Death penalty dead and buried as (Australian) Parliament bans it for good

[Towlie]

Source: The Herald Sun of Melbourne, Australia.

THE death penalty has been buried forever after Federal Parliament passed laws ensuring it can't be reinstated in any jurisdiction.

While no Australian state or territory uses the death penalty, the laws were needed to ensure the situation could never be reintroduced.

Both sides of politics supported the move which is largely seen as symbolic.

Read more: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/death-penalty-dead-and-buried-as-parliasment-bans-it-for-good/story-e6frf7l6-1225839834244

---

This is a harsh reminder of how backward and barbaric America is, compared to other civilized nations.

[Jefferson23]

1. Applause, applause!

[Ignis]

2. Great news.

It's great to see another country join the civilized, modern world. :thumbsup:

[ColesCountyDem]

3. Good!

:thumbsup:

[Imajika]

4. Nothing can be banned for good...

If Australians decide they want the Death Penalty back in 25 years, they will figure out a way to do it.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

7. Yes, but it'll be harder. -nt

[liberalhistorian]

5. Good. Too bad we can't

be as civilized here. Then again, we bankrupt our sick and think nothing of it, so I guess that shouldn't be too much of a surprise.

[Xenotime]

6. I might have to move there if HCR doesn't pass.

[Libertas1776]

8. The reality is that America is just

a collection of tiny little countries we call states. You can't blame the 16 some odd states plus territories that banned the DP or found it unconstitutional for the barbarity of those that didn't. New York, which has nearly the same population of the entire nation of Australia, declared the DP unconstitutional a few years ago. Michigan, which is at least half the size of Australia in population was the first English speaking government in the world to ban the DP in 1846. It's not fair to label the entire country as barbarous. Under the Federal system of a union of 50 states and territories, the sane and logical citizens and territories must coincide with the barbarians whether they like it or not.

[depakid]

12. Actually, if the Supreme Court had used different legal reasoning 38 years ago

in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furman_v._Georgia#Concurrences">Furman v. Georgia America wouldn't be lumped in there with the Muslim and Asian nations.

Had the Court ruled- as Brennan and Marshall urges, that the death penalty was cruel and unusual punishment proscribed by the 8th Amendment that would have been that unless a later court overturned the decision or Americans passed a constitutional amendment restoring their right to execute people.

As it is- the court's gone even further down the road to violent retribution: The majority in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herrera_v._Collins">Herrera v. Collins concluded that the 8th Amendment doesn't even allow a person to assert a claim in federal court of actual innocence to prevent their execution, as long as they've had due process!

To which Justice Blackmun wrote in dissent: "N]othing could be more contrary to contemporary standards of decency or more shocking to the conscience than to execute a person who is actually innocent."

Four months after the Court's ruling, the state of Texas executed Herrera. His last words were: "I am innocent, innocent, innocent. . . . I am an innocent man, and something very wrong is taking place tonight.



http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty

[Libertas1776]

16. Yes, unfortunately

we are also at the whim of a court that has too much power invested in itself for its own good.

[rpannier]

50. I thought the French Government did in the 1790's for a short period

You probably know better then I, but I do remember reading Robespierre was opposed to the Death Penalty and had proposed instituting it in the early stages after the Revolution had seized power.
I thought he got it through and later it was changed.

I could easily be wrong.
The only thing I am sure of was that Robespierre had proposed eliminating it -- Either way, his proposal obviously failed

[Libertas1776]

54. If they did, they would be the first French Speaking Govt to do so

I said that Michigan was the first "English speaking" government in the world to abolish the DP. :)

[rpannier]

55. Sorry

Screwed up on two points

1. English speaking

2. was opposed to the Death Penalty and had proposed instituting it... After reading it I realize opposed and instituting do not go together in the sentence

[DavidDvorkin]

9. Good for them!

[proteus_lives]

10. "Backward and barbaric"?

Maybe to you but a lot of Americans support the death penalty. (Including this DUer.)

[prolesunited]

11. Why?

What does society gain from it?

[proteus_lives]

18. The absence of murderers and rapists.

[Occulus]

21. Go tell that to the

Innocence Project.

One wrongfully executed citizen is enough to demand the elimination of the death penalty on the Federal level. Just one.

[Ignis]

22. +1, but expect *crickets* from the blood-thirsty. (nt)

[proteus_lives]

27. By that logic, we shouldn't have prisons either.

Innocent people go to prison, do support not sending anyone to jail?

