Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Judges Responsible For Grossly Uneven Executions

Judges Responsible For Grossly Uneven Executions
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

======
Also see "Judges as Jackasses"
======

 re: Why only 2% of counties are responsible for 51% of all executions

 The three primary reasons for executions being limited to so few counties are these: 1) Very few of the counties will have the majority of capital murders; 2) Judges are responsible for grossly uneven executions and 3) prosecutors make the choices to seek or reject the death penalty and they will always vary on support or rejection of the death penalty, prosecutorial discresion, which will, of course, affect the number of death sentences and executions.

 Virtually all media, completely, avoided a reality check on this issue.

Judges are responsible for grossly uneven executions, demonstrating dictatorial like contempt for the law in those states where it is, virtually, impossible to execute confirmed murderers. Some states execute 70% of their death sentenced murderers, others 0%.

 Prosecutors know this.

If abortions had to be, individually, approved or rejected, by judicial ruling, and some states approved them at a 50-80% rate and others at a 0-10% rate, do you think the media might notice? 

Would they blame the judges or abortions?

With such uneven enforcement, with the death penalty, the media will just blame . . . well . . . the death penalty.  Completely irresponsible and false.

======

 The media seemed astounded that 2% of US counties account for 51% of the executions.

 The Dallas Morning News writes:

"The report illustrates the nation’s grossly uneven use of the death penalty, with 2 percent of the counties responsible for most executions, far out of proportion to their population."

 The DMN, as most media, missed both the forest and the trees. Why? They didn't even look. They, intentionally, blind folded themselves.

 Judges are responsible for grossly uneven executions.

 Does population matter?

 There are 3144 counties (aka as parishes & others). 

 If we look at the 2% of the counties, with the highest number of death penalty convictions in death penalty states I suspect we will be in the ballpark of having a majority (51%) of the nation's capital murders, in death penalty states, with the greatest variable in executions, caused by the judges, the case managers. 

In 2002, the 75 largest counties had 51% of murders and non-negligent manslaughters, 61% of robberies and 36% of forcible rapes, nationally (1), which is in the ballpark of 60-70% of what we know as capital, death penalty eligible murders, inclusive of robbery/murders, rape/murders, police murders, multiple and serial murders, in death penalty eligible counties.

 75 is nearly 2.4% of all counties, both death penalty eligible and not.

 In other words, we should expect  that 2% of US counties would account for 51% of the executions. 

 Yet, somehow, the media was surprised.

 When you don't fact check, vet or think that happens.

 As far as executions, will population matter?  No.

 This study wrongly included all NON death penalty counties, making a typical inaccurate mess, as the anti-death penalty Death Penalty (Mis)Information Center (DPIC) often does.

 New York state had the death penalty for a very short time and New York City, the most populous city, possibly in the second most populous count(ies) (NYC includes 5 counties), and the state gave very few death penalties, none of which were carried out. State courts threw out their death penalty as unconstitutional.

 Michigan has three counties in the top 63, by population, one county with a  perennial murder leader, Detroit, and has not had the death penalty for over a century. but is included in this review, as were all other non death penalty jurisdictions.

32 out of the 63 most populous counties, either have never had the death penalty, in the modern era, execute very little or not, at all (2).

 There are four factors, responsible for the study results,  which weigh much more heavily than do population counts:

1) the improper inclusion of non-death penalty counties, by DPIC, the source;
2) elected district attorneys have discretion which, likely, reflects the philosophy of the majority population who voted for those prosecutors, who may be anti or pro death penalty, as their voters wished, as we would expect;
3) Total numbers of capital murders in the death penalty counties;
4) The most decisive factor, by far, is the state and federal judges. 

 I found no media outlet that considered any of those. 

California has the largest population of death row inmates, because many of the counties and their DA's support the death penalty and because the courts either block executions or cause huge delays in appeals (4), as is/was the case in New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and others;

 In addition, Governor Brown, intentionally, did nothing, for seven years, after a judicial ruling that the California's execution protocol was unconstitutional. How long would it have taken for California to receive the well known constitutionally approved execution protocols, from the four most active execution states?

 5 minutes, at most.

 If California had the death row clearance rate of Virginia, California would, now, in 2019, have 47 inmates on death row, not nearly 780.

 New Jersey judges would never allow any executions;

 A federal judge in Connecticut threatened to disbar an attorney, because his client, serial rapist/murderer Michael Ross, had volunteered for execution. That remains the single execution in Connecticut, which ONLY occurred because that judge was put in his place, by a superior court, and because Ross "volunteered".

