happens? Go back through the years, many years I've done this same post - quite simply, here's the year end numbers. What did I say about it? Nothing really - the numbers were this, and here is what they were before hand. You are the one defending the numbers. They are what they are. They will go up next year. Who knows five years from now. Quite frankly, the number of executions isn't really important overall - I look more at the death sentences handed out (the pipeline) and the states action/inaction.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 18, 2009 12:08:41 GMT -6
Curious ~ If they haven't executed in years, then isn't there a case for 'unusual' that attorneys can argue? SCOTUS has twisted the idea of Cruel and Unusual so much it's certainly possible. Still, if one of those in California hasn't been able to make the argument then I don't imagine anyone can. Robert Coe would have been a good candidate for that too. More than twenty years after the reestablishment of the death penalty in Tennessee, 40 years after the last execution there, one of over 100 inmates on death row and he's the first to go. I agree 100% - I would think that argument would gain traction in California or a few other places, but for some reason, it doesn't stick. People don't seem to fight those issues as much as just trying to prove their client is crazy.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Jan 18, 2009 12:10:37 GMT -6
Robert Coe would have been a good candidate for that too. More than twenty years after the reestablishment of the death penalty in Tennessee, 40 years after the last execution there, one of over 100 inmates on death row and he's the first to go. Did you ever get a chance to see the video of Coe strapped to the gurney getting wheeled into the death chamber? You can't find it anymore online, but someone sneaked a camera in and while you can't see the execution, you can see him strapped down and being wheeled in to the juice room. I posted the video here about 4 years ago, but the link is no longer good. He looked terrified.
|
|
|
Post by RED on Jan 18, 2009 12:13:18 GMT -6
Correct. It seems strange that one can do everything in one's power to prevent an event from happening and then argue that the event should be eliminated because it doesn't happen often enough. Love, RED Curious ~ If they haven't executed in years, then isn't there a case for 'unusual' that attorneys can argue? I think that argument might perhaps have more traction if it wasn't the often-frivolous appeals filed by the attorneys themselves cusing the delays.
|
|
|
Post by RED on Jan 18, 2009 12:14:48 GMT -6
Umm, dear, I think you're trying to be obtuse. So, let's just agree to disagree. Love, RED Oh, come on now. The point is that the number is a compromised number. In 2008 the number of executions was artifically low because it HAD to be. Do you agree or disagree? Love, RED How is the number of dead people artificially anything - line them up and count them. "If if's and but's were candy and nuts it would be Christmas all year round". Sure, there's reasoning behind the drop - just like the numbers will go up for a while and it was because the pipeline unjammed. A number is a number though - spin it how you want. I don't even think it is the most important on the list I posted - not even close.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 18, 2009 12:25:13 GMT -6
Umm, dear, I think you're trying to be obtuse. So, let's just agree to disagree. Love, RED How is the number of dead people artificially anything - line them up and count them. "If if's and but's were candy and nuts it would be Christmas all year round". Sure, there's reasoning behind the drop - just like the numbers will go up for a while and it was because the pipeline unjammed. A number is a number though - spin it how you want. I don't even think it is the most important on the list I posted - not even close. You want a big asterisk by the number - you can put one there in your mind if you want - if it helps you feel better about it. By the way, what is the asterisk you would put by the severe drop in the number of sentences handed out? That one really interests me.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 18, 2009 12:36:12 GMT -6
By the way, what is the asterisk you would put by the severe drop in the number of sentences handed out? That one really interests me. I would say it denotes "we can't afford the litigation to off the schlub." Read a newspaper lately?
|
|
|
Post by RED on Jan 18, 2009 12:38:50 GMT -6
Why would an asterisk make me feel any better? Regardless, if you believe that 37 was an accurate depiction of the state of execution in 2008, so be it bro. As for the death sentences, there were less. Hmm, so? Love, RED Umm, dear, I think you're trying to be obtuse. So, let's just agree to disagree. Love, RED You want a big asterisk by the number - you can put one there in your mind if you want - if it helps you feel better about it. By the way, what is the asterisk you would put by the severe drop in the number of sentences handed out? That one really interests me.
