Murder is an unlawful killing. One can kill in self defense, in a just war and with lawful execution and it is legal and moral.

Murder is neither.

Definition of homicide: n : unlawful premeditated killing of a human being [syn: murder, slaying]

Note the synonym of murder.

So executions = homicide (as the states describe them) = murder.

So thou shalt not murder = murder is killing = don’t kill.

Hmm…

Don’t tell me the lists are not true. The truth is that the people on the lists have been acquitted, pardoned, or had the charges dropped. These are not possible innocents. Not O.J. Simpsons. They are ordinary Americans, starved of “Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (and almost of their lives) by a government, well, mainly southern state governments, who couldn’t be bothered to ensure that the constitution was upheld.

http://www.aclu.org/capital/moratorium/10413prs20040218.html (It’s ACLU! Commies! Automatic Lies!)
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-cases-1973-1983#1 (Gasp! DPIC! Automatic lies!)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Krone (Wikipedia; must be socialists! Can’t trust them!) (of course the evidence here is that he is the 100th American to be exonerated)
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_17_54/ai_90888288 (A critique of DPIC’s list. Unfortunately for you, this states that _at least_ 32 have been released due to actual innocence. That’s one exoneration for every thirty-five executions, and that is of course a severe underestimation, but this article is propoganda, so that it even accepts that 1 in 35 are innocent is staggering..)

You never provided the link for the 130 exonerated.

It is not the justice dept., as you wrongly stated.

The anti death penalty groups invented their own deifinition of exonerated a shoe horned a bunch of cases into tht definition.

Thou shalt not kill is an improper translating. It is thou shalt no murder.

Again, you either refuse to fact check or, even worse, you may make things up.

And let’s not forget that the southern states, the pro-death penalty states, have on average in 2007, a 42% higher murder rate than non-death penalty states.

Geez, that’s one hell of a detterent!

Oh yeah, that data is from the FBI. Again, they’re not anti-death penalty.

http://davecoop.net/2007.htm
http://davecoop.net/1990.htm
http://bit.ly/deathpenaltydeterrence

Hmm…

Governor Ryan, by the way, issued the mass commutations in 2000. It was a whole three years later that his resignation came (2003), and six years later (2006) that he was charged by Patrick Fitzgerald. Please connect the dots for me, because I’m really not understanding the supposed link between the commutations and his corruption as governor.

And Patrick Fitzgerald doesn’t exactly seem to be singing the praises of Illinois’ death penalty. He arrested Jon Burge, the torturer who put many innocents on death row by obtaining false confessions.

” But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.” —Luke 6:27-31. NIV

As goes the 1 in 8 stat, I described it incorrectly.

It’s 1 exoneration for every 8 executions. I’ll do the math:

exoneration (http://definr.com/exoneration)

1,136 executions since Gregg v. Georgia
130 exonerations since Gregg v. Georgia
1,136 / 130 = 8.73, or 11.44 percent

If you’re having to release one person for every eight you kill, there’s something very wrong. And please don’t use excuses like blaming the appeals process.

“Freedom has many difficulties … but at least we did not have to put a wall up to keep our people in” JFK

Instead you kill your people (FWIW, after his brothers’ murders, Ted Kennedy was a staunch death penalty opponent. In 1968, RFK was seriously considering signing abolition legislation.)

Frankly, it isn’t important to the morality of the death penalty whether or not you put innocents at risk. It happens to be the case that you put many innocents at risk, but the main issue is that killing is wrong, whoever does it.

As far as what you said about people of faith ‘creating a god of [their] own image’, that’s not really a good statement to make, considering

‘Thou shalt not kill’ -10 Commandments
‘Whomever of you is without doubt cast the first stone’ -Jesus
‘You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.’ —Matthew 5:38-42, NIV

To be frank, pro-death penalty advocates are the one creating a God of their own image. For some God forsaken reason (literally) they are inventing a God who is uncompassionate and full of hatred and anger. That is not the Christian God, the Jewish God, or the deity of any other religion.

As Gandhi said, ‘An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind’

You write: That the monicide rate in New York City is 7.3 per 100,000

The exoneration rate in US death rows is 2% since 1973.

2% / 0.0073% = 273.97

So the exoneration rate — the rate of innocence, shall we say — is almost 274 times larger than the possibility of being murdered in the US’s most populous city.

—————–

Some reality

Murder rate NYC 6 per 100000
exoneration (actual innocence) 25 per 8000 0.3%

All of the actual innocents from death row have been released. Still alive.

Of all the government programs in the world, that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty?
 
Unlikely.

You write: “the 130 is not a scam, it cannot be. The Department of Justice provides that statistic. It is a statistic of those who *have* been released, not because of commutations, but because of exonerations a la actual innocence.”

No, it’s an anti death penalty scam.

