Talk:Capital punishment

Archives
2003/2004 to end of 2005 (approx.) 2005 to 16 January 2006 February to May 2006 (approx.) February, March 2006 (approx.) March to mid April 2006 Mid to end of April 2006 End of April to mid May 2006 May 2006 to end of January 2008

Recent updates and restructuring

I have just re-read this article for the first time in some time and would like to say that the editing that has taken place in between times has significantly improved it. Well done to all concerned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Firehorsefish (talk • contribs) 13:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

POV problems

ohhh heyyyyy!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.78.174.2 (talk) 14:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC) In reading and reviewing this article, it would appear that there are some galring POV problems. One that jumps out is the heading "Movements towards 'humane' execution." The use of quotes around 'humane' definately give away the author's point of view on the topic. This specific problem is rather widespread, particularly in that section. Also, the sidebar "Homicide" box might be going a little overboard. Without specific elaboration, it gives the distinct impression that all forms of homicide are capital offenses, when, as point of fact, they are not. Case in point, self-defense (e.g., justifiable homicide) is not a capital offense, despite being techincally homicide.hey whats up. All that, and the fact that more attention is given to the controvery (with distinct POV problems) surrounding capital punishment than to capital punishment itself gives this article some glaring problems. Smit8678 (talk) 04:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

1. Advocates of the death penalty talk about humane and inhumane forms, so I don't see how that is a problem. Are you saying that there is a point of view which sees all forms of execution as equally humane? (even stoning?) 2. Capital punishment is a form of justifiable homicide. 3. I don't think your assertion of giving more attention to the controversy than capital punishment itself holds up in light of the actual numbers of characters in this article. Most of the discussion of the controversy has been pushed out into the other articles in the sidebar. SBPrakash (talk) 10:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Why is this link considered spam ?

MisterFine (talk) 05:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC) I tried to insert a link to Opposing Views' debate between Amnesty International and a leading national D.A. on the death penalty, which contains great arguments and detailed information. The content doesn't belong here, but it is certainly deeper and relevant. When I did it, someone struck it as spam... but it appears to meet all the guidelines. Why doesn't it meet the guidelines, and if it does how do I get it put in ?

What is the word 'gay' doing there?

'In most places that practice GAY capital punishment today, the death penalty is reserved as punishment for premeditated murder, espionage, treason, or as part of military justice.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.216.202.168 (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Obviously vandalized. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 20:03, 29 February 2008

What picture? There are a few & all look fine. Ok, I see now what you mean when one hides the content. I'll move the map down then. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 21:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ancient rome

Death penalty was abolished for a few decades before the roman empire. i believe this should be included in the page194.199.137.149 (talk) 13:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Another song

Craigg1 (talk) 11:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC) There is a song by Steve Earl called Billy Austin that was used in the soundtrack of Dead Man Walking which is about a man on death row. I think it deserves to be included as a great example of "death row" music.

Another song by the swedish band Candlemass - "At the gallow's end" is about a man who is waiting for his execution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.134.235.18 (talk) 21:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Debate summary

Has anyone made the argument that a slow death of natural causes after decades of confinement is a worse punishment than a quick and painless death?

Also what is the deal with these Wikiproject boxes here on the talk page, to the right? Could someone please put them back up top in a multiple-Wikiprojects-box so they don't bunch the [edit] links? SBPrakash (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC) 58.106.129.98 (talk)

I am not sure where or how to make the entry, but recently the History Channel has documented that Iran executed a 16 year old girl for the crime of seducing a 50 year cab driver. They claimed she seduced him for the first time when she was only 13 years old.

It seems to me that this 50 year old cab driver raped this 13 year old little girl and did so repeatedly over a number of years and according to Islamic Law, when a girl gets raped its always the girl's fault, even when she only 13. Pastorart1974 (talk) 00:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

This article isn't really the place to examine individual cases. David Underdown (talk) 08:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

proposed citation

I propose the following citations for sentence in the summary where it is stated that capital punishment has a higher financial cost than incarcerating an inmate for life. The following applies to the United States only and most of the studies following are done within a single state, are therefore not applicable throughout the country, but do provide proper citation to the theory that capital punishment is more costly.

Gold, Russell. The Wall Street Journal: Counties Struggle With High Cost Of Prosecuting Death-Penalty Cases. The Wall Street Journal, January 9, 2002.

Tempest, Rone. Death Row Often Means a Long Life; California condemns many murderers, but few are ever executed. Los Angeles Times, March 6, 2005.