 Pennsylvania judges are a little bit better, they do allow "volunteers" to be executed, without threatening disbarment, but won't allow executions for any murderers that pursue appeals;

 Texas and Virginia have executed about 50% (510) and 70% (110) of their death row murderers, respectively, because their judges are not obstructionists to the law (3).

 Nationally, within appeals, inmates are twice as likely (42%, 3481 cases) to be removed from death row by means other than execution or other death (21%, 1737) (3).

The opposite of Virginia, where inmates are 4.1 times more likely (76%, 115) to be removed from death row by execution or other death than to be removed by other means (18%, 28) (2).

Why such a disparity? The judges.

Judges are, by far, the dominant factor in the exclusive geography of executions. Their discretion, as to their observance and respect of death penalty law or contempt and disregard of it, dictates if murderers will be executed.

 Judges are responsible for grossly uneven executions, demonstrating dictatorial like contempt for the law in those states where it is, virtually, impossible to execute confirmed murderers.

 If abortions had to be individually, approved or rejected, by judicial ruling, and some states approved them at a 50-80% rate and others at a 0-10% rate, do you think the media might notice that it is the judges, not abortions?

 Of course. The criticism of the judges would be overwhelming and everybody knows it.

 ======

Appeals:

For example:

 In Texas, appeals take, on average, nearly 11 years prior to execution, and can go through 4 courts: The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (a Supreme Court that only looks at criminal cases), the Federal District Court, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court, all of which CAN review both direct appeals and the writ.

1) Texas death  penalty cases are overturned 17% of the time. Nationally, absent Texas, 40% of death penalty cases are overturned within appeals (2).

Texas's due process shows a 58% improvement over the national average.

2)  Texas has executed 45% of those sentenced to death. Nationally, absent Texas, that figure is 11% (2).

Texas' appellate record is 310% better than the national average.

NOTE: Virginia has executed 72% (109) of those so sentenced and has an overturning rate of only 11% (2) and executes within 7.1 years, on average (2).

Nationally, within appeals, inmates are twice as likely (42%, 3481 cases) to be removed from death row by means other than execution or other death (21%, 1737) (2).

 The opposite of Virginia, wherein inmates are 4.1 times more likely (76%, 115) to be removed from death row by execution or other death than to be removed by other means (18%, 28) (2).

In the modern death penalty era: 

 Nevada's first 11 executions occurred after about 4.5 years of appeals, on average. 

 Virginia's first 113 executions occurred after 7.1 years of appeals, on average. 

 Nationally, the first 60 executions occurred after about 5 years of appeals, on average (3)

Modern era executions began in 1977.

From 1984-1988, when double digit executions began, it took 6.6 years, on average, of appeals, prior to execution (3), nationally.

6.6 years.

 In 1996, the US Congress passed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, part of which was supposed to quicken death penalty appeals.

 Every year since then, the average time of appeals, until execution, has gotten longer.

From 2009-2013, it took 15 years, on average, prior to execution (3), nationally.

15 years.

 in 2018, 19 years.

State and federal legislatures, attorney general's district attorneys, defense counsel and state and federal judges need to have open meetings to discuss why judges are, deliberately, obstructing the death penalty.

The judges are the case managers and set the schedules, on a case by case basis, pre trial, at trial and on appeals, controlling all timing and costs.

The judges are responsible for grossly uneven executions, demonstrating dictatorial like contempt for the law in those states where it is, virtually, impossible to execute confirmed murderers.

======

FN

 1) Highlights, page 1, State Court Processing Statistics, 1990-2002, Violent Felons in Large Urban Counties, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice,  July 2006, NCJ 205289, http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/vfluc.txt

2)  List of the most populous counties in the United States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_most_populous_counties_in_the_United_States

3)  Capital Punishment, 2012, Bureau of Justice Statistics, last edited 11/3/14,  Table 17, Number sentenced to death and number of removals, by jurisdiction and reason for removal, 1973–2012

======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
Research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts listed)

Posted by at

Thursday, November 07, 2013

86% Death Penalty Support: Highest Ever - April 2013

update 3/2023

86% US Death Penalty Support: Highest Ever? April 2013
(update 86% in 2019, as well)
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

RE: April 29, 2013 Angus Reid Poll (1) - THE POLL YOU NEVER HEARD OF:

 86% death penalty support (1), the highest I have ever located (2)

22% of the 86% finding the death penalty "always appropriate" (1), the highest I have ever located (2)
64% of the 86% finding the death penalty "sometimes appropriate" (1)
9% finding the death penalty "never appropriate" (1), the lowest I have ever located (2)

 78% death penalty support was found from another Angus Reid question, within the same poll (5).

 Yet, October 29, 2013, just 6 months later,  Gallup finds:

 60% death penalty support, their lowest in 40 years (3).

