Interest Group Project
Guest
|
Post by Interest Group Project on Oct 11, 2005 8:03:22 GMT -6
Dear www.Prodeathpenalty.com, “The death penalty is a warning, just like a lighthouse throwing its beams out to sea. We hear about shipwrecks, but we do not hear about the ships the lighthouse guides safely on their way. We do not have proof of the number of ships it saves, but we do not tear the lighthouse down.” - poet Hyman Barshay This quote symbolizes and shows a great example of how the Death Penalty, and the basic lighthouse compare to each other, with the same principle meaning. Like another old saying, “Hind-Sight is always 20/20,” you can never simply tell whether or not a murderer, or a rapist will do it again after they get out, so why take the chance, when statistically, they will. We are doing a small simulation in our high school AP American Government class about different interest groups, and how they function, along with their political role. We were mostly wondering how effective your campaign is compared to other interest groups and their political issue. Also, how you operate your campaign efficiently, with making the common people active and interested in how their government decides their fate. While your website and information there mostly is for Pro-Death Penalty, our small group is targeting a more specific problem with our current death penalty. That is to basically set a death sentence to a shorter length, because it is a waste of governmental money to keep the prisoners living in Death Row. If they had already been proven wrong with several eyewitness accounts, or hard evidence, then why are they allowed to live for 10-15 years before their last meal? Although we are based in a non-death sentence state, we still believe that the death sentence should be nationwide again. True, the court trials don’t maintain 100% efficiency, but it is better to take that chance, than to let an innocent bystander be posted on the front page of the news as the next victim, just because the accused had several mistrials, including several people. In conclusion, our group, SLIDR (Shorten the Length of Inmates on Death Row), shows that the average cost to incarcerate a Death Row inmate costs the local and federal government around $80 per day. With hundreds of people awaiting their execution on Death Row, the costs saved here could go to more important systems in the community. The most important thing that can possibly be saved by a more active death penalty is less victims, created by those who would be turned from fear of death. Also, those that have already committed these heinous crimes, as well as the families of the victims, could finally see justice served. Sincerely, Marty Kuelbs, Jon Forrey Any feedback you might have is greatly appreciated. Thanks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2005 16:58:46 GMT -6
“The death penalty is a warning, just like a lighthouse throwing its beams out to sea. We hear about shipwrecks, but we do not hear about the ships the lighthouse guides safely on their way. We do not have proof of the number of ships it saves, but we do not tear the lighthouse down.” - poet Hyman Barshay This quote symbolizes and shows a great example of how the Death Penalty, and the basic lighthouse compare to each other, with the same principle meaning. Like another old saying, “Hind-Sight is always 20/20,” you can never simply tell whether or not a murderer, or a rapist will do it again after they get out, so why take the chance, when statistically, they will. The lighthouse saves nobody. It's obsolete. So is the deathpenalty. By the way: Never heard of GPS? Bad comparison anyway. Pathetic but does not say anything. Statistics show that at least here in Germany the murder rate among released murderers is lower than average. Your argument does not make any sense. You think murderers deserve death. OK. You may think so. Life with preventive detention is working quite well. Statistics suggest that capital punishment may even brutalize society and therefore result in more crimes. The effect of this campaign is starting discussion about the dp. It won't make me become a PRO. Nevertheless this website is a great chance for an ANTI to see the other side's point of view. It is essential to know about the other side, if you want to find your own position. Setting a death sentence to a shorter length dramatically decreases the accuracy of the system. Short TTDs (time to death) mean you get most of the murderers, but also pay a high price, since innocent people are more likely to be executed then. Why not let the police execute als suspects immediately? Mistrials are not acceptable. There are clear rules for trials. If your judges and prosecutors are unable to do their job properly, fire them. They are to blame not the ANTIs. How can killing people be justice. When a murderer kills it's a crime. When the state kills it is justice? Invest the money spent for death row in social insurance and you will see that the murder rates decrease. It works in Europe. Why not in the US? Instead of being pathetic find real arguments. Discuss pro _and_ contra. And make use of all data you can get. Analyse and then find your position. You do not discuss problems and just present your "solution" to the dp as the best way to go. Be sure, I also would critize ANTIs thinking the way you do. Best regards Valentin
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Oct 13, 2005 8:21:17 GMT -6
Your policy makes sense, but as this guy pointed out, there are obviously some flaws to it. At any rate, it's an interesting idea, and you guys deserve more credit than Valentin is willing to give to you.