I provided many links to show you precisely what was going on, plus a detailed review that the exonerated definition is a new one , made up by anti death penalty folks and does not mean actual innocence, as the anti death penalty folks admit.

Let me guess. You didn’t read any of it.

But, your welcome to show me your Justice department link. Where is it? I’ll read it.

I did not misread what Northwestern said. Their standards are so poor I say there is much reasonable doubt in all of their stated case as to whether any were actually innocent.

I appreciate your links to non US cases. Can you direct me to government sites that confirm those claims?

“Perhaps the bleakest fact of all is that the death penalty is imposed not only in a freakish and discriminatory manner, but also in some cases upon defendants who are actually innocent.”
-William J. Brennan

sharp: About 10% of all murders within the US might qualify for a death penalty eligible trial. That would be about 64,000 murders since 1973. We have sentenced 8000 murderers to death since then, or 13% of those eligible. I doubt that there is any other crime which receives a higher percentage of maximum sentences, when mandatory sentences are not available. Based upon that, as well as pre trial, trial, appellate and clemency/commutation realities, the US death penalty is likely the least arbitrary and capricious criminal sanctions in the US.

“There’s no question, in my mind, that someone has slipped through the cracks and that an innocent person has been executed.”
-Jay Burnett, former Harris County criminal court judge.

Sharp: No doubt, but no proof.

Not only to you refuse to fact check, you make things up.

I have never thought nor stated that I am “not concerned about executing an innocent person.”

It is a dispicable thing for you to make up, as well a immature nonsense.

I said no one was concerned about executing a legally innocent person. Because, we can’t.

The concern is with executing an actually innocent person.

I made that very clear. So, I now, must suspect you are being intentionally dishonest.

Josh, give me a link to the Texas case. A Texas link, not an anti death penalty site. I’ll take a look at it. Very likely it does not say what you say it does. You are so error prone there is no way to accept what you say. And if such a case of government acknowledged execution of an innocent in Texas actually existed, I would have heard aout it and I haven’t.

So, show your proof.

I have never said that Troy Davis was guilty, legally guilty or “actually guilty”.

You just made it up. Please, stop doing that. Is it too much to ask?

Of course, everyone acknowledges his legal guilt. It is the actual guilt that the debate is about. As you well know, when you want to admit it.

See the difference?

There *are* documented cases of exonerations posthumously. The Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles does not issue exonerations, certainly not posthumous ones, callously.

So considering that even Texas accepts there have been wrongful executions, how can you make such a statement.

And let’s not forget Troy. 7 out of 9 witnesses recant. The Georgia Supreme Court current and former chief justices vote for a retrial evidentiary hearing. The Eleventh Circuit issues a third stay. Death penalty supporters express concern. Sylvester Coles is stated in sworn affidavits as having admitted three times to the crime. Sylvester Coles ditched a weapon of the same caliber as the murder weapon (caliber determined by bullet forensic analysis) on the night of the murder. Sylvester Coles refuses to comment on allegations. Federal judge chastises Georgia deputy attorney general for pathetically failing to include Coles, a suspect immediately after the murder, in witness parades.

And you say Troy is guilty.

And SCOTUS makes wrong decisions sometimes. A bunch of ideologically-unshifting right-wingers such as Scalia and Alito do not define morality merely because they vote to uphold inhumanity.

Have you heard of the Dredd Scott decision? Later overruled, for (very) good reason. The outcome of Baze v. Rees (SCOTUS, decided April 2008) has been termed by legal experts as “the Dredd Scott decision of our time.”

Also, I believe you misinterpreted the Northwestern study.

It said “While innocence has not been proven in any specific case, there is no reasonable doubt that some of the executed prisoners were innocent.”

I think you misread it; they’re saying that there is “no doubt that some of the executions prisoners were innocent.”

There have, of course, been other such studies. It is, of course, likely that they will uncover different results, based upon whether they were including pre-Furman (v. Georgia) or merely post-Gregg (v. Georgia) executions. Furman being the outlawing of the US death penalty statutes, in 1972, by SCOTUS, and Gregg being the reinstating.

If you’d like to list my ‘error filled claims’, please, go ahead. And remember, you’re only allowed to included ones that actually do include errors, not cases you misinterpreted.

Here’s another case of (yes, actual exoneration) after execution: http://forejustice.org/wc/george_kelly.htm.

In depth list here with full descriptions: http://mitglied.lycos.de/PeterWill/penal9.htm.

“Perhaps the bleakest fact of all is that the death penalty is imposed not only in a freakish and discriminatory manner, but also in some cases upon defendants who are actually innocent.”
-William J. Brennan

“There’s no question, in my mind, that someone has slipped through the cracks and that an innocent person has been executed.”
-Jay Burnett, former Harris County criminal court judge.