 70% death penalty support was found from another Gallup question, within the same poll (4).  

 The media, rarely, if ever, reports the higher death penalty support, which is found within all Gallup annual death penalty polling, but, only, reports the lowest percentage support poll.

======
Death Penalty Support 72-86% depending upon question (2019-2020)
New Evidence of Broad Support for Death Penalty | RealClearPolicy
Joseph M. Bessette & J. Andrew Sinclair, RealClearPolicy August 16, 2021 
https://www.realclearpolicy.com/2021/08/16/new_evidence_of_broad_support_for_death_penalty_790059.html#! 
 
This study reflects well known polls, for the last 15 years, proving much higher  death penalty support than by the oft quoted, much less accurate Gallup.
======

 THE POLL YOU NEVER HEARD OF (6)

 Gallup had 371  Google search hits within three days of their news release (6)

Angus Reid had 0 - no one carried it - Zero (6)

You never heard of the 86% (or 78%) from Angus Reid, because the media didn't want you to (6).

 Everyone heard about the 60% Gallup poll, because the media wanted you to (6).

 POLLING ACCURACY

 Angus Reid was #1, Gallup #26, with the most recent polling company comparisons (7).

The Angus Reid Poll provides an accurate measure of death penalty support, with an answer of "sometimes appropriate", which Gallup  does not (1&3).

When Gallup does allow for the "sometimes appropriate" response, as with their death penalty support poll for mass murderer/bomber Timothy McVeigh, support goes to 81%, showing how consistent support is - 80-86% - when, properly using the "sometimes appropriate" response.

 In that Gallup poll, 58% of those who said they opposed the death penalty, supported execution for McVeigh.

 ======

 A separate question (5), within the Angus Reid poll, with a negative inference bias, against the death penalty, had these results:

 78% death penalty support
16% death penalty opposition

Preference Poll from same Angus Reid poll:

 LWOP vs the Death Penalty

 59% prefer the death penalty over a life sentence, which is preferred by 25% --  the death penalty preferred 240% more.

A preference poll, not an exclusion poll. 

 For example, 84% may support the death penalty, and wish to retain it, with 25% of the 84% having a life sentence preference, and 59% of the 84% having a preference for the death penalty, with both groups, still supporting the death penalty at 84%, with the same respondents.

Although both Quinnipiac and Gallup imply that preference polls show lower support for the death penalty, support dropping from 84% to 59%, there is zero evidence to support their claim (2). 

 Why would death penalty support, suddenly drop 25 points, from the same respondents, at the same time? It wouldn't, of course.

If 95% support LWOP and if the preference poll shows that 25% prefer LWOP, does that mean that LWOP support suddenly dropped 70%, with the same respondents, at the same time?

 Of course not, it's absurd.

Would Gallup and Quinnpiac even imply such with LWOP? Of course not. 

They appear to have an observable bias against the death penalty, which is why they may speculate lower death penalty support with a preference poll, but won't so speculated such with LWOP, as detailed.

 Additional evidence:

Gallup speculates "The current era of lower support may be tied to death penalty moratoriums in several states beginning around 2000 after several death-row inmates were later proven innocent of the crimes of which they were convicted. More recently, since 2006, six states have repealed death penalty laws outright, including Maryland this year." (3)

With no proof, Gallup parrots and speculates the exact line that anti-death penalty folks use, in contradiction to both the truth and the polls.

 There is a 70-83% error rate in the anti-death penalty claims of "innocence" or "exonerated" (8).

 Let's see what the polls say:

"A Nov. 2010 poll showed that a large majority, 81%, believes that innocents have been executed and, with that same group, at the same time, responding to the "general" death penalty question, found 83% death penalty support and 13% opposition." (2). 

"That shows no evidence that the US population has turned away from executions based upon the, largely, misleading innocence claims by anti-death penalty folks (2)."

 I would be surprised if Gallup was unaware of those results.

 Gallup even parrots another standard anti death penalty error, that "six states have repealed the death penalty outright . . .". New York State did not repeal their statute, at all. The New York Court of Appeals found the statute unconstitutional.

 Gallup didn't even fact check this well known anti-death penalty error. The just bought it and used it.

 The reason those 5 states were capable of repeal, had nothing to do with the false anti-death penalty claims, parroted by Gallup,  but was because those 5 states had an anti-death penalty Democratic Governor, with an anti-death penalty Democratic majority in the legislature, at the same time the majority of their citizens supported the death penalty.

 Gallup, reality is better than biased speculation. Gallup simply bought into standard anti-death penalty deceptions, chose not to fact check nor vet any of them, but instead, just passed them along - an anti-death penalty norm.

Very media-like.