[mvd]

30. You don't die when sent to prison

I applaud Australia's decision.

[proteus_lives]

34. That that to all the dead from attacks, poor medical care and suicides.

[mvd]

36. It's still a life that can't be brought back

We just value what that means differently.

[The Doctor.]

39. That's a joke, right?

Cause last I checked, every state with the death penalty still has murder and rape.

Meanwhile, would you accept being wrongfully accused and executed next year if it would make one murderer or rapist re-think committing a the crime?

[proteus_lives]

43. Murderers and rapists in jail.

What reason is there for them to sit in a cell on the state's dime for 50-60 years?

[The Doctor.]

44. So it costs less to execute them?

Meanwhile, I did ask you a question before that.

[proteus_lives]

48. I don't know, would you?

Would you let yourself be tortured to death if meant a terrorist didn't walk into an embassy with a bomb?

[The Doctor.]

75. WTF does that have to do with anything?

I don't believe in using torture to prevent attacks... it doesn't work. So your question is utterly irrelevant.

You believe in the death penalty.

My question to you was relevant. Do you accept that you would be executed, never to have the chance to prove your innocence, if it meant that others who were actually guilty would be put to death?

[ronnie624]

45. So the innocent don't die along with the guilty. n/t

[ImOnlySleeping]

69. $

It does actually cost several times more to execute than jail for life

http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&source=hp&q=cost+execution+vs+life+prison&meta=&aq=0&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=cost+execution+&gs_rfai=&fp=1e76ebc91b139a28

Which is really besides the point. Most moral decisions aren't made on a cost analysis basis.

[Ignis]

78. Thanks for answering the cost question.

Here's hoping people read it...though hopes aren't high. :hi:

[sabrina 1]

47. Only 62 countries around the world still

have the death penalty. Of those some, like Taiwan, have had a moratorium on carrying out death sentences for the past several years.

We are not in good company. China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the United States and Pakistan account for over 90% of all executions worldwide. Even Saudi Arabia seems to be making more progress than the U.S. They have stopped executing people who were minors when they commit murder.

It is a barbaric practice and does not prevent murder or violence and has little effect on prevention of crime if any.

Life in prison without parole if there is no hope of rehabilitation, will keep murderers and rapists away from society.

The number of innocent people who have been sentenced to death is enough to end it. We don't know how many have actually been wrongfully executed. We do know that Texas killed a man for murders he did not commit recently.

[FarrenH]

76. Assuming the person executed is actually guilty of course

The death penalty is the only sentence that cannot be rescinded, once it has been carried out. The blood of innocents isn't worth it. And innocents will inevitably die in any country that executes people.

[nyc 4 Biden]

77. actually those who conduct the execution are technically murderers.

so we lose one but we also gain one. i'm not in favor of any government sanctioned killings.

[proteus_lives]

98. No.

They're not breaking any laws.

[LeftishBrit]

88. Really? Is there any evidence that countries with the DP have fewer rapists or murderers than

countries without it?

[proteus_lives]

99. Not what I was saying.

An executed murderer or rapist means there are fewer murderers or rapisrs in the world.

[LeftishBrit]

100. Only if they are not replaced by others.

There is no evidence that having the death penalty reduces the total number of rapists or murderers in the world. If this were true, there would be fewer rapists and murderers in places that have the death penalty.

[depakid]

13. Puts you in the same class with Saudi Arabia, Iran & China

But hey- at least it's not more American exceptionalism- but rather, like torture- a wilful decision to behave like the worst elements of humanity.

[proteus_lives]

19. Not really.

Saudi Arabia-We don't execute people because of religious law.

Iran- We don't execute people for being homosexual or because of protesting.

China- We don't chop up the bodies and sell the organs.

But as usual, your desperation to anti-American clouds on you this issue. Nothing new from you.

[depakid]

20. Of course it does!

That their reasons and justifications for execution (or torture) vary from yours is simply a difference of degree- and not of kind.

In addition, Americans DO in practice execute people on the basis of religion doctrine. Hence the constant refrains from the Old Testament.

[proteus_lives]

29. Sorry, executing some for murder doesn't have any thing to do with religion.

We don't behead or stone them to death.

Yeah, thanks for admitting it. There are reasons to execute people. And some of us agree with those reasons.

[mvd]

31. And many don't agree, including me

:hi:

[proteus_lives]

33. That's fine with me.

I never require anyone to agree with me on DU. I love have conversations with people who have different POVs.

