Barbaric

[Tigers!]

Human life is either sacrosanct or it isn't.

Human life is sacrosanct but that is not the same as saying all killing is wrong.

None of that justifies killing people because they have killed people. That a government reserves the right to execute people, making it legal for the authorities, does nothing to make it moral. Vengeance, retribution or vendetta are not a part of our legal system.

We (reluctantly) allow killing in time of war, self-defence, defence of others etc. That is the recognition that we must do all we can to preserve life but sometimes ultimate measures are necessary.

You are advocating killing someone for killing someone.

Yes. To protect all members of society including your good self.

 

[Tigers!]

None of that justifies killing people because they have killed people. That a government reserves the right to execute people, making it legal for the authorities, does nothing to make it moral. Vengeance, retribution or vendetta are not a part of our legal system.

Why is locking up for life not considered by you to be vengance, retribution, vendetta? Why is locking them up more moral than executing them?

 

[DBT]

So much for deterrence:

"States Without the Death Penalty Have Better Record on Homicide Rates — A new survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% — 101% higher than in states without the death penalty. “I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago,” said the state’s governor, John Engler, a Republican, referring to the state’s abolition of the death penalty in 1846. “We’re pretty proud of the fact that we don’t have the death penalty.” (New York Times, 9/22/00)"

Murder Rate of Death Penalty States Compared to Non-Death Penalty States | Death Penalty Information Center

(Data for each year taken from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports. Murder rates calculated by dividing the total number of murders by the total population in…

deathpenaltyinfo.org

 

[Tigers!]

So much for deterrence:

"States Without the Death Penalty Have Better Record on Homicide Rates — A new survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% — 101% higher than in states without the death penalty. “I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago,” said the state’s governor, John Engler, a Republican, referring to the state’s abolition of the death penalty in 1846. “We’re pretty proud of the fact that we don’t have the death penalty.” (New York Times, 9/22/00)"

Murder Rate of Death Penalty States Compared to Non-Death Penalty States | Death Penalty Information Center

(Data for each year taken from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports. Murder rates calculated by dividing the total number of murders by the total population in…

deathpenaltyinfo.org

I cannot ever recall saying that the death penalty is solely for deterrence. It might do so, it might not.

Sentencing to jail is not a deterrence either.

 

[bilby]

Human life is sacrosanct but that is not the same as saying all killing is wrong.

Every single part of that statement is untrue.

 

[bilby]

Sentencing to jail is not a deterrence either.

That's not true either.

All punishments have some deterrent effect; No punishment seems to have very much. Which is unsurprising, as most crimes are either unplanned, or are planned by people whose plan includes not getting caught. Neither of those is capable of being deterred by any kind of penalty.

The fact in this case is that capital punishment is no greater deterrent than other existing penalties, and appears to be actually less of a deterrent than jail time, despite what one might naïvely assume.

 

[DBT]

So much for deterrence:

"States Without the Death Penalty Have Better Record on Homicide Rates — A new survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% — 101% higher than in states without the death penalty. “I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago,” said the state’s governor, John Engler, a Republican, referring to the state’s abolition of the death penalty in 1846. “We’re pretty proud of the fact that we don’t have the death penalty.” (New York Times, 9/22/00)"

Murder Rate of Death Penalty States Compared to Non-Death Penalty States | Death Penalty Information Center

(Data for each year taken from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports. Murder rates calculated by dividing the total number of murders by the total population in…

deathpenaltyinfo.org

I cannot ever recall saying that the death penalty is solely for deterrence. It might do so, it might not.

Sentencing to jail is not a deterrence either.

You are not the only one supporting the death penalty, it was your current ally aupmanyav who invoked deterrence when the evidence does not support it.

And whether jail is or isn't a deterrence has no bearing on the moral issues of the execution of prisoners by the state.