|
Post by mcdude on Aug 25, 2008 3:50:08 GMT -5
So what does make a murder case dp eligable in Texas?
|
|
|
Post by ♥Eva♥ on Aug 25, 2008 9:08:01 GMT -5
So what does make a murder case dp eligable in Texas? As you see McDude Cain for instance wouldn't get the DP in Texas even if it could be proven that it was first degree premeditated murder! tarlton.law.utexas.edu/vlibrary/outlines/deathpenprint.html QUOTE: In Texas, the district courts have original jurisdiction for all criminal felony cases. If an individual is convicted of a capital felony, he or she may be subject to punishment by death, if the State sought such punishment. A capital felony is one in which an individual "intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual," under special circumstances. In particular, the: 1 ) murder of a public safety officer, firefighter, or correctional employee; 2 ) murder during the commission of specified felonies (kidnapping, burglary, robbery, aggravated rape, arson); 3 ) murder for remuneration; multiple murders; 4 ) murder during prison escape; murder of a correctional officer; 5 ) murder by a state prison inmate who is serving a life sentence for any of five offenses; [or] 6 ) murder of an individual under six years of age1. In Texas, a person must be of at least 17 years of age at the time of the crime to have the death penalty imposed upon him or her.
|
|
|
Post by ♥Eva♥ on Aug 25, 2008 9:17:37 GMT -5
Now i'll seem like a hypocrite because i will use the same stats antis use to make their point! True 99% of the murders in the stats sited below were never DP eligible, but perhaps the spectre of the DP does deter non-DP eligible homicides too! After the DP was outlawed in 1976 in Texas there were 1,519 murders = a 12.2% murder rate pro 100,000! In 2006 with the population in Texas doubling from about 12 million to roughly 23 million there was a decrease in murders to 1,384 for a 5.9% murder rate! The DP is a deterrent!www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htm
|
|
|
Post by skyloom on Sept 6, 2008 16:05:58 GMT -5
Now i'll seem like a hypocrite because i will use the same stats antis use to make their point! True 99% of the murders in the stats sited below were never DP eligible, but perhaps the spectre of the DP does deter non-DP eligible homicides too! After the DP was outlawed in 1976 in Texas there were 1,519 murders = a 12.2% murder rate pro 100,000! In 2006 with the population in Texas doubling from about 12 million to roughly 23 million there was a decrease in murders to 1,384 for a 5.9% murder rate! The DP is a deterrent!www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htmYou assume that the death penalty is responsible for a decrease in murders in Texas. Plenty of other things were going on in Texas in 1976 and in 2006 besides capital punishment. Until you examine them, your statistics are not valid and mean nothing. I'd need to see a comparison of the average incomes of the two years, just to begin to draw any conclusions about the issue, because poverty and lack of opportunity and hope are major factors in the rate of crimes of all sorts anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Sept 7, 2008 14:13:04 GMT -5
After the DP was outlawed in 1976 in Texas there were 1,519 murders = a 12.2% murder rate pro 100,000! In 2006 with the population in Texas doubling from about 12 million to roughly 23 million there was a decrease in murders to 1,384 for a 5.9% murder rate! The DP is a deterrent! How do you define the murder rate? All too often cops write off murders as accidents or suicides. And locking people up younger for longer has an effect too. Even abortion reduces murders as unwanted children have a higher tendency to commit crimes. The shrinking baby boom needs to be factored in also. There are many factors which can affect this - the one we know has no effect is the DP.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Sept 7, 2008 19:40:31 GMT -5
After the DP was outlawed in 1976 in Texas there were 1,519 murders = a 12.2% murder rate pro 100,000! In 2006 with the population in Texas doubling from about 12 million to roughly 23 million there was a decrease in murders to 1,384 for a 5.9% murder rate! The DP is a deterrent! How do you define the murder rate? All too often cops write off murders as accidents or suicides. And locking people up younger for longer has an effect too. Even abortion reduces murders as unwanted children have a higher tendency to commit crimes. The shrinking baby boom needs to be factored in also. There are many factors which can affect this - the one we know has no effect is the DP. Abortion does not reduce murder rates. It adds to them. Saying abortion deters murder is more illogical sounding than the death penalty detering murder.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Sept 8, 2008 20:38:47 GMT -5
Abortion does not reduce murder rates. It adds to them. Saying abortion deters murder is more illogical sounding than the death penalty detering murder. Does Abortion Prevent Crime?In recent weeks there has been a lot of media coverage of a paper John Donohue and I recently wrote connecting the legalization of abortion in the 1970s to reduced crime in the 1990s. (A preliminary version of the paper is posted here.) The purpose of the study is to better understand the reasons for the sharp decline in crime during this decade, which, prior to our research, had largely eluded explanation. While there are many other theories as to why crime declined (more prisoners, better policing, the strong economy, the decline of crack, etc.), most experts agree that none of these very convincingly explains the 30 percent to 40 percent fall in crime since 1991.