:hi:

[mvd]

35. Thank you for being respectful

:hi:

[Violet_Crumble]

56. Can I ask a question about yr POV?

I already read something from you that you were opposed to gun control. Now with this very very strong support of the death penalty and what seems to be a support of torture of suspected terrorists in another post in this thread, do you mind me asking what views you hold that aren't ones that are held mainly by conservatives? I'm a bit confused by politics in the US and am aware that there are some people who call themselves liberals who have views that are indistinguishable from those of mainstream conservatives...

[proteus_lives]

58. You may.

I don't support torture, I was be snarky about a half-assed hypothetical question from another poster.

I might be called conservative in your neck of the woods but in the US I couldn't be called conservative. I can't because I support HCR, equal rights for LGBT folks, abortion rights and the complete separation of church and state. I am fiercely anti-gun control because personal liberty is very important to me. I believe people have the right to say what they please, worship as they please, what goes on between two consenting adults is none of my business and a person should have the right to carry/own a firearm if they so choose. I am in favor of a vast reduction in our drug laws and I want big companies held accountable for their actions. I want manufacturing brought back to America. I would not be welcomed in the conservative movement.

I might stick out a little on DU because I don't agreeing on one issue means you have to agree on all of them. I don't support the DP in all cases but I believe that in many cases the DP is an appropriate response. I always find it interesting that anti-DP folks who accuse me of bloodlust often say things like "He should suffer in prison for the rest of his life."

I think it's difficult sometimes to sum-up a philosophy in a forum post. The world is rarely black and white and I try not have that POV.

Would I call myself a liberal? Yes. Would others? maybe not.

[Violet_Crumble]

64. Thanks for the thoughtful answer...

I appreciate you doing that. I'm in total agreement with you on those except for gun control and the death penalty (and of course we don't agree on much in regard to the I/P conflict) :)

[proteus_lives]

65. No problem.

I don't think agreement is required for good conversation. I think the world would be a perfectly boring place if everyone agreed about everything.
:hi:

[depakid]

37. Hint: there's a reason why executions are more popular and prevalent in Fundy states

And they're not different in kind from those in Saudi Arabia and Iran.

No other Western nation finds it acceptable to execute people (not even Russia does anymore).

Which leaves the US- once again alone, much as it is with its health care system, paying tons more money to satisfy political and religious ideology- as well as to mollify base emotion.

[Paladin]

23. Not Much New From You, Either...... (n/t)

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. You do realise that killing people is far, far worse than selling the organs afterwards, don't you?

Really, it's ridiculous to pretend that the selling of the organs is at all significant compared to the execution. If it was about 'respect for the body', then you wouldn't kill the person in the first place, would you?

[proteus_lives]

28. It's the black-market for organs and corrupt Chinese officials executing prisoners for their organs.

[muriel_volestrangler]

60. As opposed to US officials up for election, and keen to satisfy bloodthirsty voters

by proving their ruthlessness. I think it's fair to group China and the US states that kill in the same category on the subject of the death penalty.

[trumad]

67. Question to you

Do you think there have been innocent people executed in this country via the death penalty?

Yes or no?

[proteus_lives]

79. Yes.

[trumad]

80. and you still support the death penalty?

[proteus_lives]

91. Yes.

[trumad]

92. So

taking a few innocent lives---er accidentally is for the greater good. Is that your case?

[proteus_lives]

93. Greater good is an interesting way to put it.

Let me ask you this.

Do you go to a doctor?

Ever drive on a highway?

[trumad]

94. You didn't answer my question

which is specific to the death penalty.

Innocent people have been put to death via state sanctioned killing. Innocent people have been saved from execution because of DNA evidence, etc.

I use to be pro-death penalty until it became evident that innocent people have been put to death and that innocent people sit and have sat on death row.

You stated that you believe that innocent people have been put to death via the death penalty.

Knowing that and knowing that innocent people have been saved from execution---how can you morally be for the death penalty?

Is your answer "mistakes happen---so what"?

[proteus_lives]

95. Because I believe far more guilty people have executed then innocent.

Most people on death row, like in prison in general deserve to be there.

So if the system were 100% perfect, you'd be pro-death penalty?

[trumad]

96. The system will never be 100 percent perfect.......

that's why I'm against it.

If it were... nah---my attitude has changed over the years..... being that we're about the only civilized country that executes their won citizens---that kind of bothers me.

[proteus_lives]

97. Perfection doesn't exist.

In anything. Looking for it breeds nothing but heartbreak.