|
|
|
Post by happygrandmab on Oct 25, 2005 22:51:29 GMT -6
i thought your analogy to the light house was very good. and i definitely agree the time between sentencing and executions needs to be reduced to make the punishment relevant to the victim's family and society
|
|
|
Post by HRoss on Oct 26, 2005 12:59:31 GMT -6
Valentin Sir your system may work very well in Europe, but we are talking AMERICA here. Ya know home of the free AND the brave. Well in America things are much different, we believe an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. You kill someone here, then you dont deserve to live PERIOD. Bavarian, please keep your European Biased Anti DP views as intelligent as you can manage. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on Oct 26, 2005 14:42:03 GMT -6
“The death penalty is a warning, just like a lighthouse throwing its beams out to sea. We hear about shipwrecks, but we do not hear about the ships the lighthouse guides safely on their way. We do not have proof of the number of ships it saves, but we do not tear the lighthouse down.” - poet Hyman Barshay This quote symbolizes and shows a great example of how the Death Penalty, and the basic lighthouse compare to each other, with the same principle meaning. Like another old saying, “Hind-Sight is always 20/20,” you can never simply tell whether or not a murderer, or a rapist will do it again after they get out, so why take the chance, when statistically, they will. The lighthouse saves nobody. It's obsolete. So is the deathpenalty. By the way: Never heard of GPS? Bad comparison anyway. Pathetic but does not say anything. Statistics show that at least here in Germany the murder rate among released murderers is lower than average. Your argument does not make any sense. You think murderers deserve death. OK. You may think so. Life with preventive detention is working quite well. Statistics suggest that capital punishment may even brutalize society and therefore result in more crimes. The effect of this campaign is starting discussion about the dp. It won't make me become a PRO. Nevertheless this website is a great chance for an ANTI to see the other side's point of view. It is essential to know about the other side, if you want to find your own position. Setting a death sentence to a shorter length dramatically decreases the accuracy of the system. Short TTDs (time to death) mean you get most of the murderers, but also pay a high price, since innocent people are more likely to be executed then. Why not let the police execute als suspects immediately? Mistrials are not acceptable. There are clear rules for trials. If your judges and prosecutors are unable to do their job properly, fire them. They are to blame not the ANTIs. How can killing people be justice. When a murderer kills it's a crime. When the state kills it is justice? Invest the money spent for death row in social insurance and you will see that the murder rates decrease. It works in Europe. Why not in the US? Instead of being pathetic find real arguments. Discuss pro _and_ contra. And make use of all data you can get. Analyse and then find your position. You do not discuss problems and just present your "solution" to the dp as the best way to go. Be sure, I also would critize ANTIs thinking the way you do. Best regards Valentin Valentin, you are way off here. Regardless of the technological advances that have made lighthouses obsolete, their purpose and results of its presence are quite clear. I would like to see the statistics that suggest the death penalty makes society more brutal. Also, short term death does NOT "dramatically" decrease the accuracy of the system. Since 1973, 121 people have been released from death row (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6). If you break the 121 prisoners down to 3.78 people released per year and take into consideration that the average yearly death row population is 2,060 (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=9&did=188#state)--you will find that the released prisoners are roughly 0.18% of the total inmate population per year (hardly a dramatic decrease in accuracy). By the way, the people released were more than likely released due to lack of evidence-not because they did not commit murder. Keep in mind that this is just using the 32 year averages. For a more accurate analysis of the data, you would need to look at the number released per year and divide that by the total inmate population. That will give you a number that is more accurate, but, similar to the percent I have provided. Try to ignore people like Valentin that criticize your belief. He is the type of person that loves to say the way things will happen--but provides little or no explanation for the change.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2005 16:06:31 GMT -6