 ======

95% death penalty support, by loved ones of capital murder victims (9)
(March 2015) Poll by Pennsylvania Office of the Victim Advocate found:

 90% of victims' family members support the death penalty. 94% said the imposed death sentence should be carried out. (9)

 Any state could, easily, do the same poll. I hope they do.

 Oklahoma City Bombing case and the 9/11 terrorism attacks:

 Oklahoma City Bombing case:

 I am aware of 4 murder victim survivors who opposed Timothy McVeigh's execution.

 That is 4 out of 1680 (10 times 168 murder victims) (9), or 0.2% opposed to execution.

 Way under 5%, which would require 84 death penalty opponents, using my method (9).

 9/11 terrorism attacks:

 I am aware of 3 of the nearly 30,000 9/11 murder victim's loved ones who opposed either Bin Laden's death or those killed in drone strikes who were connected to 9/11 or who have voiced any opposition to a death penalty for any other 9/11 conspirators.

 That is 0.01% opposed to the death penalty.
5% would be 1500.  I have only found 3.

 Sadly, these mass murders were so huge, it presented this opportunity to see what developed with a media that is very interested to find such cases.

Boston Marathon Bombing

 Note that the opposition to the death penalty, by survivors, in the Boston Marathon case is based upon having to suffer through an eternity of appeals, which should be only about 4-6 years, in a federal death penalty case, because there are only federal courts, no state courts.

It is not moral opposition, but based upon the incompetence of the management, not the death penalty's fault.
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 

Footnotes

 1) Support for Death Penalty in U.S. Surges After Boston Bombing, Angus-Reid Global, April 29, 2013, 
www.angusreidglobal.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/2013.04.29_Death_USA.pdf

 Based upon the question: "Which of these statements comes closest to your own point of view about the death penalty?" Angus Reid

 86% death penalty support, totaled from
22% the death penalty is "always appropriate"   plus
64% the death penalty is "sometimes appropriate"

9% the death penalty is "never appropriate"

 Benefit: The question allows reality based replies for those who 1) sometimes support the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crimes,  (2) those who always support the death penalty and (3) those who never support the death penalty, no matter the crimes - the true for and against positions.

 These should be the death penalty answers we are looking for, from the question:

Do you support the death penalty for murder/capital murders?:

 Always
Sometimes
Never

 2) US Death Penalty Support at 80%: World Support Remains High
95% of Murder Victim's Family Members Support Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/04/us-death-penalty-support-at-80-world.html

 3)  U.S. Death Penalty Support Lowest in More Than 40 Years: Sixty percent of Americans favor death penalty for convicted murderers, by Jeffrey M. Jones, Gallup, October 29, 2013, http://www.gallup.com/poll/165626/death-penalty-support-lowest-years.aspx

 based upon the question:  "Are you in favor of the death penalty for a person convicted of murder?". 

 Yes 60%
No   35%

 Problems: For most, the answer would not be a "yes or no", but a "yes and no".  Most individuals support the death penalty "sometimes", as Angus Reid measures, but Gallup does not. Gallup fails to give a "sometimes" option, which suppresses the support percentage and expands the against percentage, because their question doesn't allow for that consideration. 

 As a rule, established with all other polls,  if you avoid the sometimes and never answers, you won't receive the answers that reflect true death penalty support or opposition, because the vast majority of folks "sometimes" support the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the murder, just as we do with all sanctions, the true support position, and a minority never supports the death penalty, regardless of how cruel the murders and/or the number of victims, the true opposition position, both of which are measured in the Angus Reid poll and neither of which are measured in the Gallup poll.

 Reality also conflicts with the Gallup poll, because about 90% of murders are not death penalty eligible, reflecting why the "sometimes" answer provides more accuracy, with the advantage of also reflecting reality, with the Gallup question producing less accurate answers, in conflict with reality.

 Gallup is aware of this (2).

 Gallup confirms this, when they polled for a specific, horrendous, capital  crime, allowing for the "sometimes" and "never" answers, within their poll about death penalty support for mass murderer, Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, showing 81% support (2), reflecting the "sometimes" answer , with 16% opposition, reflecting the "never" answer.

Not surprisingly, this mirrors, almost exactly, poll results from Angus Reid and  Quinnipiac:

82% support and 16% opposition  is the average of Qinnipiac polling since 2000 (2) , using those same combinations with always, sometimes and never responses

as with Angus Reid

 83%  support, 13% opposed (11/09/10)  (2)

 80%  support, 12% opposed (10/4/11)  (2)

All of which support that the sometimes and never responses provide for a more accurate poll.