Kansas Audit of Department of Corrections. Legislative Post Audit Committee. Legislative Post Audit Committee, December 19, 2003.

Vermont Legislative Research Shop. Deterrent Value and Cost of Death Penalty. The University of Vermont, April 23, 2001.

Judicial Conference Committee on Defender Services. Subcomittee Report. Subcommittee on Federal Death Penalty Cases, 1997.

Phillip J. Cook & Donna B. Slawson. The Cost of Processing Murder Cases in North Carolina, 1993. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jssfub (talk • contribs) 01:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject

I would propose creation of a Wikiproject on capital punishment. I do not think that it is too arcane of a subject, and many large articles could fit under the scope, including those dealing with lethal injection and human rights in China, among many others. CopaceticThought (talk) 23:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Where's the article on public executions?

You know, like in the olden days such as revolutionary France where little old ladies would do their knitting in front of the Madame Guillotine, etc.?

Why does "Public Execution" redirect to here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.211.78.60 (talk) 05:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you should add "The Stranger" to the Lit section. Here is a quote from Wikipedia:(The novel tells the story of a man, Meursault... who eventually kills a man. The story continues as Meursault waits to be executed.) Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.111.78 (talk) 19:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Relevance to Christianity?

Noticing Wikiproject boxes, why is this article relevant to Christianity, especially over any other religion? It seems either biased, or improperly placed. Can someone please explain why these two are connected? Thanks! Neuro√Synapse ▪ ∆ 08:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I moved the template box to the bottom under the others, but really any project can add any article to their domain. Take it up on their talk pages if you must. --70.142.44.220 (talk) 18:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Cause of death

The text, 'Thieves would be imprisoned in suspended cages and left to die by dehydration', located at the beginning of the History section and attached to the first image as a caption, seems to imply that locking someone in a cage causes them to die by dehydration. If the prisoner were to die by some other means, their incarceration has still served its purpose. Can we simply omit 'by dehydration'? - Mhitchens (talk) 21:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Fine by me. (I'm the one who wrote the caption.) – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 01:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect Map

The world map on this page is incorrect and I propose that it be deleted unless an alternate can be found. Specifically, the map of the US on the world map is incorrect when compared to the United States map on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States

If the "Retains, though not used for at least 10 years" classification is used on other countries and US States are pictured with differences in capital punishment law, then the "Retains, though not used for at least 10 years" must also be used within the US to accurately show American attitudes toward capital punishment.Rander26 (talk) 21:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

"Retains, though not used for at least 10 years" would describe Colorado, Nebraska, Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Kansas and New Hampshire if my count is correct. Rmhermen (talk) 06:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

As stated on the map, the federal death penalty remains applicable in all states, so the US is considered retentionist overall - perhaps it would be better ot remove the state boundaries from the map. David Underdown (talk) 10:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

We used to have a map that had a single-colored U.S., and I support that. I believe that map was removed for having several countries colored wrongly so if it could be found it would need to be fixed/updated. Rmhermen (talk) 15:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Please remove references in the article to 'more developed nations/countries'

For example: 'South Africa, which is probably the most developed African nation'.

These are opinions and are not facts.

Particularly offensive is the sentence: 'Singapore, Japan and the U.S. are the only fully developed countries that have retained the death penalty.'

Which gives the view that other nations that are retentionist are not somehow 'developed'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.148.96 (talk) 03:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Attacking comment removed by Booglamay (talk), 17:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of image

An image was deleted on the following ground: "it does not illustrate the capital punishment". But it clearly does as it shows people "waiting to be shot" as follows from title of the painting.Biophys (talk) 19:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of note on China on 2007 figure table

Deleted the 6000 figure in the table and the note" Based on publicly available reports. Other sources suggest the real tally in China for example may be as high as 6,000", since the table is for verifiable figure and that figure is unsourced and cannot be verified.Also added citation needed tag on this figure in the previous paragraph.

The 6000 figure comes from exactly the same source as the rest of the figures there, Amnesty's published data - it is sourced to them and is just as well sourced as anythig else there. David Underdown (talk) 09:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

It seems the figure from Amnesty's reference to Dui Hua foundation is not sound.From Dui Hua's own website the figure is 5000,they also say this figure is based on a combination of published and anecdotal evidence, the latter of which is almost impossible to verify.You can say it is an educated guess but by no means is it reliable statistics. http://www.duihua.org/hrjournal/2008/06/welcome-reduction-in-use-of-capital.html

Dui Hua estimates that around 5,000 people were executed in China in 2007. We can make this statement based on a combination of published and anecdotal evidence despite the fact that the Chinese government closely guards its statistics on capital punishment on the grounds of "state secrecy."