Valentin, you are way off here. Regardless of the technological advances that have made lighthouses obsolete, their purpose and results of its presence are quite clear. I would like to see the statistics that suggest the death penalty makes society more brutal. Also, short term death does NOT "dramatically" decrease the accuracy of the system. Since 1973, 121 people have been released from death row (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6). If you break the 121 prisoners down to 3.78 people released per year and take into consideration that the average yearly death row population is 2,060 (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=9&did=188#state)--you will find that the released prisoners are roughly 0.18% of the total inmate population per year (hardly a dramatic decrease in accuracy). By the way, the people released were more than likely released due to lack of evidence-not because they did not commit murder. Keep in mind that this is just using the 32 year averages. For a more accurate analysis of the data, you would need to look at the number released per year and divide that by the total inmate population. That will give you a number that is more accurate, but, similar to the percent I have provided. Try to ignore people like Valentin that criticize your belief. He is the type of person that loves to say the way things will happen--but provides little or no explanation for the change. OK. That should be interesting for you. www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FaganTestimony.pdfNow, let's have a closer look at your calculations... You "forgot" to consider that speeding up executions would risk up to 3.78 possibly innocent lives per year. And a person who is released because there is not enough evidence should be seen as an innocent person. Let's say 3 innocent persons are executed. That would make 96 people who did not (legally) deserve death. Congratulations, very good idea. But let me guess: You expect all of them to be the murderers despite the lack of evidence... @students: Be always sceptic about the posts here on that board. I would not trust people who fake numbers just to convince someone... Best regards Valentin
|
|
|
Post by maxine on Oct 26, 2005 16:26:57 GMT -6
Dear www.Prodeathpenalty.com, “The death penalty is a warning, just like a lighthouse throwing its beams out to sea. We hear about shipwrecks, but we do not hear about the ships the lighthouse guides safely on their way. We do not have proof of the number of ships it saves, but we do not tear the lighthouse down.” - poet Hyman Barshay This quote symbolizes and shows a great example of how the Death Penalty, and the basic lighthouse compare to each other, with the same principle meaning. Like another old saying, “Hind-Sight is always 20/20,” you can never simply tell whether or not a murderer, or a rapist will do it again after they get out, so why take the chance, when statistically, they will. We are doing a small simulation in our high school AP American Government class about different interest groups, and how they function, along with their political role. We were mostly wondering how effective your campaign is compared to other interest groups and their political issue. Also, how you operate your campaign efficiently, with making the common people active and interested in how their government decides their fate. While your website and information there mostly is for Pro-Death Penalty, our small group is targeting a more specific problem with our current death penalty. That is to basically set a death sentence to a shorter length, because it is a waste of governmental money to keep the prisoners living in Death Row. If they had already been proven wrong with several eyewitness accounts, or hard evidence, then why are they allowed to live for 10-15 years before their last meal? Although we are based in a non-death sentence state, we still believe that the death sentence should be nationwide again. True, the court trials don’t maintain 100% efficiency, but it is better to take that chance, than to let an innocent bystander be posted on the front page of the news as the next victim, just because the accused had several mistrials, including several people. In conclusion, our group, SLIDR (Shorten the Length of Inmates on Death Row), shows that the average cost to incarcerate a Death Row inmate costs the local and federal government around $80 per day. With hundreds of people awaiting their execution on Death Row, the costs saved here could go to more important systems in the community. The most important thing that can possibly be saved by a more active death penalty is less victims, created by those who would be turned from fear of death. Also, those that have already committed these heinous crimes, as well as the families of the victims, could finally see justice served. Sincerely, Marty Kuelbs, Jon Forrey Any feedback you might have is greatly appreciated. Thanks. Thanks for posting this, IGP I wish you well. Elsewhere on this board we have many times debated whether or not a definitive and absolute period should be prescribed in law for any appeals to be heard in relation to dp convictions. The views of the pros and antis varied widely from execution on the courthouse lawn to "reform" and repealling of the right to execute or imprison for lwop. Interestingly, some antis agreed with the proposition. My personal view is that if there is verifiable evidence, a sentence should be carried out within 3 years of condemnation. (by verifiable evidence I mean dna, eye witnesses or other irrefutable proof, for example video or cctv footage) Otherwise, I consider that a dr inmate should retain his/her right of appeals, and that the appeals should have a finite time for decision. I am plucking 5 years out of the air, but I would not be adverse to 6 years, ie 2 years per appeal x 3 appeals. At the end of the day I cannot imagine that living on dr in a halflight between death and life is a comfortable place to be, but, I know that not living, being in a wooden box covered with soil is nothing. Just blackness and an infinite source of sadness to all those who loved you. Justice in my opinion is not well served when condemned murderers can form new relationships with previously unknown correspondants, get married (even only proxy relationships), read and listen to the radio and in some states, have contact visits. In addition to the issues surrounding speed of executions the above need to be abolished. Hope this helps, Maxine