The best way to get clear answers, is to ask clear questions,  which for the death penalty are:

 Do you support the death penalty for murder?
Always
Sometimes
Never

 "Always" could be left out, as they will be found in the sometimes response, but is of interest, in contrast to the "never" answer. 
4)  Gallup: "In your opinion, is the death penalty imposed too often, about the right amount, or not often enough."

"Not often enough" (44%) and "about the right amount" (26%) totaled 70%.

Sharp: This rise in support is based upon a consideration of circumstance: "sometimes".

5)  Angus Reid "As you may know, many countries around the world have abolished the death penalty, but not the United States. All things considered, do you support or oppose the possibility of prosecutors relying on the death penalty for murder cases in the United States?"

 Sharp: This provides for the respondent to consider circumstances "possibility", providing the "sometimes" answer. With the negative bias, I am surprised at the 78% support.

Angus could have asked: Alternate question, with a positive bias, instead: "As you know, the majority of countries around the world still have the death penalty, as does the US. All things considered, do you support or oppose the possibility of prosecutors relying on the death penalty for murder cases in the United States?"

 6) Gallup had 371  Google search hits within the first three days of their news release (a), Angus Reid had 0 (b).

 a)  I did 1 search using Google, for the  first three days of the Gallup News Release
I got 371 hits within the three day search period of   10/29-31/2013, for the search, which was: 
poll "death penalty" gallup 60%
search conducted 6:10 am CST 11/01/2013

 b) I did 1 search using Google, for the first 3 days of the Angus Reid News Release
I got 0 hits within the three day period of 4 /29 -  5/1/2013, for the search, which was: 
poll "death penalty" angus reid 78%

GOOGLE suggested and presented 20 hits, none of which referred to the death penalty poll.
search conducted 6:41 am CST 11/01/2013

 I didn't present an 86% poll result search, because Angus Reid, oddly, never used the 86%, in either their News Release or report, but broke down the numbers, as I reported, which showed 86% support.

 My informed speculation is that AR was afraid of the 86% support result, as the media is abandoning use of AR death penalty polls, as detailed, because the anti death penalty media doesn't like the AR results, which in AR's previous polls were similar - 81 and 83%, which AR highlighted, as opposed to repressing, as they did with the 86%, even though they are the same polling methods - equals with the 81-83% support polls -  as opposed to the 78%, highlighted in the April 2013 poll, with that different question and response, secondary, in those two prior AR polls.

 7)   11/10/2012    A Daily Kos blogger reworked the Fordham study (below), using updated data, and found.
Angus-Reid #1
Gallup #26
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/10/1160222/-Updated-most-accurate-pollster-list-Angus-Reid-1

 The final tallies from the 2012 presidential election proved the Daily Kos blogger correct.

11/7/2012 The Fordham review found
Angus-Reid #11
Gallup #24
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/fordham-study-public-policy-polling-deemed-most-accurate-national-pollster-in-2012

 8) The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy
and
THE DEATH PENALTY: SAVING MORE INNOCENT LIVES
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-innocent-frauds-standard-anti-death.html

9) 95% Death Penalty Support by Loved Ones of Capital Murder Victims
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2016/03/95-death-penalty-support-by-capital.html

======
Additional research,w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.
Posted by at

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Moral Hypocrisy: European Union & The US Death Penalty

Moral Hypocrisy: European Union & The US Death Penalty
Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

Human Rights & The  Europena Union's Hypocrisy

As with all sanctions, the death penalty represents justice and it saves more innocent lives (2). Therefore, the lack thereof confounds justice and is a greater harm to innocents (3), which the EU supports, therefore making EU the greater human rights violator.
 
a) Sarin Gas
 
The EU could hardly be more hypocritical on this issue, with Germany selling tons of materials, which produced sarin gas, which Syria used to murder a huge number of innocents (1).
 
In the US, guilty murderers are executed within justice, making no profit, except that of justice and saving more innocent lives ((())), a huge profit, indeed.
 
b) The European Union's vile immigration system captures migrants arriving from Africa. then sends them to brutal detention centers run by Libya militias, with unknown numbers of innocents killed.
c)  Children committing suicide

The majority population in most (if not all) EU countries support the death penalty for some crimes (1). 

Why? Justice (2).

MORAL COMPASS

EU governments/politicians whine about the US using propofol (and other drugs) for the execution of guilty murderers (3), as Syria wipes out thousands of innocents with sarin gas, thanks to Germany (4).  

EU politicians and world sanctions against Germany? Zero.  

