ProDPinNC: Search results for human rights

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query human rights. Sort by date Show all posts

Thursday, November 21, 2013

The Death Penalty: How bad is the European Union?

updated Feb 2025

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

As with all sanctions, the death penalty represents justice and, in addition it protects and saves more innocent lives, in six ways, than does a life imprisonment (1) which confounds justice and is a greater harm to innocents (1), as EU supports, making EU the greater human rights violator.

1) The EU's Hypocricy

a) Sarin Gas

The EU could hardly be more hypocritical on this issue, selling tons of materials to produce sarin gas for Syria to murder a huge number of innocents, just to make a profit (2).

In the US, guilty murderers are executed within justice, making no profit, except that of justice and saving more innocent lives (1), 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.

The Secretive Prisons That Keep Migrants Out of Europe | The New Yorker

c) Children committing suicide

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 consent to assisted suicide (3), 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, aged 0-4.

EU politicians were aghast that the US would allow 16-17 year old rapist/murderers to be executed, even with thorough reviews of their mental and psychological capacities, to determine their discernment. Yet, Belgium allows children, of any age, to discern whether or not suicide is appropriate for their condition.

Combining EU's anti-death penalty position with that Belgian law shows how absurd they are, if one is capable of rational discernment.

The EU finds, no matter what, 16-17 year old rapist/murderers are not mature enough to be subject to such a punishment because they can't possibly discern murder and execution - although, somehow, 16-17 year olds do discern both murder and incarceration? Really? It's ludicrous, of course.

Now that Belgium and, possibly, the EU, are to agree that some children, of any age, are mature enough to invite death, I guess the EU and those US Supreme Court Judges will have to change their opinions on the possibility that 16-17 year old rapist/murderers may discern the error of their ways, to the point that execution may be an option. Well, no. Hypocrisy and irrationality will rule the day.

All of a sudden, 0-17 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 "rationale" for EU's illogic.

But, of course, the EU finds that s0me 0-5 year olds have the discernment to decide their own suicide.

EU governments could could not see what most see, quite clearly, that some 16-17 year old murderers are more mature than many 18-21 year olds, just as many non-murderous 16 and 17 years are, as we all know, except for the EU.

But, 0-5 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 18-21 year olds.

Clear, obvious, unchallenged.

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." (3)

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

Complete moral bankruptcy. Nothing new.

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, valuing US murderers over innocent patients, with the pro-death penalty governor valuing the innocent patients more that the murderous human rights violators. The pattern (5).

Favoring guilty murderers over the innocent is the standard anti-death penalty malady/pattern (5).

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, and 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 . . . 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.

With, only, irrational and inconsistent reasoning, death penalty opponents find the death penalty a human rights violation, when it is they who have chosen to put many more innocents at risk.

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 (7), with the EU government supporting the anti-democratic, anti-death penalty position, which also sacrifices more innocent lives.

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, $17 million through 2025, supporting US murderers instead of giving that money to innocent victims of crime, within the EU, another example of death penalty opponents valuing the lives of guilty murderers over innocent rape and murder victims (5).

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/can-europe-end-the-death-penalty-in-america/283790/

======

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 (1), at the behest of the EU. The pattern (5).

======

1) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-death-penalty-do-innocents-matter.html

and

The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents

http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-death-penalty-justice-saving-more.html

2) Gross Hypocrisy & Moral Choices:

Germany/European Union & The US Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/germanyeuropean-union-us-death-penalty.html

3) What Belgium’s child euthanasia law means for America and the Constitution, Eugene Kontorovich, The Volokh Conspiracy, The Washington Post, February 13, 2014

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/13/belgiums-kiddie-euthansia-law-and-roper-v-simmons/

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

5) 30 Examples: How Death Penalty Abolitionists Value Murderers

More Than Their Innocent Victims:

AKA - Full Rebuttal of Sir Richard Branson & His Death Penalty Comments

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/04/full-rebuttal-of-sir-richard-branson.html

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,

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/european-union-financing-efforts-end-death-penalty/?page=all

======

600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &

3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history

http://prodpquotes.info/

======

Victim Services

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/03/victim-services.html

Victims' Voices

https://www.marsyslaw.us/victims_voices

======

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

The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-death-penalty-justice-saving-more.html

and

Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2022/01/students-death-penalty-research.html

======

Partial CV

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2021/08/partial-cv-dudley-sharp-independent.html

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.