|
|
|
Post by truth1 on Oct 27, 2005 8:21:36 GMT -6
Valentin, you are way off here. Regardless of the technological advances that have made lighthouses obsolete, their purpose and results of its presence are quite clear. I would like to see the statistics that suggest the death penalty makes society more brutal. Also, short term death does NOT "dramatically" decrease the accuracy of the system. Since 1973, 121 people have been released from death row (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6). If you break the 121 prisoners down to 3.78 people released per year and take into consideration that the average yearly death row population is 2,060 (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=9&did=188#state)--you will find that the released prisoners are roughly 0.18% of the total inmate population per year (hardly a dramatic decrease in accuracy). By the way, the people released were more than likely released due to lack of evidence-not because they did not commit murder. Keep in mind that this is just using the 32 year averages. For a more accurate analysis of the data, you would need to look at the number released per year and divide that by the total inmate population. That will give you a number that is more accurate, but, similar to the percent I have provided. Try to ignore people like Valentin that criticize your belief. He is the type of person that loves to say the way things will happen--but provides little or no explanation for the change. OK. That should be interesting for you. www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FaganTestimony.pdfNow, let's have a closer look at your calculations... You "forgot" to consider that speeding up executions would risk up to 3.78 possibly innocent lives per year. And a person who is released because there is not enough evidence should be seen as an innocent person. Let's say 3 innocent persons are executed. That would make 96 people who did not (legally) deserve death. Congratulations, very good idea. But let me guess: You expect all of them to be the murderers despite the lack of evidence... @students: Be always sceptic about the posts here on that board. I would not trust people who fake numbers just to convince someone... Best regards Valentin Those numbers WERE assuming that the 121 people released from death row since 1973 were executed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2005 10:04:22 GMT -6
OK. That should be interesting for you. www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/FaganTestimony.pdfNow, let's have a closer look at your calculations... You "forgot" to consider that speeding up executions would risk up to 3.78 possibly innocent lives per year. And a person who is released because there is not enough evidence should be seen as an innocent person. Let's say 3 innocent persons are executed. That would make 96 people who did not (legally) deserve death. Congratulations, very good idea. But let me guess: You expect all of them to be the murderers despite the lack of evidence... @students: Be always sceptic about the posts here on that board. I would not trust people who fake numbers just to convince someone... Best regards Valentin Those numbers WERE assuming that the 121 people released from death row since 1973 were executed. OK. Then we probably use different definitions for 1 per cent.
|
|
|
Post by chazz on Oct 29, 2005 10:29:35 GMT -6
There is a guy on this board called Joseph D Phillips. Get him to give you advice on the writing style. Don't let his views influence the content though. Otherwise you'll find yourself with a piece of prose supporting the execution of toddlers, battered wives and drunk drivers. Chazz
|
|
|
Post by twoshotdqm on Nov 24, 2008 17:12:07 GMT -6
"...Statistics show that at least here in Germany the murder rate among released murderers is lower than average."
Did you really mean to say this? Are you saying that murderers that have been released from prison that murder again after being released "is lower than average"? Here's a quick calculation for you: The probability of an executed murderer, murdering again, is 0.0. Don't forget that the US has a different situation than in Munich. I was in Munich last week for Electronica. Your city is missing a certain element that all American cities are plagued with, and that element will remain nameless here. Come to the US and see what it is for yourself. I challenge you to walk down any MLK Boulevard in any major city by yourself after the sun goes down. Make sure your insurance is paid up.
True to most leftist modes of debate, you attack rather than argue. Barshay's analogy is accurate. Smarmy remarks about GPS are not effective.
|
|