I changed the reference to this direct link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.210.68.66 (talk) 21:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

michigan abolition date

abolition section: "In the United States, the state of Michigan was the first state to ban the death penalty, on March 1, 1847."

public opinion section: "The United States is a notable exception: some states have had bans on capital punishment for decades (the earliest is Michigan, where it was abolished in 1846), while others actively use it today."

1846 or 1847...? Jessi1989 (talk) 03:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

1847 according to [1] Rmhermen (talk) 03:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

It could also be the difference between when the Act was passed, and when it actually came into force. David Underdown (talk) 13:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

life imprisonment cheaper than a bullet?

the explanation given is we have extra trials, etc... shouldn't we do this for life imprisonment? keeping an innocent person in jail for life is almost worse than killing him can we take this BS out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.8.61.31 (talk) 15:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

'History' section

If you notice, there are two of them (1. History and 3. History) Merge? ~Chemicalrubber (talk) 12:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you are right, there is 2 of them! By the looks of it, it should get merged, thus I'll bring the one below towards the top section. Thanks for noticing that! That-Vela-Fella (talk) 04:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Spectacles

Executions were public spectacles for a reason. That was to show what happens to criminals who murder other people. Thus, capital punishment was considered to be a deterrent or counter–motive. The other meaning of "spectacle" is also relevant. Lawyers tell their guilty clients to wear eyeglasses or spectacles in court. This impresses the jury in that the defendant looks studious, intellectual, and therefore non–violent (innocent).Lestrade (talk) 03:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Lestrade

Christian Views

What about Genesis 9:6? "Whoever sheds the blood of man,

      by man shall his blood be shed..."

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Didn't a guy called Jebus you USAians so love to quote say something against that old sentiment? Or are you implying that the justice system is without sin? ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.38.4.194 (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 88.11.150.118 (talk) 20:58, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Lol wat? "USAians" is not a proper demonym for any nationality on this Earth. You are clearly confused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.237.59.92 (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

"in the U.S.and Europe surveys have long shown a majority in favor of capital punishment."

Europe here should be cited or deleted? All the surveys listed are US, and [2] seems to suggest that's not the case, at least in the countries they have listed. 90.201.172.67 (talk) 21:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

On the use of the phrase "human development" in reference to non-state societies

This should be changed/clarified in this article. Non-state societies are not biologically less evolved as the term "human development" implies. No country contains members who are more physically evolved than any other. This term is a reminant of 19th century evolutionist thinking.

Also, when revising this avoid using the ideas of social evolution. Although societies are organized in various ways, there is not a lock-step progression of societies from "simple" to "complex" forms.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.42.98 (talk) 19:01, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

The section on Islam says "Although the Qur'an prescribes the death penalty for several hadd (fixed) crimes—including rape—murder is not among them." This is not true, the only instances where the Qur'an accepts killing people is in the context of war, or as a punishment for murder (although death penalty for murder isn't encouraged either: the Qur'an only says a murderer may be killed for his crime (5:32). The victim's family can choose whether they want the murderer executed, whether they want him to pay a financial compensation or whether they decide to forgive altogether, which is the course encouraged by the Qur'an). Death penalty in Islam for murder, aldutery, homosexuality and apostasy comes only from sayings or practices attributed to the prophet and are controversial for the more liberal Muslim theologians as these things arguably contradict the Qur'an. At the end of the day it amounts for the same, as the mainstream traditional interpretion retains death penalty for these crimes but I just wanted to point out that the sentence I quoted is not accurate. The Qur'an doesn't "prescribe" death penalty for "several hadd crimes" except making it permissible for murder. Paradoxally, the article says the exact contrary. It should be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.247.85.103 (talk) 21:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The stoning of the adulteress and Christianity.

I'm surprised that the whole "may he who is without sin cast the first stone" bit is not mentioned in the Christianity section, as it seems to be much more directly related to capital punishment than "turn the other cheek". This should be self-evident, but I've learned to never underestimate how anal retentive some fellow editors can be about demanding a New York Times article to confirm that the sky is blue and the Pope is Catholic. I'm going to add it, but if anyone has a serious objection to this let me know (rather than reverting it, please) and I'll google something. Wormwoodpoppies (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Oops, my bad, the verse was already mentioned. But I added a brief summary of the story for those of us who don't have every chapter and verse of the Bible committed to memory. Wormwoodpoppies (talk) 22:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)