The Secretive Prisons That Keep Migrants Out of Europe | The New Yorker

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

Support The Death Penalty
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/11/86-death-penalty-support-highest-ever.html

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

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/02/13/belgiums-kiddie-euthansia-law-and-roper-v-simmons/

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

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37395286

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/

======

Victim Services

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/03/victim-services.html

Victims' Voices

https://www.marsyslaw.us/victims_voices

======

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

The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-death-penalty-justice-saving-more.html

and

Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2022/01/students-death-penalty-research.html

======

Partial CV

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2021/08/partial-cv-dudley-sharp-independent.html

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

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

2) Valuing Guilty Murderers Over Innocent Patients

Favoring guity murderers over the innocent is a standard anti-death penalty malady (((()))).

3) The Ethics Time Gap

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.

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 ((())).

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/02/can-europe-end-the-death-penalty-in-america/283790/

======

======

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,

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/european-union-financing-efforts-end-death-penalty/?page=all

Monday, December 30, 2024

Media Disaster: Philip Martin & The Death Penalty: All Points Rebutted w/Sources

sent Dec, 29, 2024

To: Philip Martin and all editors, columnists, opinion writers and news reporters
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Bcc: sent Jan 2, 2025

Parents of Murdered Children, Arkansas

Arkansas Governor, Lt.. Gov, Atty. Gen., & their staffs, boards and commission members

Arkansas House, Senate and all staff

2024-2025 Chapter Officers & Board Members, Arkansas Chapter, Society of Professional Journalists

Arkansas Press Assoc.

Media throughout Arkansas

Arkansas College Media Association

Arkansas Journalism/Communications Depts. and Colleges

Arkansas Secretary of Corrections Lindsay Wallace, staff and board

Arkansas Prosecuting Attorneys Assoc.

Subject: Martin & The Death Penalty: Factual Rebuttal All Points w/Sources

Re: Rebuttal of Martin's article and comments

Martin's replies to me (@dudleysharp3), in comment section from

"The tension between grace and retribution", by Philip Martin, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, December 29, 2024

The tensionbetweenr graceand retribution | Arkansas Democrat Gazette

From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom

Preface

I rebutted all of Martin's replies in the fact checking material that I sent him and all editors, prior, here (1). It would have taken him a few weeks to read, fact check and vet that material. He should have waited.

Based upon his article and his replies to me, he will continue to refuse fact checking and vetting. Ask him.

Martin used anti-death penalty material, did not fact check nor vet it, nor used critical thinking and eschewed all pro-death penalty material and experts, both within his article and repeated within his reply, to me.

Rebuttals to Martin

I quote Martin, then reply as Sharp

1) Martin: "Studies on Deterrence: While some studies claim a deterrent effect, others dispute this."

Sharp: There is not one negative incentive that does not deter some (2). The dispute Martin speaks of is not that there is no deterrence from the death penalty/ executions, but disputes over methodology, within the studies (2).

You might note that the methodology, finding for deterrence, is the same methodology which those same academics use for other research, with no complaints (2) and you may note the complete destruction of some of those finding fault with those studies (2), once you have read all the material I sent you.

No one says executions deter none. Such would be irrational. The issue is not do death penalties and executions deter. They do. The issue is to what degree (2).

2) Martin: "The National Research Council (2012) found that studies claiming deterrence from the death penalty were methodologically flawed and inconclusive."

Sharp: It was not the NRC. They only published the paper. Nagin is the primary author, He is an anti-death penalty professor, whose academic chair is financed by an anti-death penalty foundation (3).

But, you wouldn't know. I, fully, rebutted the study here (3).

3) Martin: "Similarly, the American Civil Liberties Union argues that the death penalty does not deter crime more effectively than life imprisonment."

Sharp: Murderers facing the death penalty have the same reaction as most healthy 28 years olds, which is, nearly 100% of them prefer life over death (2).

No, those murderers were not deterred, at least not for those murders, but they certainly fear death more than life, by nearly 100%. Unchallenged (2).

It is obvious that healthy, non suicidal persons prefer life over death and fear death more than life. Rationally, what we prefer more deters less. What we fear more deter more (2). Also, unchallenged, with the ACLU exception.

NOTE: 28 is the average age put on death row.

4) Martin: "Crime Statistics: States without the death penalty often have lower murder rates than those with it, according to FBI data. This challenges the assertion that executions deter violent crime."