|
|
|
Post by RED on Jan 18, 2009 12:40:03 GMT -6
Well, in that case we're both winners!! Love, RED But here we go with apples and oranges. First, many pros (like yours truly) simply want the right of a state to execute murderers to remain intact. If the people of the United States decide that only 10 murderers should be executed during a year, then so be it. Antis don't want that. They want ABOLITION. Right? Do we have abolition? Second, executions will go up and down depending on the year. Look at the 80's. The point is that one cannot try to figure out sentiment about a particular social policy by using stats in a vaccum. Love, RED Well, then you aren't a typical pro and I'm not a typical anti. I'm fine if every state has it on the books - I wouldn't even cry if it were rarely used. We are probably already to the point where executions and deaths by lightning strikes are pretty close. My concerns are: - I don't want my state to get the DP. - I want the DP to be as rare as possible (to the point of not being used in many states, if not all) I don't care about abolition quite frankly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2009 13:37:04 GMT -6
My concerns are: - I don't want my state to get the DP. - I want the DP to be as rare as possible (to the point of not being used in many states, if not all) I don't care about abolition quite frankly. Wouldn't this suggest you are not an anti, but rather a wowie or a mild pro ? Please understand that I am not picking on you, but am very curious about your stance. You call yourself an anti, yet you are satisfied with the low percentage of executions. I oppose all executions. When I read some of the things these creeps have done, I am so infuriated that I can think (not believe) they deserve the death penalty (especially child killers). But there is a difference, even though I despise their acts, I can not come to accept it is all right to kill in the name of Justice. I am also curious about people believing the death penalty is coming to an end in the US (or even a drastic decline). The stats really don't support those claims. I admit the last 2 years the numbers are lower than statical averages (because of LI litigation), but I do not see a trend of executions actually declining. I acknowledge that the numbers executed in 1999 & 2000 likely won't be met, but I can see the typical average of 50 - 60 executions happening on a yearly basis. If you look at the first 3 months of this year (18 sceduled executions), if 75% are carried out and this trend is continued for the rest of the year, it would mean that there will be 54 executions this year. That would make 2009 a typical year when comparing executions in the last 10 - 15 years. I also acknowledge that there are less people sentenced to death, but believe this is due to the declining murder rate and maybe the option to sentence a murderer to LWOP. While a declining murder rate can be an indicator that executions will decline in the following years, but (I hate to say this) it is usual for the murder rate to increase during tough economic times and with the onset of the current recession/depression .... I believe the LWOP, has also reduced the number of murderers being sentenced to death, but it will also reduce the number of sentence changes after being sentenced to death (as it has already been offered as an alternative during the original sentencing). Just my thoughts. Ron
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 25, 2009 21:15:38 GMT -6
My concerns are: - I don't want my state to get the DP. - I want the DP to be as rare as possible (to the point of not being used in many states, if not all) I don't care about abolition quite frankly. Wouldn't this suggest you are not an anti, but rather a wowie or a mild pro ? Please understand that I am not picking on you, but am very curious about your stance. You call yourself an anti, yet you are satisfied with the low percentage of executions. I oppose all executions. When I read some of the things these creeps have done, I am so infuriated that I can think (not believe) they deserve the death penalty (especially child killers). But there is a difference, even though I despise their acts, I can not come to accept it is all right to kill in the name of Justice. I am also curious about people believing the death penalty is coming to an end in the US (or even a drastic decline). The stats really don't support those claims. I admit the last 2 years the numbers are lower than statical averages (because of LI litigation), but I do not see a trend of executions actually declining. I acknowledge that the numbers executed in 1999 & 2000 likely won't be met, but I can see the typical average of 50 - 60 executions happening on a yearly basis. If you look at the first 3 months of this year (18 sceduled executions), if 75% are carried out and this trend is continued for the rest of the year, it would mean that there will be 54 executions this year. That would make 2009 a typical year when comparing executions in the last 10 - 15 years. I also acknowledge that there are less people sentenced to death, but believe this is due to the declining murder rate and maybe the option to sentence a murderer to LWOP. While a declining murder rate can be an indicator that executions will decline in the following years, but (I hate to say this) it is usual for the murder rate to increase during tough economic times and with the onset of the current recession/depression .... I believe the LWOP, has also reduced the number of murderers being sentenced to death, but it will also reduce the number of sentence changes after being sentenced to death (as it has already been offered as an alternative during the original sentencing). Just my thoughts. Ron Ron - sorry for the delay on this - missed it earlier. A couple of things though: 1) I think the key stat in regards to the decline of the DP is the number of sentences handed out a year. It is dropped drastically in just 10 years. Something is happening in general to shift these sentences away from the DP - and down the road, we'll see less executions because of that. Also, if you take Texas out of the mix, the DP barely registers in the US - they are a big percentage. 2) My stance - I think that the DP is a waste of resources. I also don't think it achieves any sort of deterrence in general - and does more harm than good in regards to publicity for the murderer. If our state ever voted on it, I would vote to keep the DP out of our state. I do see the anger factor that pros have with the DP, and quite frankly, I don't shed tears when executions happen. Strong LWOP is like the DP anyways, except the state takes a less active roll in the death. I'm an anti not as much on a sanctity of life argument as I am that, if we're going to entrust a government to take a life, I think the system has to have a high degree of fairness and justice. The DP system in the US is a joke - I don't think we should entrust the government to take the lives of citizens - they simply aren't doing a good enough job for such an important task.
|
|