Beautiful.
Someone broke into my car a couple of years ago, and a few years before that, someone stole my purse. I’d like to kill both of those bastards slowly and painfully. Does that mean that we should have slow, painful executions for thieves? No, it just means I’m a vengeful bitch. Personal feelings aren’t necessarily a good basis for laws.
By what measure do you conclude that the “frequent” and “public” executions were not effective? How do you know that they did not lessen the particular types of crimes that would warrrant being the star of a good town-square hanging? (See post by buttonjockey308.)
Or how about: most criminals assume that they’ll be able to game the system and even if they are found guilty after exhaustive appeals they won’t end up serving their full sentences. I stand by, provide 1)swift and 2)consistent punishment and the particular bad behavior in question will be reduced. This is true of any bad behavior.
You’re claiming positive effect, you should be able to provide proof rather than asking for proof of a negative.
If swift and severe punishment were as effective as authoritarians claim, then it seems logical that criminal behavior would be very rare.
Am I missing a reason for #2? Wouldn’t that be covered by #3?
Yes, what I left out;
Number 2 should read:
- The murder of someone in a position of public trust in the line of duty, to any degree (i.e. cop, firefighter) wherein the individual confesses, or the crime is witnessed by three credible witnesses, or seen on video.
You SHOULD be able to, but you can’t, at least not conclusively in either case. The DP is a tool, in fact, a scalpel, as opposed to a broadsword, used to remove those in society who are a direct and imminent danger to others.
There is a wide range of criminal behavior, there is a narrow range of criminal behavior that deserves the death penalty.
If anyone can honestly say that it would have been better to keep John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, or Jeffrey Dahmer alive (though yes, Dahmer was killed by another inmate awating his own DP sentence, which proves my point, actually) than to kill them deader than dirt, we have nothing more to talk about.
How effective is that on deterring the other dogs?
Isn’t that still covered by number 3?
Oh. Well, I guess I won’t be getting an answer to my previous question, then.
I think he intended to remove wilfully in #2, but to leave it in #3, such that voluntary manslaughter of a civilian would not rate the DP, but voluntary manslaughter of a public safety officer would. Or something like that.
That about right, buttonjockey?
Let’s take a look at some statistics. This site lists statistics for executions at Tyburn and Newgate, England. If you go through each page, you’ll see that the numbers of persons executed remained relatively constant with an off-the-cuff average of about 250 per year. The last segement of years listed, 1775–1783 shows more executions than the years 1695–1704. If the public executions had a deterrent effect, wouldn’t the opposite be true?
So, the decrease in executions was not because people were learning from the examples of those executed, but because the number of crimes that were DP-eligible decreased. (222 crimes were eligible for the DP by 1700. Between 1823 and 1837, those were reduced by about 100.)
Surprisingly, crime rates in England were *highest *during the late medieval times, when execution laws were the toughest. (See here for an analysis of why crime rates were so high during the time.)
Maybe, maybe not. After all, Flor’s victim was a trained police officer with nearly a year’s active duty experience, but that didn’t prevent Flor from grabbing his gun and shooting him with it. Are you smarter, faster, or more skilled with firearms than the tragically late Officer Gregg? If not, what makes you think it’s “likely” you’d do better than he did at saving yourself from the sudden attack of a vicious homicidal psychopath?
The only place I can think of that punishment would have been swift and consistent is in a highly dictatorial regime. Saddam’s Iraq comes to mind. Maybe a prison camp as well. Or a crew on a 18th century ship. Of course, I bring these up to offer the relationship between swift, consistent punishment and the low incidence of particular types of “law breaking”.
I don’t know. But you might have missed my earlier post:
Looking at the first page, the one clear pattern is that there seemed to be a shift in the year 1701. This average for the four years before was 46 per year. The average for the next four years was 13. So we have a period of more executions followed by a period of fewer execustions. Sounds like people might have gotten the message. The next significant change appeared to be in 1713, when men hanged shot up. Why? Who knows. As interesting as this is, we can not divine causality.
Overall, I’m not sure what your point is. First, you make the point of executions being public. Now while that would be a necessary ingredient for them to be a deterrent, my point went to swiftness and consistency. Nor do I think we’d be able to go back so far, look at the small pieces of information, and be able to build an accurate picture as to what transpired at the time in totallity. And, more importantly, why.
Again, I don’t think you can go back so far, look at the limited information provited and divine causality.
I’ve always found this to be an exceptionally weak anti-DP argument. Sometimes it’s right the state gets to do things that would be wrong for you as an individual to do. For example, if you lock me up in a small concrete and metal cell against my will, the (assuming you get caught) I guarantee you the state will do the same to you. And while you doing that to me was wrong, the state doing it to you is perfectly right.
Maybe the DP is right and maybe it’s wrong. But, unfortunately, this argument gives us no insight either way.
Your view of society is pretty fucked up.
In Saddam’s Iraq, crimes were committed all the time. It was just that the ruling party/clan/family could get away with it while others were not. Actually, the only crime in Iraq was opposing the government.
Prision camps and 18th century sailing vessels are not a good comparison to American society. Prision camps are also not notorious for all crimes being treated exactly the same.
If you need someone to tote the ammo give me a call.
It is an oversimplification. That’s quite its point. I could bore you to tears with a lengthy discourse on the moral underpinnings of a just society, but I am too lazy to write it and you have better things to do than read it. Nor do I offer insight, the subject is well and thoroughly discussed, to offer an unglimpsed insight is as presumptuous as it is unlikely.
I simply hope to remind that the value we place on human life is presumed to be the foundation of our laws regarding murder. A proper respect would demand a grave reluctance to kill, regardless of provocation. This is equally true when it comes to military force, but the topic is the DP. You can no more kill for justice than you can fuck for chastity.
In 1699, the Shoplifting act raised the amount of a DP-eligible theft to five shillings, which may account for the lesser numbers for the short number of years afterwards. (Quite a few of the crimes committed by those condemned are not recorded.)
About 30% of those executed were sentenced to death for highway robbery. Why do we not see a decrease in the number of these crimes until 1755? Most of those executed were under the age of thirty. They had grown up seeing men executed for that crime. From 1695 onward, we see a steady increase in the number of executions until there’s a small decrease in 1735-1744 and then back up again until 1755. Seems like it was taking them a bloody long time to get the “message.”
If the numbers don’t show a deterrent effect once upon a time when the death penalty was frequent, public and swiftly accomplished, what makes you think that today would be any different?
Do you think modern audiences would be any more sensitive than those at Tyburn who cheered, picnicked and bought souvenirs during executions? Do you think modern criminals are in some way more likely to take a “lesson” from an execution?