# Words Fail Me \[infanticide\] **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 24, 2006, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989 "2006-02-24T22:56:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/61 "2006-02-28T17:50:11Z")
**Testy** , What do you think of the fact that, if we reduced the length of time before execution in the way you suggest, the 100+ people who have been released from death row after being proven innocent by DNA or other evidence would now be dead? Is that a price you’re willing to pay for the alleged deterrent effe3ct of a quick execution? The [number released from death row](http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6) currently stands at 123 in 25 states since 1973. The most recent death row exoneration was just five days ago in Florida. In this case: > [@](#): > > The Florida Supreme Court unanimously overturned the conviction of death row inmate John Robert Ballard (pictured) and ordered his acquittal in the 1999 murders of two of his acquaintances. The Court concluded that the evidence against Ballard was so weak that the trial judge should have dismissed the case immediately. The primary evidence presented against Ballard was a hair and a fingerprint, both of which he could have left during his many visits to the victims’ apartment. Bloody fingerprints and 100 other hair samples were found associated with the crime scene, none of them belonging to Ballard, who has always maintained his innocence. Ballard had been on death row for three years, so under your system he’d be dead by now. At least in Ballard’s case, his release was the result of the appeals process doing its job. In many other cases, the normal appeals process is exhausted and the only reason they have been released is that newly-available DNA tests have exonerated them. In some cases, these people have been on death row for decades. Read the cases on the linked page for a litany of failure. And your Saudi example is awful. Sure, it might be a safe place to raise children. If you want them raised safely in a society with all the authoritarianism and barbarism that exists in the Saudi government and justice system. These things go together. Also, as **Lissa** correctly notes, your assertion about the deterrent effect of executions is not only historically problematic, but it also rests on the assumption that murderers and other violent criminals make some sort of rational cost/benefit analysis before committing their crimes. It just doesn’t work this way. In an earlier thread on the death penalty i linked to a study by Gary Potter, a professor of Criminal Justice and Police Studies. The paper is titled “Cost, Deterrence, Incapacitation, Brutalization and the Death Penalty: The Scientific Evidence.” While the link is dead and the study is no longer available online, you can find it in _The Advocate: A Journal of Criminal Justice Education and Research_ 22:1 (January 2000): pp. 24-29. Here’s a portion of what Potter has to say on this issue: > [@](#): > > The most commonly advanced argument in support of capital punishment has been that no offender wants to die, therefore the threat of execution will deter homicide in society at large. While this may seem a common sense fact, it is anything but sensible. The scientific facts are very simple. No credible study of capital punishment in the United States has ever found a deterrent effect. > > In studies of contiguous states, at least one with the death penalty and at least one without, research has shown that there is no deterrent impact from capital punishment (Sellin, T. 1980. _The Penalty of Death_. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications). > > In studies of states where the death penalty was adopted or reinstated after having been abolished, research has once again failed to show any deterrent effect. (Sellin, T. 1980. _The Penalty of Death_. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications; Zeisel, H. 1977. The deterrent effect of the death penalty: Facts v. Faith. In _The Supreme Court Review_ 1976. P. Kurland (ed.). Chicago: IL: University of Chicago Press). > > \ > > **The alleged deterrent value of the death penalty is refuted by all the data we have on violent crime. The death penalty, if it is to deter, must be a conscious part of a cost-benefit equation in the perpetrator’s mind. There are very few murders that involve that level of rationality or consciousness of the outcomes. Most murders are (1) committed under the influence of drugs or alcohol; (2) committed by people with severe personality disorders; (3) committed during periods of extreme rage and anger; or (4) committed as a result of intense fear. None of these states of mind lend itself to the calm reflection required for a deterrent effect.** Bolding mine. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/62 "2006-02-28T18:51:39Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > As a history buff, I can say that this is patently false. Public executions were the norm in 16th and 17th century England (the time period with which I am most familiar.) It was considered fun for the whole family. Thousands of people would line up to watch hangings, beheadings, and the hideously painful methods of drawing and quartering as well as burning at the stake. > > The range of crimes for which one could be executed was larger-- robbery and theft were hanging offenses, as well as heresy. There was little respect for age or gender-- children and women recieved much the same punishments when they were caught doing something criminal. > > From all accounts, the atmosphere at an execution was not one of solemn introspection. Execution days were treated as carnivals by the locals. Vendors sold snacks and souvineer pamphlets describing the deeds of the condemned in salacious detail. Spectators jeered and laughed at the condemned, often throwing rotten vegetables, rocks and dung at the them as they were led to the scaffold. They laughed uproariously at the screams of agony, and little children would play “mock execution” aping the shrieks of the dying. > > Hanging was often accomplished by hauling the condemned up by the neck and then tying the rope to a stationary object, so it took quite a while for the condemned to die. The crowd would wait until the body was still before reluctantly dispersing. Afterwards, they dipped their handkerchiefs in the blood for luck, or bought pieces of the rope that hanged the condemned. > > Astonishlingly enough, seeing a thief die didn’t reduce the rates of theivery, nor did burning heretics alive cause their numbers to dwindle. Though traitors died a horrible death, there were still those willing to rebel. I do indeed take your point about executions being some kind of medieval picnic. I’ve read similar accounts. I’ve also attended executions here. The historic record of European executions and what actually happens here are utterly dissimilar. As I pointed out in my first post, an execution here is not done as a public spectacle but as a warning and is effective as such. Why is there such a difference between what I have seen here and what the two of us have read about? Personally, I have no idea. The lack of public celebration at a local execution might be cultural or religious. The only solid fact I have to report is that there **is** a difference. There might be some meat for a serious debate about that. > [@](#): > > _People don’t commit crimes thinking they’ll get caught._ Murderers do not stop in the heat of the moment and think, “Well, gosh, if I do this, I might get a lethal injection.” No rapist has ever changed his mind because he might go to prison. They all think that they’ll get away with it, or they just don’t think about it at all. Well, we have to define the crime. Murder committed in the heat of the moment? Probably you’re right. Something planned and premeditated? I think you’re wrong. Criminals do indeed consider being caught and make plans to avoid it. > [@](#): > > I don’t doubt that one bit. The more freedom a society has, the more crime there will be. But what is the cost of that safety? Your children may be safer in Saudi Arabia, but they’re likely sequestered. As far as my child (I have one daughter) being sequestered, that