The theoretical justification for our argument rests on two simple assumptions: 1) Legalized abortion leads to fewer "unwanted" babies being born, and 2) unwanted babies are more likely to suffer abuse and neglect and are therefore at an increased risk for criminal involvement later in life. The first assumption, that abortion reduces the number of unwanted children, is true virtually by definition. The second assumption, that unwanted children are at increased risk for criminal involvement, is supported by three decades of academic research. If one accepts these two assumptions, then a direct mechanism by which the legalization of abortion can reduce crime has been established. At that point, the question merely becomes: Is the magnitude of the impact large or small?
|
|
|
Post by justme on Sept 10, 2008 22:53:39 GMT -5
So it makes more sense to execute a baby, prior to knowing whether or not he/she will end up committing criminal acts, than a convicted murderer who has proven to be a killer?
I don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by ♥Eva♥ on Sept 11, 2008 0:40:09 GMT -5
Now i'll seem like a hypocrite because i will use the same stats antis use to make their point! True 99% of the murders in the stats sited below were never DP eligible, but perhaps the spectre of the DP does deter non-DP eligible homicides too! After the DP was outlawed in 1976 in Texas there were 1,519 murders = a 12.2% murder rate pro 100,000! In 2006 with the population in Texas doubling from about 12 million to roughly 23 million there was a decrease in murders to 1,384 for a 5.9% murder rate! The DP is a deterrent!www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htmYou assume that the death penalty is responsible for a decrease in murders in Texas. Plenty of other things were going on in Texas in 1976 and in 2006 besides capital punishment. Until you examine them, your statistics are not valid and mean nothing. I'd need to see a comparison of the average incomes of the two years, just to begin to draw any conclusions about the issue, because poverty and lack of opportunity and hope are major factors in the rate of crimes of all sorts anywhere. Dearest SkyLoom! As far as your post goes YES some people will use your same demand for higher standards of proof to deny the "theory of Evolution"! Furthermore in an older post on this very same thread you defended the belief that it is impossible to deter murderers from murdering! In your post you claimed that all deterrents/punishments for murder could be abolished and the murder rate would remain absolutely unchanged! This is an extremist view even for the anti-DP people! In effect you claim that if murder were legal the murder rate would remain unchanged! I agree that neither you or me would commit murder, even if murder were legal, or even if we were rewarded for the act of murder! You just don't want to admit that a certain mindset wants to experience the thrill of commiting an evil act such as a murder for the "feel" of it! Yes you're argument here fails in the same manner that McDude's argument a few posts ago failed! If you claim that murderers cannot be deterred from carrying out their murderous plans you're claiming that they are robotic killing machines that are somehow different from the rest of humanity and you give an enormous power to the Incapation Argument against the DP which is discussed here! ccadp.proboards40.com/index.cgi?board=debate&action=display&thread=6879Some pros agree that murder can't be deterred because murderers are not like ordinary people! Love & Hugs! Your Friend!
|
|
|
Post by ♥Eva♥ on Sept 11, 2008 1:22:08 GMT -5
Abortion does not reduce murder rates. It adds to them. Saying abortion deters murder is more illogical sounding than the death penalty detering murder. Does Abortion Prevent Crime?In recent weeks there has been a lot of media coverage of a paper John Donohue and I recently wrote connecting the legalization of abortion in the 1970s to reduced crime in the 1990s. (A preliminary version of the paper is posted here.) The purpose of the study is to better understand the reasons for the sharp decline in crime during this decade, which, prior to our research, had largely eluded explanation. While there are many other theories as to why crime declined (more prisoners, better policing, the strong economy, the decline of crack, etc.), most experts agree that none of these very convincingly explains the 30 percent to 40 percent fall in crime since 1991.