 Compassion

 Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon decided to suspend the execution of multiple murderer Allen Nicklasson because Missouri's use of propofol for executions, prompted an EU threat to withhold propofol, thereby putting millions of innocent patients at risk -  propofol use is " . . .  about four-fifths of all anesthetic procedures (in the US). . . ". (5)

 see crimes of Allen Nicklasson (6)

Pro death penalty Gov. Nixon was compassionate for all of the innocent patients who would be harmed had propofol been withheld as Gov. Nixon was certain that the EU and those drug companies would harm innocent patients, by withholding that drug, had Nixon allowed the execution to go forward.

 Save murderers, at any cost

 Anti-death penalty EU governments/politicians are much more concerned that all guilty murderers must live, than they are for innocent patients or innocent murder victims. They made their choice. 

The EU and drug companies moral calculus being that it is preferable to harm millions of innocent patients in protest of those drugs being used in the executions of known guilty murderers.

Nor do they prohibit the use of drugs in the use of innocents' deaths with abortion or euthanasia, both of which are banned by the Hypocratic Oath (7) - the death penalty is not (7).

 As Washington Post columnist Charles Lane observes:   " . . . just when I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, some Europeans (EU governments/politicians) go and do something irresponsible like restricting the export of sodium thiopental, an anesthetic, to the United States -- because some death penalty states use it in lethal injections. Not only is this gesture unlikely to prevent any executions -- it actually could put the lives and health of innocent Americans at risk." (8)  

"After Hospira announced its decision, the American Society of Anesthesiologists issued a strongly worded statement saying it was "extremely troubled" by Hospira's forced exit from the market and criticizing the anti-death-penalty movement for "using" thiopental supplies to make a point. The doctors noted the "unfortunate irony that many more lives will be lost or put in jeopardy as a result of not having the drug available for its legitimate medical use." (8)

 6.3 million murdered innocents preferred over 1300 guilty murderers executed

 EU governments/politicians know that they are putting innocents at risk, in order to benefit guilty murderers. That's been an anti-death penalty staple forever - save all murderers, no matter the cost (9).

 It seems that anti-death penalty EU politicians have a moral preference for guilty murderers over innocent patients or innocent murder victims, very similar to that of anti-death penalty activists in the US, whose moral/scholarly leadership has stated that if the deterrent effect of the death penalty/executions was proven that they would choose sacrificing an additional 6.3 million innocent murder victims rather than executing 1300 murderers (9).

 Astounding, but true.

A human rights violation?

 The EU and some others claim that the death penalty is a human rights violation. They have never proven it, nor can they.  

Life, freedom, the pursuit of happiness and ownership of property may be and often are considered fundamental human rights. However, all countries find that, for those who violate the rights of others. freedom may be taken away with incarceration, property may be taken with fines or seizure of property, thankfully, happiness may be taken away from thieves, rapists and other criminals, and all countries believe that life may be taken within self defense, defense of others, in a just war, all against unjust aggressors, with many countries allowing euthanasia, abortions and about half of the countries finding that some criminals may be executed, for severe transgressions.

Why is it that the human right to life, freedom, property and happiness can be taken away, but not life taken by execution? Anti-death penalty folks have no rational argument for that. Why? Because there isn't one (9).

 Anti-death penalty folks have an irrational belief that all murderers have the absolute right to life, no matter their crimes and no matter the cost. They're wrong.

 Money well spent?

 In 2009, the EU spent $3.6 million (US) to lobby on behalf of US murderers (11). The EU motto appears to be "Save murderers at any cost", just as it is with US based death penalty opponents (10).  Should the EU spend that $3.6 million as compensation for EU murder victims' families, rather than lobbying for US murderers?  Do a EU poll.  

Harming Children

 How bad can it get? 5 year olds are more mature than 17 year olds? Of course, says the EU.

 As a matter of law, Belgium has agreed that children of any age can commit suicide (12), if they possess "the capacity of discernment" --   undoubtedly, a human rights movement that will sweep throughout the EU.

 I'll take a chance, here, and say that Belgium and the EU may end up drawing the line at 5 year olds, unless they find that would violate the human rights of those children 0-4.

 EU politicians were aghast that the US would allow 16-17 year old murderers to be executed, even with thorough reviews of their mental and psychological capacities.  

Why? Well, because they said, no matter what, 16-17 year olds are not mature enough to be subject to such a punishment because they can't possibly discern either murder or execution - although, somehow, 16-17 year olds do discern both murder and incarceration for that murder? Really? 

Now that Belgium and, soon, the EU, are to agree that some children, of any age, are mature enough to off themselves, I guess the EU and those US Supreme Court Judges will have to change their opinions on the 16-17 year old murderers. Right? Well, no. Hypocrisy will rule the day.

All of a sudden, 5-17 year olds are more than capable of offing themselves, because they are mature enough. I guess mental and psychological maturity is dependent on the type of killing - or, at least, that is the only "rational" for their illogic.