is not as much as you’d think. She did attend a private school but there were numerous Saudi and other Arab kids there and during her free time she spent the night with them, went shopping, played sports, etc. Not really sequestered any more than she might be in the US if I could arrange it. The situation is more tense these days with AQ roaming around but kids still manage to have a good time. That is an interesting thought that freedom and the crime level are in some way proportional. If this is true, then there must be some ideal level of freedom where the crime rate is just barely tolerable and most people can do what they like. It sounds reasonable but it doesn’t correlate with my own experience. I am quite free here as are most people, and there is very little crime. People mostly mind their own business and expect you to do likewise. > [@](#): > > The question then becomes “What do you define as a _crime_?” In Saudi Arabia, there are many accepted practices which would be considered crimes here in the US. It may not be that their crime rates are so much lower, but what they \*consider \*crimes is different. I’m not sure what accepted practices in Saudi would not be considered a crime in the US. Certainly there are men who would be considered bigamists in the US and prosecuted as such. That is a religious/cultural thing and I don’t see what it has to do with the DP issue. As far as what the Saudis define as a crime, it is much the same as in the US although there _are_ differences. For instance, a person could be executed for blasphemy or homosexuality, a practice that I find extremely distasteful. In general though, the things that will get you chopped here are much the same as the ones that will get you locked-up and _possibly_ even executed in the US, rape, murder, and serious drug-dealing. A creature like that in the OP would certainly get the chop. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/63 "2006-02-28T19:57:20Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > I do indeed take your point about executions being some kind of medieval picnic. I’ve read similar accounts. I’ve also attended executions here. The historic record of European executions and what actually happens here are utterly dissimilar. As I pointed out in my first post, an execution here is not done as a public spectacle but as a warning and is effective as such. > > Why is there such a difference between what I have seen here and what the two of us have read about? Personally, I have no idea. The lack of public celebration at a local execution might be cultural or religious. The only solid fact I have to report is that there **is** a difference. There might be some meat for a serious debate about that. I see your point. There probably are great cultural differences which dictate how the audience reacts. I would bet my first-born child that if executions were public in the US, you’d see the medieval-carnival-like atmosphere. > [@](#): > > Well, we have to define the crime. Murder committed in the heat of the moment? Probably you’re right. Something planned and premeditated? I think you’re wrong. Criminals do indeed consider being caught and make plans to avoid it. hose involved in intense planning don’t believe they’ll be caught, because they think they’re being so careful, so the potential sentance is immaterial. My point was that there are so many variables to crime that the harshness of the sentance doesn’t usually factor into whether or not the perpetrator will comit the criminal act. > [@](#): > > As far as my child (I have one daughter) being sequestered, that is not as much as you’d think. She did attend a private school but there were numerous Saudi and other Arab kids there and during her free time she spent the night with them, went shopping, played sports, etc. Not really sequestered any more than she might be in the US if I could arrange it. The situation is more tense these days with AQ roaming around but kids still manage to have a good time. Puritan children had fun, too-- I have even heard tales of children in concentration camps playing games. Children are astonishingly adaptable. I assume from the clarity of your English that you are of Western origin, meaning that you probably have raised your daughter with Western culture-- you won’t arrange her marriage, or kill her if she has sex before she marries. You might let her wear blue jeans (I don’t know how strict your area is on Western clothing, but I know it’s forbidden in some areas of the ME) and listen to rock music. She’ll be allowed to speak her mind and decide her own life. I’m just saying that YOUR Saudi experience might not be an indicator of everyone’s experience in SA. > [@](#): > > That is an interesting thought that freedom and the crime level are in some way proportional. If this is true, then there must be some ideal level of freedom where the crime rate is just barely tolerable and most people can do what they like. It sounds reasonable but it doesn’t correlate with my own experience. I am quite free here as are most people, and there is very little crime. People mostly mind their own business and expect you to do likewise. There have been thousands of books written on this subject, and everyone has a differing opinion. The consensus among scholars is that the overall “crime rate” of every civilization is basically the same, it’s just that the _definition_ of crime varies widely. The United States is a quandry for everyone who studies crime. What is the difference between the US and Canada? Even adjusted for population, Canada seems to have a lower incidence of _violent_ crime than does the US. People have been studying and researching this for years, and they really can’t uncover a concrete reason for it. The culture in the US is just overall more violent. Some blame poverty, some blame the brutalization effects of the justice system, and some blame the media glorification of it. We also have complex notions of rights and entitlements, and we don’t have such a strong sense of shared community as other places. A kid here thinks nothing of spitting on a sidewalk, because it was never impressed upon him that it’s EVERYONE’S sidewalk in the way it is in, say, Singapore, where such a thing will get you a caning. In the past, if a child misbehaved in public, often community members stepped in to quell the misbehavior, but that is utterly \*verbotten \*today. Our society is secular and moving away from partriarchal systems of social control. We have nearly abolished any sense of social shame and replaced it with defiant ego-centricism. It has the benefits of greater freedoms, but it has the drawbacks of more selfish inconsiderate behavior. Kids are taught early to defy authority if they deem the rules or judgements of said authority “unfair” and to “stand up for themselves.” Again, standing up for one’s rights is a noble thing taken in of itself, but it also leads to breakdowns of societal controls. My stance is that crime is such a complex issue that it’s utterly ridiculous to believe that executions or other harsh penalties are the one-size-fits-all solution to it. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Long\_Road](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b5a626/32.png) [@The\_Long\_Road](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Long_Road)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/64 "2006-02-28T20:04:40Z")
> [@deevee](#): > > I’m far too vindictive to support the death penalty myself. Let him serve his 22 years as a known baby killer, leave the vigilante justice until he gets released. He’s not going to make 22 days, much less 22 years. If they ever put him in general population, he’s dead. The guards will let it be known why he’s there and he will get shanked. