I don't think that is true, but if you can find some examples to illustrate your point then I will accept that as minor point against the death penalty. MY example against your assertion is, the Bega schoolgirl murders. Two men who were on parole, and who were facing very serious charges which would have resulted in very serious jail time, thought they had nothing to lose by abducting two schoolgirls in Bega, NSW. They raped them and then murdered them. Had they known that such behaviour would earn them the gallows, they might have considered that they had a lot more to lose, and those two girls might still be alive.Sprintcyclist wrote
In a crime situation, if the offenders are possibly facing the death penalty, well, it does not matter what they do.
It can make situations worse for victims.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFbeb1shTZ0
In addition, the death penalty can be used as a bargaining chip by prosecutors who make deals with the accused. Gary Ridgeway, the Green River serial killer, who murdered over 60 young women, was offered a deal by prosecutors to plead guilty and give up the locations of the bodies, in order to spare him the death penalty when he was convicted. Ridgeway pleaded guilty, the state avoided paying for an extremely lengthy and expensive trial, and the families of the dead girls were able to recover their loved ones bodies.
Here in Australia, Ivan Milat was believed to have murdered several more missing young people, but had nothing to lose by not admitting to those crimes. The threat of the noose may have loosened his tongue and more murders may have been solved, and more bodies recovered for their loved ones to bury.
I am not proposing the death penalty as general punishment for murder. Only for those who commit the most heinous of crimes, like mass murder, terrorism, the abduction and rape of women and children, serial killers, hired murderers, serious drug traffickers, career criminals who never reform, those who are jailed for murder who serve their sentences and then kill again, those who murder while in custody, and those who kill or maim police officers and prison warders.Sprintcyclist wrote
If an offender is deranged mentally or by drugs, they will likely not consider the penalties anyway.
Under the British system, a condemned person gets no more than two weeks to live after conviction.Sprintcyclist wrote
In the US they provide legal avenues for the prisoners, that costs all the money.
Australia has more than 60 terrorists serving very long sentences at $100,000 dollars p.a. to keep them locked up. $6 million dollars a year. Hiring a backhoe costs $60 dollars an hour, and a bullet costs 15 cents.