 But, of course, the EU finds that 5 year olds have the discernment to decide their own suicide.

EU politicians could not see that some 16-17 year old murderers may be more mature than many 18 year olds, just as many non-murderous 16 and 17 years are, as the rest of us know.

 But, 5 year olds? Of course. 

 Some idiotic US Supreme Court judges used that same illogic in Roper v Simmons, based upon EU sensibilities, to outlaw the execution of any 16-17 year old murderers, regardless of how mature they are and regardless that the rest of us, with some sense, know than many 16-17 year olds are more mature, in every way, than are many 18 year olds. 

All US criminal cases are supposed to evaluate suspects/criminals, individually, not collectively.

 Prof. Kontorovich writes: " . . . a system that permits the euthanasia of innocent 12 year-olds but not the punishment of guilty 17-year-olds is one that exalts autonomy without culpability." So it comes out that the juveniles cannot really make accountable decisions when it comes to killing people, unless it is themselves. Or to put it differently, Belgium will not hold children responsible when they hurt others, but gives them free license to hurt themselves." (12)

Undoubtedly, the EU will, someday, make child suicide a human right.

 Complete moral bankruptcy. Nothing new.

 1)  86% US Death Penalty Support: Highest Ever - April 2013
World Support Remains High
95% of Murder Victim's Family Members 

2)  600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 

 3) German firm halts US exports over execution drug row, Oman Tribune
http://www.omantribune.com/index.php?page=news&id=153288&heading=Europe  

4) Report: Germany gave Syria ingredients for deadly gas in 2011
http://www.jpost.com/International/Report-Germany-gave-Syria-ingredients-for-deadly-gas-in-2011-327964  

5) "Use of anesthetic propofol in executions might cut supply", The Denver Post, Jim Salter (AP), 9/29/2013
http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_24194351/use-anesthetic-propofol-executions-might-cut-supply  

6) Crimes of Allen Nicklasson: His many (known) murders:  On a drive to buy drugs, Allen Nicklasson's car broke down.   Richard Drummond stopped to help, was kidnapping, robbed and murdered by Nicklasson.  In a later incident,  both Joseph Babcock, 47, and his wife, Charlene, 38  also tried to assist Nicklasson, who robbed and  murdered them both.  During a string of additional robberies, Nicklasson murdered an unnamed waitress in Mexico (7).  These are the murders we know of.
Murderpedia, Allen Nicklasson, http://murderpedia.org/male.N/n/nicklasson-allen.htm      

7) Physicians & The State Execution of Murderers: No Medical Ethics Dilemma
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/10/physicians-state-execution-of-murderers.html

 8) "Europe's dangerous death penalty gesture", By Charles Lane, Washington Post, 2:39 PM ET, 02/ 1/2011,
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/02/europes_dangerous_death_penalt.html  

9) The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation within
The Death Penalty: Fair and Just
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/12/is-death-peanalty-fairjust.html

 10) The Death Penalty: Do Innocents Matter?
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-death-penalty-do-innocents-matter.html  

11) "The European Union gives millions in taxpayers’ money to anti-death penalty groups in America", By Nile Gardiner, World, THE TELEGRAPH,  Last updated: March 2nd, 2011
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100078360/the-european-union-gives-millions-in-taxpayers%E2%80%99-money-to-anti-death-penalty-groups-in-america/  

12) What Belgium’s child euthanasia law means for America and the Constitution, Washington Post, 02/13/2014

Belgium minor first to be granted euthanasia, BBC, 9/17/2016 

Belgian Children Being Euthanized, Canada Also Embraces Culture of Legally Assisted Suicide STEVE WARREN, CBN, 12-10-2022
https://www2.cbn.com/news/news/belgian-children-being-euthanized-canada-also-embraces-culture-legally-assisted-suicide 

 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
Additional research,w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.  
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
======
 
Partial CV


=================================================================================================================================

The Death Penalty: How bad is the European Union?
From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
 
c


2) Valuing Guilty Murderers Over Innocent Patients
 
The state of Missouri had planned to use propofol for executions, which no one doubted would result in a quick, painless death. The European manufacturer stated that they would withhold that drug from the US if propofol were used in executions, thus denying its use, estimated at 50 million uses per year in the US (4).

Missouri Governor Nixon was much more concerned about those innocent patients and how their lives and suffering would be additionally threatened and increased, respectively, by the withholding of that drug, that he ordered the drug not be used, because he was certain that the drug manufacturer would increase the harm and suffering to all those innocent patients, by withholding that drug (4).

Drug manufacturers in Europe are so against the death penalty that they would, knowingly, put more innocent patients at risk, by withholding their drugs from the US, while benefiting US murderers. 
 