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/65 "2006-02-28T20:08:22Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > **Testy** , > > What do you think of the fact that, if we reduced the length of time before execution in the way you suggest, the 100+ people who have been released from death row after being proven innocent by DNA or other evidence would now be dead? Is that a price you’re willing to pay for the alleged deterrent effe3ct of a quick execution? For starters, I don’t consider this a “fact” at all. Judicial things happen more quickly over here. I believe this is due to a lighter load on the system. > [@](#): > > The [number released from death row](http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6) currently stands at 123 in 25 states since 1973. The most recent death row exoneration was just five days ago in Florida. In this case:Ballard had been on death row for three years, so under your system he’d be dead by now. At least in Ballard’s case, his release was the result of the appeals process doing its job. In many other cases, the normal appeals process is exhausted and the only reason they have been released is that newly-available DNA tests have exonerated them. In some cases, these people have been on death row for decades. Read the cases on the linked page for a litany of failure. People here also get off of death-row. As I pointed out earlier, the time between conviction and execution is about one year and numerous people are released through pardons, appeals, fresh evidence, or by the victim forgiving the crime. Mr. Ballard might or might not have gotten off. If he could have produced new evidence or cast doubt on old evidence he would probably have been released sooner than he was in the US. > [@](#): > > And your Saudi example is awful. Sure, it might be a safe place to raise children. If you want them raised safely in a society with all the authoritarianism and barbarism that exists in the Saudi government and justice system. These things go together. So, a system different from your ideal is “barbarism?” Sure, Saudi society leans toward the authoritarian. I consider some limits a good thing. Kids most certainly need them and a lot of adults could do with a few limits as well. Limits are not _necessarily_ a bad thing. > [@](#): > > Also, as **Lissa** correctly notes, your assertion about the deterrent effect of executions is not only historically problematic, but it also rests on the assumption that murderers and other violent criminals make some sort of rational cost/benefit analysis before committing their crimes. It just doesn’t work this way. > > In an earlier thread on the death penalty i linked to a study by Gary Potter, a professor of Criminal Justice and Police Studies. The paper is titled “Cost, Deterrence, Incapacitation, Brutalization and the Death Penalty: The Scientific Evidence.” While the link is dead and the study is no longer available online, you can find it in _The Advocate: A Journal of Criminal Justice Education and Research_ 22:1 (January 2000): pp. 24-29. Here’s a portion of what Potter has to say on this issue:Bolding mine. > The alleged deterrent value of the death penalty is refuted by all the data we have on violent crime. The death penalty, if it is to deter, must be a conscious part of a cost-benefit equation in the perpetrator’s mind. There are very few murders that involve that level of rationality or consciousness of the outcomes. Most murders are (1) committed under the influence of drugs or alcohol; (2) committed by people with severe personality disorders; (3) committed during periods of extreme rage and anger; or (4) committed as a result of intense fear. None of these states of mind lend itself to the calm reflection required for a deterrent effect. Mhendo, I’ve screwed-up the quoting process in some manner and apologize for that but I do understand Mr. Potter’s point about criminals not making calculations prior to a murder due to drugs, alcohol, rage, etc. OTOH, what about those who murder for profit? Insurance or inheritance for example? Are there no people who do this kind of thing? Does this not imply a certain amount of planning on the part of the murderer? Admittedly it might be a very poor plan, but it is still a plan. As far as the lack of deterrent effect in the US, my own belief is that this is due to the manner it is done rather than any problem with the DP itself. Now, I do not have Mr. Potter’s credentials in criminology but I have found a strong inverse correlation in one country between the DP and the rate of serious crime. I cannot say that this is absolute proof that A causes B but it is worth investigating and holds together quite well in my own head. To go back a bit, where you mention that Saudi is a safe place but in a condition of “authoritarianism and barbarism”, I don’t see it that way at all. My wife and daughter and my neighbors and their neighbors mean quite a lot to me and I care deeply for their safety and security. I don’t have to lock my doors at night nor do I lock my car. If the price for that safety and security is a few murderers/drug-dealers/rapists/child molestors being chopped, then that is a price I am willing to pay. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/66 "2006-02-28T20:46:07Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > Sure, Saudi society **leans toward** the authoritarian. I consider some limits a good thing. Kids most certainly need them and a lot of adults could do with a few limits as well. Limits are not _necessarily_ a bad thing. Bolding mine. Hands **Testy** trophy for uinderstatement of the week. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/67 "2006-02-28T21:10:46Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > I see your point. There probably are great cultural differences which dictate how the audience reacts. I would bet my first-born child that if executions were public in the US, you’d see the medieval-carnival-like atmosphere. You could have a point on this one for sure. In Saudi, executions are done right after Friday prayers in the center of the city. The atmosphere is quite solemn but dispassionate. The Saudis see it as justice being done and certainly nothing to party about. The atmosphere is somewhat tense but not dangerously so. Lest I come across as some kind of ghoul, I’ve seen two executions. Once when I first came here in 1982, and again many years later when I was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. > [@](#): > > hose involved in intense planning don’t believe they’ll be caught, because they think they’re being so careful, so the potential sentance is immaterial. > > My point was that there are so many variables to crime that the harshness of the sentance doesn’t usually factor into whether or not the perpetrator will comit the criminal act. Admittedly, no criminal ever believes he’ll be caught. He wouldn’t do the crime otherwise. Nevertheless, he is most certainly aware that the jails are full and over-full of other people who **were** caught. I have trouble believing that there is no sense of risk involved. In my own youth I certainly knew some of the risks in the mildly criminal enterprises I engaged in. > [@](#): > > Puritan children had fun, too-- I have even heard tales of children in concentration camps playing games. Children are astonishingly adaptable. > > I assume from the clarity of your English that you are of Western origin, meaning that you probably have raised your daughter with Western culture-- you won’t arrange her marriage, or kill her if she has sex before she marries. You might let her wear blue jeans (I don’t know how strict your area is on Western clothing, but I know it’s forbidden in some areas of the ME) and listen to rock music. She’ll be allowed to speak her mind and decide her own life. > > I’m just saying that YOUR Saudi experience might not be an indicator of everyone’s experience in SA. You’re quite right. I was born in Dallas and raised in Kentucky, Arkansas, Missouri and similar places. I’m a lot more hillbilly than Saudi. My last name is one of the most common in the Western world. In any event, my daughter’s background is boringly normal. Shes finishing highschool this year in California and working in an IHOP for spending money. She’ll attend college in August and from there to med-school if she can hack it. She misses Saudi and considers California to be “weird.” As far as me controlling her life, we had a hellish fight over listening to Korn. By the time I gave up on it she didn’t care for them anymore. :smack: Surprisingly enough, most Saudis don’t do the things they are so famous for. Most of them don’t kill their daughters and girls **do** have sex before