The theoretical justification for our argument rests on two simple assumptions: 1) Legalized abortion leads to fewer "unwanted" babies being born, and 2) unwanted babies are more likely to suffer abuse and neglect and are therefore at an increased risk for criminal involvement later in life. The first assumption, that abortion reduces the number of unwanted children, is true virtually by definition. The second assumption, that unwanted children are at increased risk for criminal involvement, is supported by three decades of academic research. If one accepts these two assumptions, then a direct mechanism by which the legalization of abortion can reduce crime has been established. At that point, the question merely becomes: Is the magnitude of the impact large or small?Oh Haddock ! Yeah if the human races dies out there would be no murder among humans! It is wrong to say that murderers kill because they were "unwanted children"! You are only defaming and insulting some beautiful people in this world, who were "unwanted children"! There are many cases of murderers who had loving parents and these murderers were just looking for a thrill, kick or whatever and decided to commite a horrible murder for the thrill of it! Yes the murderer of 12 year old Kimberly Leach, who was dragged from her school in Florida by the predator who's name is better known than the names of most US presidents is a case in point! We should remember Kimberly Leach, Susan Rancourt, Denise Ott and the other victims of this evil predator and delete the name of this evil thrill killer! His parents wanted him and loved him and there was no question of abortion! Yeah and keep in mind his first murder was about a year after the US Supreme Court outlawed the DP! One deterrent less to fear! Dearest Haddock! You just refuse to accept that some, who have it all-e.g. loving parents. financial pluses and the world at their feet just decide to go for evil thrills instead! Yes Haddock murder like drugs is one of these evil thrills! I suggest you see this traumatizing film which will confront you with evil! Something an anti will claim doesn't exist!
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Sept 13, 2008 10:45:13 GMT -5
So it makes more sense to execute a baby, prior to knowing whether or not he/she will end up committing criminal acts, than a convicted murderer who has proven to be a killer? I don't get it. Obviously not. It makes more sense to provide proper education and support to children so they can avoid pregnancy (as Sarah Palin has shown, abstinence 'education' doesn't work). For those who do get pregnant, prompt termination should be available if needed. For those who carry the child to term, full support during and after birth must be there. Unless you cure your social ills, you will reap the whirlwind of social chaos and crime. And no one suggested executing a baby, that is pure emotional blackmail and a nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Sept 13, 2008 10:48:06 GMT -5
Dearest Haddock! You just refuse to accept that some, who have it all-e.g. loving parents. financial pluses and the world at their feet just decide to go for evil thrills instead! Yes Haddock murder like drugs is one of these evil thrills! I suggest you see this traumatizing film which will confront you with evil! Something an anti will claim doesn't exist! I don't regard movies as scientific research. You might want to note that atheists are extremely under represented in prisons. Logically, if we got rid of religion, we might get rid of most crime.
|
|
|
Post by ♥Eva♥ on Sept 16, 2008 11:18:51 GMT -5
Dearest Haddock! You just refuse to accept that some, who have it all-e.g. loving parents. financial pluses and the world at their feet just decide to go for evil thrills instead! Yes Haddock murder like drugs is one of these evil thrills! I suggest you see this traumatizing film which will confront you with evil! Something an anti will claim doesn't exist! I don't regard movies as scientific research. You might want to note that atheists are extremely under represented in prisons. Logically, if we got rid of religion, we might get rid of most crime. Oh Haddock! Walk the walk and talk the talk! I'm sure imprisoned non-believers of a criminal nature don't see much benefit in flaunting atheism! If atheists start lobbying for atheist inmates i think there would suddenly be an increase in jailbird atheists! Eva
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Sept 16, 2008 17:52:11 GMT -5
Oh Haddock! Walk the walk and talk the talk! I'm sure imprisoned non-believers of a criminal nature don't see much benefit in flaunting atheism! If atheists start lobbying for atheist inmates i think there would suddenly be an increase in jailbird atheists! Eva So they aren't very good Christians then are they? Presumably those who call themselves Atheists are much more honest than the others. However failing some better analysis the presumption stands.
|
|
|
Post by biglinmarshall on Sept 19, 2008 10:05:59 GMT -5
people can be honest whatever their religious beliefs. As a Christian married to an agnostic, I know that there are good and bad people whatever their ideas are.
I even know someone who was a racist and belonged to the BNP but was a really nice guy in spite of that. I spent a year working on him till I converted him to decent attitudes to people of other ethnic groups.
I suppose I've got a vested interest in anit-racism being a gypsy myself
|
|