Favoring guity murderers over the innocent is a standard anti-death penalty malady (((()))).
 
"After Hospira announced its decision, the American Society of Anesthesiologists issued a strongly worded statement saying it was "extremely troubled" by Hospira's forced exit from the market and criticizing the anti-death-penalty movement for "using" thiopental supplies to make a point. The doctors noted the "unfortunate irony that many more lives will be lost or put in jeopardy as a result of not having the drug available for its legitimate medical use." (4)

The European Union is proud of this.
 
3)  The Ethics Time Gap
 
The drug companies were invisible and speechless, from 1977, when the lethal injection protocols were, publicly, adopted by Oklahoma, and from 1982, when they were first used for executions, in Texas, until 2009 - 32 years and 27 years later, respectively. 

Why did the moral outrage take 27-32 years to surface? 

Anti-death penalty folks didn't, publicly, criticize the drug companies (and their countries of origin), until 2009.  Of course, the drug companies and their countries of origin were well aware of the lethal injection use of drugs from 1977, but were not embarrassed, publicly, until 2009.

The response was all PR, not ethics. Obvious.

4) EU Rejects Hippocratic Oath
 
Would the EU ban such drugs for use in euthanasia and abortion, which are both banned by the Hippocratic Code, which the death penalty is not (5)?  
 
Of course not.
 
For the EU, as so many others, the Hippocratic Oath has become the Hypocrisy Oath.
 

5) The EU: Lack of Reason - Human Rights & The Death Penalty
 
The EU opposes the death penalty, allegedly because they find it a human rights violation, even though they have never shown it to be one . . . but they have tried.
 
The EU's lack of reason.
 
Fundamental human rights include the right to life, the right to freedom, the right to the fruits of our labors, meaning earnings and possession of property, and the right to pursue happiness.
 
Human rights tell us that all of those may be taken away, by the due process of law, when the social contract, the laws of our land, are violated, with all countries accepting a) incarceration taking away freedom; b) fines taking away currency or other property; c) with about half the countries retaining the death penalty, taking away life, with d) all countries, fortunately, taking away the happiness of criminals, from continuing their trade and e)  with some countries providing community service, whereby the sanction is both time and labor, taking both freedom and currency.
 
According to the reasoning of anti-death penalty human rights activists, all of those should be human rights violations, even though such activists, only, claim the death penalty to be, when all should be, given their reasoning.
 
Consistent activist reasoning finds the death penalty not a human rights violation.

6)  EU Population Supports The Death Penalty
 
The EU contradicts their own population, a majority which supported the execution of Iraqi dictator/mass murderer Saddam Hussein (7) and, very likely, a majority would support the death penalty for cases where children were raped, tortured and murdered, as well as cases of mass and serial murders (())))), with the EU supporting an anti-democratic position.
 
Majority does not make right, but all other points, herein, do make it right, as is that majority.

7) EU Valuing Guilty Murderers Over Innocent Victims
 
 "EU agencies contributed over $4.8 million in donations to U.S. anti-death-penalty organizations between 2009 and 2013" (((())))) and, if the same average annual contributions, $15 million through 2023, supporting US murderers instead of giving that money to innocent victims of crime, within Europe, another example death penalty opponents valuing the lives f guilty murderers over innocent rape and murder victims ((())).
NOTE: The US and the EU have never had a problem in extraditing criminals to the US, that face the death penalty, as the US simply waives seeking death in those cases, putting more innocents at risk ((())))), at the behest of the EU.
======
 
FN
 
1)  Gross Hypocrisy & Moral Choices: Germany/European Union & The US Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/germanyeuropean-union-us-death-penalty.html  

2)  The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
 http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-death-penalty-justice-saving-more.html 

3) The Death Penalty: Do Innocents Matter?: A Review of All Innocence Issues
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-death-penalty-do-innocents-matter.html 

 4) "Europe's dangerous death penalty gesture", Charles Lane, Washington Post, Posted at 2:39 PM ET, 02/ 1/2011 

5) Physicians & The State Execution of Murderers: No Medical Ethics Dilemma
 http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/10/physicians-state-execution-of-murderers.html  

6) The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation
http://homicidesurvivors.candothathosting.com/2006/03/21/the-death-penalty-not-a-human-rights-violation/ 

7) 86% Death Penalty Support: Highest Ever - April 2013
    World Support Remains High
    95% of Murder Victim's Family Members Support Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/86-death-penalty-support-highest-ever.html 

8)  European Union financing efforts to end death penalty in U.S., By Lachlan Markay — The Washington Free Beacon, carried by the Washington Times, 10/31/2013, 
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)