marriage. I don’t know the details but there is supposedly a clinic in Dubai that specializes in hymen replacement. I wonder what they use for that. I have quite a few arguments with the Saudis I know on this kind of topic. I keep telling them that Americans almost never hear about “Abdullah Average”, the guy that simply goes to work every day and makes some money for his family. The only thing from Saudi is Prince so-and-so and terrorist-the-other. Abdullah Average is much more normal than the kind you hear about. > [@](#): > > There have been thousands of books written on this subject, and everyone has a differing opinion. The consensus among scholars is that the overall “crime rate” of every civilization is basically the same, it’s just that the _definition_ of crime varies widely. Now this is a very good point. I always feel sneakingly un-patriotic when I think it, but I am actually more free here in this authoritarian country than I am at home in “the land of the free.” I spent years in the military and grew up saying the pledge of allegience. Realizing something like this bothers me a lot. > [@](#): > > The United States is a quandry for everyone who studies crime. What is the difference between the US and Canada? Even adjusted for population, Canada seems to have a lower incidence of _violent_ crime than does the US. People have been studying and researching this for years, and they really can’t uncover a concrete reason for it. The culture in the US is just overall more violent. Some blame poverty, some blame the brutalization effects of the justice system, and some blame the media glorification of it. > > We also have complex notions of rights and entitlements, and we don’t have such a strong sense of shared community as other places. A kid here thinks nothing of spitting on a sidewalk, because it was never impressed upon him that it’s EVERYONE’S sidewalk in the way it is in, say, Singapore, where such a thing will get you a caning. In the past, if a child misbehaved in public, often community members stepped in to quell the misbehavior, but that is utterly \*verbotten \*today. > > Our society is secular and moving away from partriarchal systems of social control. We have nearly abolished any sense of social shame and replaced it with defiant ego-centricism. It has the benefits of greater freedoms, but it has the drawbacks of more selfish inconsiderate behavior. Kids are taught early to defy authority if they deem the rules or judgements of said authority “unfair” and to “stand up for themselves.” Again, standing up for one’s rights is a noble thing taken in of itself, but it also leads to breakdowns of societal controls. On that last paragraph of yours, I wonder if it is worth the price. Unlimited personal freedom sounds nice in theory but as you point out, there is a price attached. Somewhere down the line, common-sense has to be given some weight. As an oh-by-the-way, they also have caning in Saudi for minor crimes. As a further OBTW, the point is not to hurt the criminal, the point is humiliation. AFAIK, they never even break the skin but it is certanly nothing a person is going to boast about. > [@](#): > > My stance is that crime is such a complex issue that it’s utterly ridiculous to believe that executions or other harsh penalties are the one-size-fits-all solution to it. I agree that execution is not some kind of panacea for social problems. OTOH, and obviously IMHO, there is a place for it and a need in some circumstances. As I mentioned to **Mhendo** , I have found a strong, inverse correlation between the DP and the crime level in a certain place. I readily admit that correlation is not causation but IMHO, this deserves investigation. Best Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/68 "2006-02-28T21:15:21Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > Bolding mine. > > Hands **Testy** trophy for uinderstatement of the week. Thank you, Thank you! Grabs trophy and wonders whether kudos could be gained by defending motherhood and apple pie. 😛 Testy ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/69 "2006-02-28T21:20:50Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > Mhendo, I’ve screwed-up the quoting process in some manner and apologize for that but I do understand Mr. Potter’s point about criminals not making calculations prior to a murder due to drugs, alcohol, rage, etc. OTOH, what about those who murder for profit? Insurance or inheritance for example? Are there no people who do this kind of thing? Does this not imply a certain amount of planning on the part of the murderer? Admittedly it might be a very poor plan, but it is still a plan. - Criminals never think they’ll get caught\*. In the near-decade my husband has been in corrections, he has _never_ met an inmate who expected that’s he’d wind up in prison. They all thought they were too smart, or the cops were too busy with other things, or the victim was too intimidated, or that if they got to another location, the cops would never think to look for them there. Secondly, many of them have fully justified the crime in their minds and think that others will see it their way. Yeah, they killed that guy, BUT he had done this-and-that to them, so it was completely justified. Yeah, they raped this girl, BUT she came on to him. Yeah, they stole money from their employer BUT the employer had been treating them badly and was underpaying them anyway. Remember also that criminals are pretty weak in the cause=effect aspects of society. Many of them sincerely don’t understand why their acts were wrong, and why they should _care_ that they hurt other people. They were raised with a complete lack of empathy-- if you want something, take it, and beat down anyone who tries to take it from you. When they’re punished by the justice system, they don’t really understand _why._ To them, it just looks arbitrary and mean, especially since they’ve seen people comitting the same acts all their lives with no punishment. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/70 "2006-02-28T21:23:00Z")
> [@The Long Road](#): > > He’s not going to make 22 days, much less 22 years. If they ever put him in general population, he’s dead. The guards will let it be known why he’s there and he will get shanked. IMHO, this kind of thing ain’t right. Mind you, I’d be happy to see him executed but expecting the inmates to do someone’s dirty-work is not what should be happening. The guy should get his sentence or (IMHO) the DP. **Lissa** might weigh-in on the possibility of this. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/71 "2006-02-28T21:41:36Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > - > > Criminals never think they’ll get caught\*. In the near-decade my husband has been in corrections, he has _never_ met an inmate who expected that’s he’d wind up in prison. They all thought they were too smart, or the cops were too busy with other things, or the victim was too intimidated, or that if they got to another location, the cops would never think to look for them there. > > Secondly, many of them have fully justified the crime in their minds and think that others will see it their way. Yeah, they killed that guy, BUT he had done this-and-that to them, so it was completely justified. Yeah, they raped this girl, BUT she came on to him. Yeah, they stole money from their employer BUT the employer had been treating them badly and was underpaying them anyway. > > Remember also that criminals are pretty weak in the cause=effect aspects of society. Many of them sincerely don’t understand why their acts were wrong, and why they should _care_ that they hurt other people. They were raised with a complete lack of empathy-- if you want something, take it, and beat down anyone who tries to take it from you. When they’re punished by the justice system, they don’t really understand _why._ To them, it just looks arbitrary and mean, especially since they’ve seen people comitting the same acts all their lives with no punishment. My father worked in a prison in Ky. so I know what you’re talking about. Most of the prisoners he worked with seemed to be the victim of mistaken identity or simply unfortunate circumstances. None were actually guilty of a _crime_. What you seem to be pointing out above is that many criminals are simply stupid and lacking in empathy. This is very true in my own experience. Most of them are simply dim but not so much so that they are clinically subnormal. Their understanding, or lack of it, does not affect the terror of their victims or the grief of the survivors. Society has to protect itself from brutes, regardless of their IQ. