Col,
The name of that girl murdered down the NSW coast was Barry. Collins and Barry. I am sorry that I could not remember her name. Their deaths are known as the 'Bega school girls murders'. Similar to Anita Cobby, with abduction, rape, abused and throats cut. A heinous crime indeed.

Aside from Virginia Morse, that o sung wu mentioned, a couple of others come to mind, like Ebony Simpson and Janine Balding. No doubt there are others that I would class as heinous.

The actions of the perpetrators of these crimes clearly demonstrate they have forfeited any right to exist in our society in any form. They should be put down ASAP. My research shows that the murderers of Janine Balding were giggling to each other and making loud remarks and finger gestures to the gallery during the trial. These scum show no remorse at all.

I feel so much for the victims and their families.

Celivia,

I agree the economic baisis of argument ofr or against is crass and I only commented on it in response.

The issue of blacks and the poor etc having not the same access to a defence falls into the same category, being issues not to do with the death penalty itself but other possible imperfections in the legal process and 'risk of error'. Hence the caveat to my opening statement.

As for the murder rate in USA, there are many other inextractible factors which contribute to US murder rate, including availability of weapons and ethnic/racial mix.

These makes isolating the availability of a death penalty as either a contributory or negatory factor to crime impossible to assess.

Banjo, I feel much like that too. some crimes display an absence humanity which even any future remorse or contrition can not set aside.

Being a father, I do not know how I would feel if I lost a child.

But being close to someone who has lost a child to murder, I observe the devastation of the crime is not solely to the slain. The victims include the family of the dead too.

Likewise, I personally see the death, destruction of meaningful life and mayhem caused by drugs as making a drug dealer on par with a murderer.

I have no problem in considering say a second offence drug dealer (one chance to change) as an equal candidate for execution. The callousness of the act is on par with the actions of a serial killer, with two differences, the victims death is slower, the victims are selected with even less discrimination.

I believe in libertarian values and those values make people accountable and responsible for their actions.

In certain cases, Killers should be held accountable for the death they bring to their victims by surrendering what they took from those victims.

Col,
I will have to concede that second conviction, or more, drug dealing should have an option of the death sentence.

I think the saddest picture I have ever seen was in the 'Tele' a few years ago. Photo of a young woman lying dead from an overdose, on the footpath in inner Sydney. It also showed her little son, about 2-3, sitting on the gutter near her, waiting for mummy to wake up.

We do terrible things to each other. I could only hope that the poor little kid got good foster parents or good grandparents. Far more consideration should be given to victims.

Banjo, with respect to the dead woman in the gutter, the chances are that she got hold of some heroin that was either extra strong, or was diluted with something else toxic.Heroin, per se, is not especially hazardous. The hazard of its use could be reduced markedly by legalising and regulating it just as we regulate alcohol.

BTW, before anybody starts accusing me of being a heroin addict, I've never touched the stuff, but I did have a girlfriend some years ago who was a nurse who used it quite regularly, although she usually acquired it through a fellow medical worker who apparently manufactured it himself. She was very conscientious about dosage and I'm sure she was never in danger of an overdose. That woman is now a Director of Surgical Nursing at a major hospital. I have no way of knowing if she still uses.

Hysteria is all too easy to feed, which is yet another reason not to have a death penalty.

Antiseptic, that last point is a very good one.

How often does 'crime and punishment' become a political topic? We like to believe the separation of powers is effective and the judiciary is not affected by the legislature, but in reality this isn't always the case.
The charges against Sergeant Chris Hurley and the Palm Island affair being a prime example.
(Note here, I'm not making any judgement either way on the Hurley matter, but it was clearly a case of political intervention in a court process. Would the same thing have occurred if it had not been such a high profile case?)

I suppose some might argue the political change was in the aim of justice - but ask yourselves, do you really think this will always be the case?
In the case of the death penalty, when we start appeasing the desire for revenge (I'm aware many people don't see it as revenge, but you can't honestly say there won't be people out there who use it as that) what's the likelihood of politicised trials.

Stuart Walker: your sarcastic hyperbole lacks witticism and credibility. The abortion debate is another matter and a passing glance at all your points reveals them to be shallow and politicised.

Celivia - I agree with you in opposing the death penalty, however I do concede that executions are more cost effective than life imprisonment. As it stands, imprisoning someone for life doesn't actually give them the opportunity to make restitution as you suggest. We pay a financial price for opting for life sentences, I just think that financial price is worth it to know we live in a society that doesn't condone premeditated killing.

(runner, Stuart, before you go calling abortions premeditated killing, the abortion debate is about establishing fetuses are developed people.
As it stands, there's no evidence that one fetus can be differentiated from another in any way that matters, with only theoretical strawman arguments to counter this. If you want to debate abortion, fine. Debate it on an abortion thread and actually tackle the issue instead of spouting hysterical innuendo).

TRTL:"however I do concede that executions are more cost effective than life imprisonment"

Not if the US example is any guide, at least since the Furman decision in 1972. The total cost of trial, incarceration while appeals are exhausted and eventual execution is many times that of merely "locking 'em up and tossing the key away". That fact is not in dispute.

However, if a less rigorous process for determining guilt without question is allowed, the cost may well plummet, at the expense of the increased likelihood of execution of an innocent. No doubt there are those here who would be happy to see public lynchings, "dispensing with the issue of doubt", but I'm not among them.