What does them being U.S. citizens have to do with it? Like I said, 99% of them earned their fate. Doesn't matter where they come from.

[trumad]

81. and you still support the death penalty?

[time_has_come]

15. Being a DUer don't give you a pass...

...it is backward and barbaric...and I'd add to that misguided and moronic...just as much as torture is, for example.
Many Americans support torture, and maybe a few DUers do as well. They might believe the old "smoking gun" scenario gives them reason to support it or that information gotten through torture is useful and has really saved lives. Lot's of Americans also believe that Iraq was a smart war to wage and that Saddam was a WMD threat to the US.
Backward thinking? Absolutely no question. Do DUers or "many Americans" believing and supporting these things change what they are? Nope.

[Bill McBlueState]

25. A lot of Americans also support torture n/t

[rpannier]

49. A lot of Americans support

Public School Prayer
Making all Abortions illegal in many if not all circumstances
Torturing suspected terrorists
3 strikes laws

I'm opposed to the Death Penalty, but I have family that supports it.
I don't support an idea that because a lot of people support anything that it makes more justifiable, which is the argument I hear you giving.

If I misunderstood (not misunderestimate <sorry I had to throw in a Bushism>) what you were saying I apologize in advance.

[Violet_Crumble]

53. Yes, it's backward and barbaric...

Just because a lot of Americans think something's great doesn't make it that way. If a lot of Americans want abortion made illegal, does that mean making abortion illegal is what should be done?

While countries that are far advanced have abolished the death penalty, the US is in good company with countries like Iran and China where it hasn't been abolished...

[OneBlueSky]

62. it all has to do with what kind of society a nation aspires to be . . .

Australia is saying "We aspire to be a society that holds life itself in the highest possible regard. We intend that our government, which we elect and which represents us, set an example that honors life by not using murder as punishment for crime, no matter how horrific. Two wrongs, after all, do not make a right, and only by honoring life as the highest manifestation of creation can we teach our children to value human life intrinsically and unconditionally."

By abolishing the death penalty, Australia is teaching by example that life is a precious gift, and that honoring and protecting human life should be (and, in fact, now IS) one of the nation's highest values. Sounds like something the US of A should try. For as long as we tell our kids that it's okay for the government to take a life, it's only a short hop to them believing that it's also okay for individuals to take lives, given the right set of circumstances. And with the murder rate in this country surpassing that of all other "civilized" nations, it seems that's exactly what they ARE learning, much to our dismay. Seems to me it's time to try a new approach.

Now if they would only also abolish war as a way of settling international differences . . . (sigh) . . .

[proteus_lives]

63. I don't buy that.

"For as long as we tell our kids that it's okay for the government to take a life, it's only a short hop to them believing that it's also okay for individuals to take lives, given the right set of circumstances."

You really think people are that dim? It reeks of absolving people of personal responsibility for their actions.

"Two wrongs, after all, do not make a right"

That only works if you believe the death penalty is wrong.

[Orsino]

74. The death penalty is backward and barbaric. n/t

[JerseygirlCT]

90. I'll wholeheartedly agree with backward and barbaric

Puts us in such nice company, too - Saudi Arabia, Iran...

[Uncle Joe]

14. Kicked and recommended for Australia's enlightenment.

Thanks for the thread, Towlie.:thumbsup:

[time_has_come]

17. Fabulous news. The DP is a cancer upon any society. n/t

[troubledamerican]

26. U.S. is miles & miles & miles & miles away from this type of civilized society

[mvd]

32. The company that the U.S. is in is telling..

as most of the countries that have it are authoritarian.

Reasons I am against it:

- Killing the person won't make up for the killer's killing someone
- Can't have a perfect justice system
- State has too much power
- Against my morals
- Expensive
- Doesn't deter
- The media ignores stories from family members who don't want to re-live the crime again with the death penalty

I understand the emotion, as I once supported the DP in extreme cases. But no longer.

[troubledamerican]

38. + 1

"The company that the U.S. keeps is telling..."

Ohhhh yes.

[kentauros]

68. I like all of your reasons and would add the following:

- It makes victims out of the murderer's family, too.
- There is a major detrimental effect on those performing or responsible for the executions. They often end up permanently scarred by doing such a thing as a job

There used to be a Houston Press story about this last one, but I can't find it on their site any more...