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/72 "2006-02-28T21:55:10Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > You could have a point on this one for sure. In Saudi, executions are done right after Friday prayers in the center of the city. The atmosphere is quite solemn but dispassionate. The Saudis see it as justice being done and certainly nothing to party about. The atmosphere is somewhat tense but not dangerously so. Lest I come across as some kind of ghoul, I’ve seen two executions. Once when I first came here in 1982, and again many years later when I was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. I don’t think you’re a ghoul. As a person with a passionate curiosity about human behavior, I’d probably be there, watching the crowd, every time there was an execution scheduled. > [@](#): > > Admittedly, no criminal ever believes he’ll be caught. He wouldn’t do the crime otherwise. Nevertheless, he is most certainly aware that the jails are full and over-full of other people who **were** caught. I have trouble believing that there is no sense of risk involved. In my own youth I certainly knew some of the risks in the mildly criminal enterprises I engaged in. One thing you have to know about criminals is that they often missed out on crucial elements of childhood socialization. They were often neglected, and learned social behavior by watching their peers, and absorbing the ethics/morals of the streets. The concept that affects the issue you raised above is called “mirroring.” Parents teach this to their children in normal child-rearing, even if they’re not fully aware that they’re doing it. It’s accomplished in two ways. 1) You see your daughter pull another child’s hair in a fit of temper. You sit her down and say, “How would you feel if that child pulled YOUR hair?” This teaches the child empathy: that others have feelings, and we should put ourselves in their shoes to determine what they are. 2) By example. 'Do you see what happened to Billy when he stole Mike’s eraser? How would you like it if you had to sit in the corner like Billy does now? " or, similarly: “Do you see what happened to that boy when he crossed the street without looking? He got hit by a car. That’s what happens when you don’t pay attention.” We teach the child to apply what happens to others as a lesson-- to learn from their mistakes. Children who do not have this feedback from their parents miss out on learning these concepts. It’s almost a form of social retardation. They honestly see themselves as something almost entirely removed from the rest of humanity-- much like the hero of a movie. The bad guys may defeat all of the supporting characters with the same tactics, but they don’t work on the hero, because he’s “different.” They do not learn to see themselves as a part of society as a whole. They believe their circumstances, their wants and their needs supercede that of all others because they were never taught to take others into consideration. Others are completely unimportant-- part of the scenery, as it were. So, these kinds of people do not take the example of others’ criminal acts and punishments as an indication of what will happen to them if they do the same. They might look at the incident, and say, “Well, he got caught because he made this-or-that mistake”, but the whole “moral lesson” escapes them. > [@](#): > > Surprisingly enough, most Saudis don’t do the things they are so famous for. Most of them don’t kill their daughters and girls **do** have sex before marriage. I don’t know the details but there is supposedly a clinic in Dubai that specializes in hymen replacement. I wonder what they use for that. Of course-- I wasn’t intending to imply that all Saudis were the same in their opinions on moral issues or how they deal with them. They love their wives and kids just as we do. > [@](#): > > I have quite a few arguments with the Saudis I know on this kind of topic. I keep telling them that Americans almost never hear about “Abdullah Average”, the guy that simply goes to work every day and makes some money for his family. The only thing from Saudi is Prince so-and-so and terrorist-the-other. Abdullah Average is much more normal than the kind you hear about. As an aside, I have condemned people in arguments about terrorism for their assumption that all people in the ME are barbaric, evil, and are devoid of emotion except lust to kill Americans. They assume all women long to throw aside their burkas and wear belly shirts-- they seem to feel that all ME women feel oppressed and are just waiting for the benevolent Americans to rescue them with MTV and credit cards, if they can keep their brutal husband from strapping bombs to them and the kids, that is. But it’s all part of the process of justifying war-- we need to feel that the “enemy” is a robotic killing machine who has no love for his family or countrymen so that we don’t feel bad about what we do to them. > [@](#): > > On that last paragraph of yours, I wonder if it is worth the price. Unlimited personal freedom sounds nice in theory but as you point out, there is a price attached. Somewhere down the line, common-sense has to be given some weight. One man’s common sense is another man’s grassroots cause. A good deal of people despise any attempt at what they see is the lessening of their rights in the name of civil control. Just as an example, I think of a young student who was suspended from school for wearing a political t-shirt. People were outraged because they believed this infringed on the kid’s First Ammendment rights to free speech, while the administration claimed their interest in keeping a distraction and controvery-free enviornment superceded his right. There were lawsuits and endless news coverage about the issue. Both sides have valid points. I see your point about common sense, but others would fight it to the death. It’s all a matter of persepective and opinion-- things the law tries to avoid. > [@](#): > > As an oh-by-the-way, they also have caning in Saudi for minor crimes. As a further OBTW, the point is not to hurt the criminal, the point is humiliation. AFAIK, they never even break the skin but it is certanly nothing a person is going to boast about. It brings to mind the old punishment of being locked in the stocks for a couple of days. Public humiliation is abhorrent to us. Think of all the controversy when a judge sentances a criminal to hold up a sign on the street stating what he did. People think public humiliation is cruel, and it’s probably inneffective, because we do not carry it past the sign-holding. (I.E the community doesn’t shun him or shake their heads in dissaproval-- Rather they condemn the punishment.) Humiliation only matters if your peers join in condemning what you did. > [@](#): > > I agree that execution is not some kind of panacea for social problems. OTOH, and obviously IMHO, there is a place for it and a need in some circumstances. I do not agree that there is ever a need to execute someone. Prison is adequate. Personally, I believe that a procedure needs to have some benefit to society to be acceptable, and I have yet to see any benefits beyond fulfilling some people’s desire for revenge. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/73 "2006-02-28T22:12:33Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > IMHO, this kind of thing ain’t right. Mind you, I’d be happy to see him executed but expecting the inmates to do someone’s dirty-work is not what should be happening. The guy should get his sentence or (IMHO) the DP. **Lissa** might weigh-in on the possibility of this. > > Regards > > Testy It’s very unlikely to happen. First of all, most inmates don’t care one way or another-- they don’t see themselves in the light of society’s avengers. Secondly, if the staff thinks he’s in some danger from others because of his notoriety, they will put him in protective custody. My husband used to work in a Super Max prison, and there was one criminal housed there who was put in that prison solely because of his notoriety. (You would know who he was, if I told you his crime.) Thirdly, any staff member who told the inmates to target an individual with the intent of having him killed would be an accessory to murder and charged as such. (see below). Fourthly, inmates don’t keep secrets very well. My husband has a vast network of snitches working for him, and he knows about any plan almost as soon as it’s discussed. Fifthly, prison is no where near as violent as the media has led us to believe. The prison in which my husband works hasn’t had a murder in twenty-five years, and an assault is infrequent enough to warrant a middle-of-the-night phone call to let him know it happened. Lastly, inmates do an incredible job of policing themselves. The long-timers keep the younger ones in line, because they don’t want their orderly lives disrupted by searches, and having privledges revoked. ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/74 "2006-02-28T22:55:28Z")
