Excuse me folks,

If the death penalty is a deterrent against crime, then how does it apply to the would-be suicide bomber?

This example exemplifies the fact that violent males are generally immune to life threatening messages.

There is more than enough evidence to show that the death penalty has an insigniificant effect on serious crime. Is the USA more crime free than Australia because it has the death penalty?
Is China? As for that other (former) death penalty state, its use in South Africa (as in China) was motivated by political overtones, rather than justice .

SHONGA,

You are right, no system is perfect. It is possible that if you have a death penalty, some innocent people will die. Against that, you have to balance the murderers, particularly of young children, who, having served their prison sentence, are released and murder again. The traditional response is to tilt the system in favour of the accused on the basis that it is better for 10 guilty men to go free that for one innocent man to suffer. I would suggest that if you look at the NSW figures over the last 65 years since the last hanging, the number of people who have been murdered by released prisoners greatly exceeds the number of people who have been convicted of murder and subsequently found to be innocent

Hi all

Redneck (post 4:13:14 AM 1/3/06)

Political correctness is a major problem!

Multiculturalism combined with relativism is a bi-product of PC. We're too afraid to speak the truth incase we insult or vilify somebody.

Decriminalisation or legalisation of some anti-social behaviours also contributes to a 'real' increase in crime - the wrongful act becomes acceptable. Falsified or manipulated statistics bring about the outcomes which we now have - crimes which "go under the radar".
(1/3/06)

gecko (post 8:27:31 AM 1/3/06)

Actually, revenge ISN'T a Christian philosophy - "Vengeance is Mine saith the L'rd." & "If someone striketh you on the right cheek, turn to him the other." That isn't vengeance.

Also, it's interesting to read some of the Levitical laws regarding theft & the fact that the victim NOT the State is recompensed. That's part of the 'problem' with the current judicial code - the criminal rarely gets to 'reimburse' the victim, & there's no/little contrition.
(1/3/06)

plerdsus (post 9:14:51 AM 1/3/06)

I'm a believer in democracy, but sometimes a democratic vote on an issue doesn't give a just & equitable decision.

Immediately after a major crime, voters would most certainly support "capital punishment". If the vote were to be taken at the time say Shapelle CORBY's 'execution' people would be less-inclined to support such a proposition.

As to your reasons: they are very logical, but they give no room for error - courts do get it wrong. No certified & accurate statistics give validity to assurance that execution minimalises murders. Criminals don't think that they will be caught.

There may be some merit in reintroducing the birch? Though Human Rights advocates & 'liberal' judiciary would probably be opposed to it. Public floggings have never statistically minimalised crime.

I agree that non-violent prisoners ought to be involved in ex-prison work-gangs. The only obstacles would probably be budget constraints, union objection (job losses) & an adequate system of monitoring. [Refer my prior comment to GeorgeT - Ken MARSLEW's exposing of Probation & Parole's inadequacies.]
(1/3/06)

Cheers all

Hi all

Flezzey (post 9:51:02 AM 1/3/06)

I'm a conservative & still think that GWB's decision will prove to be wrong - but not necessarily for the same reasons.

On a wider front, 'liberals' often try to negotiate - believing that the other person is of similar integrity. However, just like a criminal, who will lie to get whatever he/she wants, so diplomats & political leaders lie also.

Strangely, given 'new' powers - to replace what the NSW Police Force lost in 1986 - & with a degree of applying a cautious approach to the Cronulla Riots, police were subsequently criticised for "taking too long", "not arresting enough people" etc.

Federally, our Welfare Budget is greater than the combined totals of Defence, Education & Health. If we look at those who are incarcerated, the greatest proportion of them are from a "social security" background. Sadly, that says something.

Peter, Paul & Mary were right. But they only echoed the words of their forefathers into antiquity.
(1/3/06)

SHONGA (post 1:33:10 AM 1/3/06)

Spot on!
(2/3/06)

Scout (post 7:28:44 AM 2/3/06)

Thank you for your kind comments. I try not to insult people - it is counter-productive & doesn't lead to any resolution. Whatsmore, I find that it's far easier to convince my opponents of the validity of my thinking be simply presenting facts & opinions based on sound logic.

You would be most welcome to join the debate on "abortion", viz: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4145

Such issues as the age of culpability & the determinations about the sanctity of life are fundamental to society's survival.

Comment to Kay:
I am saddened by your experiences as a rape victim (Scout). My former-wife was 'allegedly' an incest victim. I discovered the truth through her dying sister. Our marriage didn't survive (obviously), but my former-wife doesn't know that I know. I will always love her, but I just don't trust her, or respect her - for the things she did to hurt me. Now at least I know why she did them.
(2/3/06)

gecko (post 8:56:52 AM 2/3/06)

Well deduced & stated.
(2/3/06)

Cheers all

LittleAgreeableBuddy

Thank you for your kind thoughts. I always find your posts interesting, thoughtful, and sometimes entertaining.

I am saddened that you love your ex wife, but that you have lost her through lack of trust. That must feel terrible.

Funny isn't it? Up until now I had thought that you were female (no offence intended).

Thanks Scout - best wishes to you too.

Cheers
Kay

The biggest load of drivel I've read for a long time, courtesy of Ken Mcnab.
Those marvelous statistics regarding the number of countries that have abolished capital punishment lack one obvious qualification - in how many of those countries was the issue ever put to a referendum, or even raised during an election? This is a question I asked of Amnesty International who naturally enough didn't deign to reply. Perhaps Ken could give us the facts, or one of his supporters on this forum. I'm aware of one country where the issue was put to the people, namely Switzerland, and even there the issue was not specific but as part of a referendum on constitutional amendment.

The usual bleeding-heart suspects lined up to support Ken, with their vacuous arguments about lack of deterrence and execution of the innocent, etc,.etc. These are not even worth commenting on. There are some crimes that are so sickening so beyond comprehension, that to talk of remorse or rehabilitation on the part of the perpetrators is an obscenity almost on a par with the original crime. Remember Virginia Morse, Anita Cobby?

The principle on which the justice inherent in capital punishment is based relies on a very simple precept - the value you put on your life is the same as that which you put on another’s life.

The tolerance of misfits in our society is one that is not supported by the majority of Australians, and is foisted upon us by the morally enlightened minority, the ‘memocrats’ that effectively rule this country. The results are there for all to see