[stevedeshazer]

40. +1

[Arugula Latte]

41. Why are other countries so much more sane and civilized than ours?

[defendandprotect]

42. Good for them . . . now we need to defeat it again here in the US . . .

[G_j]

46. Bravo!

[canetoad]

51. Actually, it goes a little further than the death penalty

Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill 2009
Date introduced: 19 November 2009
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Attorney-General
Commencement: On the day after the Royal Assent.
Links: The relevant links to the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum and second reading speech can be accessed via BillsNet, which is at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/. When Bills have been passed they can be found at ComLaw, which is at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.

Purpose
The purpose of the Bill is to:
•amend the Criminal Code Act 1995 (the Criminal Code Act) to include a specific torture offence, and
•amend the Death Penalty Abolition Act 1973 (Death Penalty Abolition Act) to extend the application of the current prohibition on the death penalty to state laws to ensure that the death penalty cannot be reintroduced anywhere in Australia.

Torture prohibition
On 8 August 1989, Australia ratified the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (UNCAT).1 The UNCAT requires states to take effective measures to prevent torture within their borders, and forbids states to return people to their home country if there is reason to believe they will be tortured. The UNCAT is supplementary to Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which provide that no one may be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

* * *

Full bill here: http://www.aph.gov.au/Library/pubs/bd/2009-10/10bd091.pdf

[Loudmxr]

52. Here is why the Death Penalty is logically wrong. Briefly.

1. It is unfair because if you have money there is almost no chance of getting the death penalty.

2. It is unjust because it is applied in disproportion to minorities.

3. It takes away, forever, a valuable resource for law enforcement. Cold cases are denied the input of really bad but connected people. I would like to ask Timothy McVeigh if the infamous "third guy" was Al Queda. Every one agrees Larry Nicols never met Mr Third Guy. But I can't ask TM. Because he is dead.

There is a very good argument for the death penalty in a perfect world. We do not live in a perfect world. Justice is flawed so the next best thing is life in prison.

I could also write about those who "believe" in the death penalty really don't "believe" in it. But that is for another time.

I do not accept the death penalty as a just punishment within our society.

[SeattleGirl]

57. Good! I wish we would do the same here.

I know that in the heat of the moment, I would probably want to throttle the killer of someone I loved until they died, but only in the heat of the moment.

Once I had a chance to calm down, I would stand on the side of no death penalty.

I know, some of you may say, "Yeah, but I bet you'd feel differently if it were one of YOUR loved ones who was murdered!"

But I will tell you this: TWO people in my life who I loved very much were murdered, and I would still say the same thing.


"An eye for an eye" just doesn't cut it for me.

[rasputin1952]

59. Kick...

:kick:

[spicegal]

61. It has really become apparent how uncivilized our country really is, whether it's

healthcare, the death penalty, or being anti-science and uneducated. Doesn't do much for my national pride and feels like we're moving backwards.

[Lorien]

73. We ARE moving backwards. Pre-Reagan we were a much more enlightened society

but even here on DU you can't get people behind the idea of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine. It's repeal is what lead to the drowning of Liberalism, reason and common sense in America.

[marmar]

66. A civilized and wise decision by Australia.....

A society does not become better by doing the thing it purports to hold in contempt.

Murder, whether committed by individuals or the state, is still murder.

[myrna minx]

70. K&R. Congratulations Australia. n/t

[Bill McBlueState]

71. When comparing this to the situation in the US,

people should realize that 13 states, one quarter of them, have outlawed the death penalty altogether, and several other states have it on the books but don't or almost never use it. We could make a lot of headway by focusing on the handful of states that execute people on a monthly basis.

[Lorien]

72. I guess the repugs won't want to move there anymore

the adore killing people.

[anakie]

82. Symbolic gesture

as the article mentions. Australia has not had a judicial execution since Feb, 1967 - 33 years ago.

Here is a wiki link to anyone interested


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Ryan


Peace

[warm regards]

83. That's what they said about the alcohol when they passed the 18th Amendment.

[warm regards]

84. Actually, I believe one could argue that it is backward and barbaric to afford

someone like John Couey (a man who raped and murdered a 9 year old girl), the privilege of sharing the planet with those of us who are civilized and non-barbaric.

Having said that, I too oppose the death penalty; but not because I believe it is wrong. Rather, I do not believe the death penalty is applied evenly across the lines of race, gender and economic/social status.

[Posteritatis]

85. Nice to see a law from Australia that isn't obscene for once. (nt)

[golfguru]

86. I want death penalty remain for criminals who

murder children and life sentences for criminals who
rape & torture children.