> [@The Long Road](#): > > He’s not going to make 22 days, much less 22 years. If they ever put him in general population, he’s dead. The guards will let it be known why he’s there and he will get shanked. I doubt that. I can’t say about the UK, but here in the US the primary way convicts find out about each other is by talking to each other. Unless A tells B why he is in lock-up, B won’t know. Even the guards aren’t supposed to know. There was a recent thread about this in GQ. Dopers who work in the prison system confirmed this and I heard it from a friend who did 13 years. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/75 "2006-02-28T23:44:28Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > I don’t think you’re a ghoul. As a person with a passionate curiosity about human behavior, I’d probably be there, watching the crowd, every time there was an execution scheduled. > > One thing you have to know about criminals is that they often missed out on crucial elements of childhood socialization. They were often neglected, and learned social behavior by watching their peers, and absorbing the ethics/morals of the streets. > > The concept that affects the issue you raised above is called “mirroring.” Parents teach this to their children in normal child-rearing, even if they’re not fully aware that they’re doing it. It’s accomplished in two ways. 1) You see your daughter pull another child’s hair in a fit of temper. You sit her down and say, “How would you feel if that child pulled YOUR hair?” This teaches the child empathy: that others have feelings, and we should put ourselves in their shoes to determine what they are. 2) By example. 'Do you see what happened to Billy when he stole Mike’s eraser? How would you like it if you had to sit in the corner like Billy does now? " or, similarly: “Do you see what happened to that boy when he crossed the street without looking? He got hit by a car. That’s what happens when you don’t pay attention.” We teach the child to apply what happens to others as a lesson-- to learn from their mistakes. > > Children who do not have this feedback from their parents miss out on learning these concepts. It’s almost a form of social retardation. They honestly see themselves as something almost entirely removed from the rest of humanity-- much like the hero of a movie. The bad guys may defeat all of the supporting characters with the same tactics, but they don’t work on the hero, because he’s “different.” > > They do not learn to see themselves as a part of society as a whole. They believe their circumstances, their wants and their needs supercede that of all others because they were never taught to take others into consideration. Others are completely unimportant-- part of the scenery, as it were. > > So, these kinds of people do not take the example of others’ criminal acts and punishments as an indication of what will happen to them if they do the same. They might look at the incident, and say, “Well, he got caught because he made this-or-that mistake”, but the whole “moral lesson” escapes them. I understand your point but possibly I missed some of the same lessons the murderers did. I feel no empathy at all for a creature such as the OP’s cite. In all honesty, I feel a great deal of satisfaction when someone like that is killed (murdered if you prefer the term) after due process of law. I truly don’t intend to be snarky with you about the subject but I just don’t feel the same degree of empathy or whatever it is, that you seem to feel. Those people killed and raped and robbed others without concern and my own opinion is that death is a just punishment for them. To me, people who do such things are similar to a rabid dog and should be put down, without torture or unnecessary suffering, but definately killed. > [@](#): > > Of course-- I wasn’t intending to imply that all Saudis were the same in their opinions on moral issues or how they deal with them. They love their wives and kids just as we do. > > As an aside, I have condemned people in arguments about terrorism for their assumption that all people in the ME are barbaric, evil, and are devoid of emotion except lust to kill Americans. They assume all women long to throw aside their burkas and wear belly shirts-- they seem to feel that all ME women feel oppressed and are just waiting for the benevolent Americans to rescue them with MTV and credit cards, if they can keep their brutal husband from strapping bombs to them and the kids, that is. > > But it’s all part of the process of justifying war-- we need to feel that the “enemy” is a robotic killing machine who has no love for his family or countrymen so that we don’t feel bad about what we do to them. Most of the Middle Easterners I know are amazingly ordinary. There are some strange things about their culture but they generally like Americans and want to emulate them. OTOH, they see some of the personal freedoms as being taken much too far and wonder why anyone would put up with such a thing. My daughter in California sees people with no apparent ethics or morals and frankly considers them trash. She recently waited on the table of a 13 year old girl who was pregnant. She was astounded. How could her parents have allowed her to become pregnant? Didn’t they talk to her? Didn’t they control who she was with and for how long and where? What went wrong? > [@](#): > > One man’s common sense is another man’s grassroots cause. A good deal of people despise any attempt at what they see is the lessening of their rights in the name of civil control. > > Just as an example, I think of a young student who was suspended from school for wearing a political t-shirt. People were outraged because they believed this infringed on the kid’s First Ammendment rights to free speech, while the administration claimed their interest in keeping a distraction and controvery-free enviornment superceded his right. There were lawsuits and endless news coverage about the issue. > > Both sides have valid points. I see your point about common sense, but others would fight it to the death. It’s all a matter of persepective and opinion-- things the law tries to avoid. Sure, the law needs to be some kind of hard-and-fast rule or it just turns into a morass of exceptions. As far as the “rights” go, I agree that everyone should have certain rights. OTOH, I never hear people talking about the responsibilities that go with those rights. That is a subject that never seems to get any air-time. > [@](#): > > It brings to mind the old punishment of being locked in the stocks for a couple of days. Public humiliation is abhorrent to us. Think of all the controversy when a judge sentances a criminal to hold up a sign on the street stating what he did. People think public humiliation is cruel, and it’s probably inneffective, because we do not carry it past the sign-holding. (I.E the community doesn’t shun him or shake their heads in dissaproval-- Rather they condemn the punishment.) Humiliation only matters if your peers join in condemning what you did. True enough. The community is what makes such a punishment effective or ineffective. What is the matter with our society that someone standing on a street-corner with a sign brings disapproval on the judge rather than the criminal? > [@](#): > > I do not agree that there is ever a need to execute someone. Prison is adequate. Personally, I believe that a procedure needs to have some benefit to society to be acceptable, and I have yet to see any benefits beyond fulfilling some people’s desire for revenge. We obviously disagree on this point but I would certainly settle for less than the DP if it could be shown to be effective in reducing crime. IMHO, the way the law is being applied in the US is not effective. I have seen an inverse correlation between a willingness to use the DP in a quick and effective manner and the rate of serious crime. Anyway, what is the matter with revenge? It is a perfectly normal desire throughout the human race. Best regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![mhendo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mhendo/32/3159_2.png) [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/76 "2006-03-01T00:10:25Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > I understand your point but possibly I missed some of the same lessons the murderers did. I feel no empathy at all for a creature such as the OP’s cite. In all honesty, I feel a great deal of satisfaction when someone like that is killed (murdered if you prefer the term) after due process of law. I truly don’t intend to be snarky with you about the subject but I just don’t feel the same degree of empathy or whatever it is, that you seem to feel. Those people killed and raped and robbed others without concern and my own opinion is that death is a just punishment for them. To me, people who do such things are similar to a rabid dog and should be put down, without torture or unnecessary suffering, but definately killed. Problem is that all of those 123 people released from death row were also found guilty “after due process of law,” and in fact found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” > [@Testy](#): > > Sure, the law needs to be some kind of hard-and-fast rule or it just turns into a morass of exceptions. As far as the “rights” go, I agree that everyone should have certain rights. OTOH, I never hear people talking about the responsibilities that go with those rights. That is a subject that never seems to get any air-time. Bullshit. The responsibilities of living in and being a part of society are a constant source of discussion in open societies like the United States, and such discussions often spend considerable time addressing issues such as responsibilities and their relationship to rights. The idea that people always talk about rights and never about responsibilities is a canard, a myth that makes authoritarians feel better about themselves. > [@Testy](#): > > We obviously disagree on this point but I would certainly settle for less than the DP if it could be shown to be effective in reducing crime. IMHO, the way the law is being applied in the US is not effective. I have seen an inverse correlation between a willingness to use the DP in a quick and effective manner and the rate of serious crime. Anyway, what is the matter with revenge? It is a perfectly normal desire throughout the human race. Can you provide some citations that demonstrate this alleged correlation? Something more than your subjective feelings and observations? Regarding Saudi Arabia, you said: > [@Testy](#): > > People here also get off of death-row. As I pointed out earlier, the time between conviction and execution is about one year and numerous people are released through pardons, appeals, fresh evidence, or by the victim forgiving the crime. Mr. Ballard might or might not have gotten off. If he could have produced new evidence or cast doubt on old evidence he would probably have been released sooner than he was in the US. Doesn’t quite correspond with [Amnesty International’s](http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/saudi/issues/dp.html) assessment of the situation: > [@](#): > > These cases illustrate the intense fear and secrecy surrounding the imposition of the death penalty in Saudi Arabia. Those facing execution are rarely told in advance the date of execution. Sometimes prisoners are not even aware that they have been sentenced to death. > > The death penalty is frequently imposed following summary and secret trials. None of those executed has had access to a lawyer. Some have been convicted solely on the basis of “confessions” extracted by torture. > > \ > > People have been executed for apostasy (renunciation of one’s faith), “witchcraft”, adultery, “highway robbery” and drug offences, as well as for murder. The death penalty is mandatory for the vaguely defined offences of “acts of sabotage and corruption on earth”, which have been used to punish those exercising their right to freedom of expression. In addition, there appear to be no legal safeguards to ensure that juvenile offenders aged under 18 are not sentenced to death. The reason the death penalty in Saudi Arabia is so swift and final is that the legal process lacks precisely the safeguards and guarantees of due process that Americans expect from their legal system. I will concede that a system like that in Suadi Arabia might have the sort of deterrent effect that you claim; if summary execution without a fair trial for a large number of poorly-defined offenses was the norm, i’m sure it would frighten some people straight. The question, though, is whether the American people would be willing to give up so many of their legal rights for such summary “justice.” I’m betting not. ---
**Author:** ![rayh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@rayh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rayh)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/77 "2006-03-01T01:07:11Z")
Going by the list **mhendo** gave, here are some of the offences which use to be punishable by death in the UK. From [here.](http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.co.uk/timeline.html) > [@](#): > > Circa 1500. Eight capital crimes defined : Treason, petty treason, murder, robbery, larceny, rape and arson. > > 1. The Coventry Act made it a capital crime to lie in wait with intent to put out an eye, disable the tongue or slit the nose. It came into being after Sir John Coventry had been attacked in Covent Garden and had his nose slit. > > 2. Alice Molland becomes the last to be hanged for witchcraft in England. > > 3. The Shoplifting Act defined shoplifting to the value of 5 shillings (25 pence) as a capital crime. > > 4. Michael Hammond aged 7 and his sister aged 11 were reputedly hanged at Lynn for felony. If true Michael would have been the youngest person ever to suffer the death penalty in Britain. > > 5. An Act of Parliament of this year made stealing from a dwelling house in the value of 40 shillings (£2) a capital crime. > > May 1723. The Waltham Blacks Act made poaching and damage to forests and parks a hanging offence. Over the next few years its wide provisions increased the number of capital crimes from 30 to 150. These extended to such “appalling crimes” as blacking the face or using a disguise whilst committing a crime. > > 1752 Under the Murder Act (1752) a person convicted of murder was to be hanged within 48 hours, unless that would have been a Sunday in which case the execution was carried out on the following Monday. This act also allowed for the dissection of murderer’s bodies after execution. > > 8th March 1784. Mary Bailey becomes the last person to be burned at the stake for Petty Treason (husband murder) > > 8th March 1789. The last burning at the stake took place at Newgate when Catherine (or Christian) Murphy was executed for High Treason (coining). > > 1. The last hanging under the “Black Act” took place on the 12th of August 1814 when William Potter was hanged for the crime of cutting down an orchard. Even the judge petitioned for a reprieve! > > 1818 - 1861. Number of capital crimes began to be reduced. Sheep, cattle and horse stealing removed from the list in 1832, followed by sacrilege, letter stealing, returning from transportation (1834/5), forgery and coining (1836), burglary and theft from a dwelling house (1837)and