[dipsydoodle]

87. Doesn't make it clear

whether the abolition includes the death penalty for treason or refers only to murder. :shrug:

[JerseygirlCT]

89. Good on them! nt

[ProudDad]

101. K&R - Hear, Hear!!! (n/t)

[ProudDad]

102. 10 Reasons to Oppose the Death Penalty

By 2004, 118 countries had abolished the death penalty, in law or practice. An average of three countries abolish the death penalty every year. The worldwide trend towards abolition of the death penalty is reflected in the Africa region, where 24 members of the African Union had abolished the death penalty, in law or practice, by 1 October 2004.(1) Here are ten reasons for the total abolition of this degrading and inhuman punishment:

1 - the death penalty violates the right to life.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) recognises each person’s right to life. Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples´ Rights (ACHPR) states that "human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and the physical and moral integrity of his person." This view is reinforced by the existence of international and regional treaties providing for the abolition of the death penalty, notably the second optional protocol of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1989.

2 - the death penalty is a cruel and inhuman death.

The UDHR categorically states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."All forms of execution are inhuman. No government can guarantee a dignified and painless death to condemned prisoners, who also suffer psychological pain in the period between their sentence and execution.

3 - the death penalty has no dissuasive effect.

No scientific study has proved that the death penalty has a more dissuasive effect on crime than other punishments. The most recent investigation into the links of cause and effect between capital punishment and the murder rate, was conducted by the United Nations in 1988 and updated in 2002. It came to the following conclusion: "...it is not prudent to accept the hypothesis that capital punishment deters murder to a marginally greater extent than does the threat and application of the supposedly lesser punishment of life imprisonment."

4 - the death penalty is premeditated murder, demeans the state and makes society more violent.

By executing a person, the state commits a murder and shows the same readiness to use physical violence against its victim as the criminal. Moreover, studies have shown that the murder rate increases immediately after executions. Researchers have suggested that this increase is similar to that caused by other violent public events, such as massacres and assassinations.

5 - the death penalty is discriminatory in its application.

Throughout the world, the death penalty is disproportionately used against disadvantaged people. Some condemned prisoners from the most impoverished social classes would not have been sentenced to death if they were from wealthier sectors of society. In these cases, either the accused are less able to find their way through the maze of the judicial system (because of a lack of knowledge, confidence or financial means), or the system reflects the generally negative attitude of society and the powerful towards them. It has also been proved that certain criminals run a greater risk of being condemned to death if their victims come from higher social classes.

6 - the death penalty denies the capacity of people to mend their ways and become a better person.

Defenders of the death penalty consider that anyone sentenced to death is unable to mend their ways and could re-offend at any time if they are released. However, there are many examples of offenders who have been reintegrated and who have not re-offended. Amnesty International believes that the way to prevent re-offending is to review procedures for conditional release and the psychological monitoring of prisoners during detention, and under no circumstances to increase the number of executions. In addition, the death penalty removes any possibility for the condemned person to repent.

7 - the death penalty cannot provide social stability nor bring peace to the victims.

An execution cannot give the victim his or her life back nor ease the suffering felt by their family. Far from reducing the pain, the length of the trial and the appeal procedure often prolong the family’s suffering.

8 - the death penalty denies the fallibility of human institutions.

The risk of executing innocent people remains indissolubly linked to the use of the death penalty. Since 1973, 116 people condemned to death in the United States have been released after proof of their innocence has been established. Some of them have only just escaped execution, after having passed years on death row. These repeated judicial errors have been especially due to irregularities committed by prosecution or police officers, recourse to doubtful evidence, material information or confessions, or the incompetence of defence lawyers. Other prisoners have been sent to their deaths when serious doubts existed about their guilt.

9 - the death penalty is a collective punishment.

This punishment affects all the family, friends and those sympathising with the condemned person. The close relatives of an executed prisoner, who generally do not have anything to do with the crime, could feel, as a result of the death penalty, the same dreadful sense of loss as the victim’s parents felt at the death of their loved one.

10 - the death penalty goes against the religious and humanist values that are common to all humanity.

Human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent. They are based on many traditions that can be found in all civilizations. All religions advocate clemency, compassion and forgiveness and it is on these values that Amnesty International bases its opposition to the death penalty.

http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAFR010132004?open&of=ENG-2AF
http://www.ncadp.org/index.cfm?content=5
http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?list=type&type=24

-------------------------

Personally, I'm against Life without Parole. I believe that nearly every human being has within her/him the capacity to achieve rehabilitation and I don't believe in throwing away human lives.