finally rape (1841) and attempted murder in 1861. > > 1. A boy of just nine was reputed to have been hanged at Chelmsford for arson. However it is probable that William Jennings was in fact 19. There is little evidence of young children actually being hanged in the 19th century although they were regularly sentenced to death up to 1836/7. > > 26th of July 1833 Last hanging of a juvenile – Thomas Knapton aged 17 is hanged for the rape of 19 year old Frances Elstone > > 1832-1837. Sir Robert Peel’s government introduced various Bills to reduce the number of capital crimes. Coining and arson re-classified as non capital crimes. The last hangings for robbery took place at Shrewsbury on the 13th of August 1836 when Lawrence Curtis and Patrick and Edward Donnelly were executed. The last hanging for arson was that of Daniel Case at Ilchester in Somerset on the 31st of August 1836. > > 27th January 1999. The Home Secretary (Jack Straw) formally signed the 6th protocol of the European Convention of Human Rights in Strasbourg, on behalf of the British government formally abolishing the death penalty in the UK. It had been still theoretically available for treason and piracy up to 1998 but it was extremely unlikely that even if anyone had been convicted of these crimes over the preceding 30 years that they would have actually been executed. Successive Home Secretaries had always reprieved persons sentenced to death in the Channel Islands and Isle of Man where the death sentence for murder could still be passed and the Royal Prerogative was observed. It seems to me that as a society becomes more enlightened it concentrates more on rehabilitation of it’s criminals, rather than retribution. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/78 "2006-03-01T04:07:22Z")
> [@Testy](#): > > I understand your point but possibly I missed some of the same lessons the murderers did. I feel no empathy at all for a creature such as the OP’s cite. In all honesty, I feel a great deal of satisfaction when someone like that is killed (murdered if you prefer the term) after due process of law. I truly don’t intend to be snarky with you about the subject but I just don’t feel the same degree of empathy or whatever it is, that you seem to feel. Those people killed and raped and robbed others without concern and my own opinion is that death is a just punishment for them. To me, people who do such things are similar to a rabid dog and should be put down, without torture or unnecessary suffering, but definately killed. - I do not abhor the death penalty out of sympathy for the criminal.\* I despise them as much as you do. I just think killing _anybody_ is wrong, and don’t want it done in my name. > [@](#): > > We obviously disagree on this point but I would certainly settle for less than the DP if it could be shown to be effective in reducing crime. IMHO, the way the law is being applied in the US is not effective. I have seen an inverse correlation between a willingness to use the DP in a quick and effective manner and the rate of serious crime. The justice system is reactive, not pro-active. Efforts can be, and are, made to rehabilitate offenders, but the purpose of the justice system is to punish crime, not prevent it. In essence, you’re blaming the justice system for doing poorly at something that isn’t its job. > [@](#): > > Anyway, what is the matter with revenge? It is a perfectly normal desire throughout the human race. All of our desires are natural, but civilization means suppressing our urges and living according to a social code of ethics. It’s perfectly natural for a man to lust after a woman, but our society has deemed that she must be willing to engage in sex, or he’s a rapist. It’s perfectly natural for me to want that dress I see in the window, but I must supress my urge to take it, or I am a thief. And, it’s perfectly natural to feel burning rage at a criminal who has harmed you, you should suppress your urge to kill, or you’re a murderer. ---
**Author:** ![Testy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c37758/32.png) [@Testy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Testy)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/79 "2006-03-01T06:15:30Z")
> [@mhendo](#): > > Problem is that all of those 123 people released from death row were also found guilty “after due process of law,” and in fact found guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt.” And were then released after appeal, providing new evidence, or through some other legal process. I would think you would see this as evidence that the legal system works as designed. > [@](#): > > Bullshit. The responsibilities of living in and being a part of society are a constant source of discussion in open societies like the United States, and such discussions often spend considerable time addressing issues such as responsibilities and their relationship to rights. The idea that people always talk about rights and never about responsibilities is a canard, a myth that makes authoritarians feel better about themselves. Really? Well, I see considerably less about it. Maybe I’m just looking in the wrong places. > [@](#): > > Can you provide some citations that demonstrate this alleged correlation? Something more than your subjective feelings and observations? No, as I said before, this is just something I’ve noticed. I have no involvement at all with the Saudi justice system. > [@](#): > > Regarding Saudi Arabia, you said:Doesn’t quite correspond with [Amnesty International’s](http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/saudi/issues/dp.html) assessment of the situation:The reason the death penalty in Saudi Arabia is so swift and final is that the legal process lacks precisely the safeguards and guarantees of due process that Americans expect from their legal system. Amnesty Intl. is a nice organization but are explicitly against the DP under any and all circumstances. As such, I would consider them at least somewhat biased. I have personally never heard of the abuses they mention in the quoted article. I have personally known lawyers involved in DP cases in Saudi so I have some doubts about people never having lawyers or being unaware that they were condemned. FWIW, the accused in the cases I have personal knowledge of were either acquitted or forgiven. > [@](#): > > I will concede that a system like that in Suadi Arabia might have the sort of deterrent effect that you claim; if summary execution without a fair trial for a large number of poorly-defined offenses was the norm, i’m sure it would frighten some people straight. The question, though, is whether the American people would be willing to give up so many of their legal rights for such summary “justice.” I’m betting not. Well, if I use your terms; “summary execution,” “without a fair trial”, and “poorly defined offenses”, I would bet that you are right. OTOH, the executions aren’t “summary,” the trials at least seem fair, and all the offenses I have ever heard of someone being executed for were quite well defined. As an OBTW, apologies for abandoning the debate last night. My last post to **Lissa** was after 0200 and I needed some sleep. Regards Testy ---
**Author:** ![pool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pool/32/4152_2.png) [@pool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pool)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989/80 "2006-03-01T06:28:28Z")
I think the death penalty should only be handed down if a certain amount of criteria are met, i.e. this was a crime that was undoubtedly carried out by the convicted, such as one that many witnesses saw, or an overwhelming amount of evidence was there. Though I suspect as time goes by and as forensics continues to grow, there will be less wrong convictions in the future. I see the death penalty not as a deterrant, but basically as the solution to the offender having outlived his usefulness to society and given up his/her right to life when they take another,and also yes as punishment, which although some don’t like to admit it is part of the purpose of the legal system, the cons of their existence outweigh any of the benefits. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/words-fail-me-infanticide/345989.md?page=5)