Sharp: No it does not. Think. "Often" means not always and with exceptions. perhaps many, which means it has nothing to do with negating deterrence.

First, sometimes that is the case and sometimes it is not (see Second, just below), which, by definition, means that it confirms nothing, as you confirmed, yourself when using "often".

I think you didn't notice because you are just parroting anti-death penalty material, with not thinking.

Second, when different villages, towns, cities, counties, states, countries or united regions, all with different characteristics, and all with different crime rates, high, average or low, does that mean that there is no deterrence of crimes because of law, law enforcement and sanctions, in any of those? Of course not. It would be an idiotic notion.

Third, for example, let's say Iceland and all of its villages, towns and cities have the lowest crimes rates in the world (close to it). Would that mean that all potential criminals, in all other locations, all over the world, are not deterred by sanction? I THINK we can all answer that.

NOTE: So far, standard anti-death penalty nonsense.

5) Martin: "Gary Becker's Statement: While Becker's perspective holds weight as a Nobel laureate, it represents an opinion rather than irrefutable evidence. Social science interpretations are inherently subject to debate and context."

Sharp: Exactly, Becker's opinions and interpretations are based upon factual confirmations, which you appear not to care about, and which supported his opinion, which The New York Times found the most important of the social scientists for the past 50 years and supportive of death penalty/execution deterrence.

6) Martin: "Accuracy in Death Penalty Cases Claim: The death penalty has a 99.6% accuracy rate in guilty findings. Refutation: Errors in Convictions: Organizations like the Innocence Project highlight wrongful convictions, including cases where individuals were sentenced to death. Since 1973, over 190 death row inmates in the U.S. have been exonerated due to evidence of innocence."

Sharp: The inflated, fraud based numbers of the "innocent"/"exonerated", released from death row has been well known since 1998, when it was confessed as 50% and has grown to a 71-83% fraud rate, since (4), which equates to a 99.6% accuracy rate in guilty findings, and a 0.4% proven factually innocent and released (4).

Martin has no idea. Why? No fact checking, no vetting. Basic.

All of which is detailed for you (4) and which fact checking would have revealed in 1998 and forward (4).

7) Martin: "Human Error and Bias: The legal system is susceptible to human error, prosecutorial misconduct, and systemic biases."

Sharp: By far the greatest human errors within criminal justice are these:

Since 1973,

20,000 ADDITIONAL innocents have been murdered by those KNOWN murderers that we allowed to harm, again - recidivist murderers;

500,000 ADDITIONAL innocents have been murdered by those KNOWN criminals that we have allowed to harm, again - recidivist criminals;

as murders are 7 times greater than rapes, robberies and other assaults, combined, we have this

3.5 million ADDITIONAL innocents have been raped, robbed or, otherwise assaulted, by those KNOWN criminals that we have allowed to harm, again - recidivist criminals (4).

We might - VERY BIG MIGHT - have proof of innocents executed as recently as 1915.

Where are the innocents most at risk?

Why no interest? NOTE: The truth is that the anti-death penalty movement cares more about guilty murderers than innocent crime victims, as detailed by the facts and not rebutted (5).

8) Martin: "Death vs. Life Sentences: The finality of the death penalty means errors are irreversible. Life imprisonment allows for the possibility of correcting mistakes and exonerating the innocent. "

Sharp:4,000- 5,000 die, every year, within US criminal custody. We execute an average of 30/yr (1973-present) .

The only sanction with super due process is the death penalty.

Innocents, by a huge margin, are much more likely to die in non-death penalty custody than are we likely to execute an innocent. There is no dispute.

By anti-death penalty logic, they will seek abolition of all custody, but, no, it is murderers they wish to save (5).

9) Martin: "Racial Disparities in the Death Penalty Claim: White murderers are twice as likely to be executed as Black murderers. Refutation: Systemic Bias: Research consistently shows racial disparities in death penalty cases. For example, the Death Penalty Information Center notes that defendants are more likely to receive the death penalty if the victim is white. "

Sharp: The anti-death penalty media standard.

-- First, you did not refute my claim, because you cannot (6)

-- Second, of course the death penalty is more likely with white victims. White victims are much more likely in death penalty eligible murders (6). Basic.

10) Martin: "Additionally, studies have found racial bias in jury selection, sentencing, and prosecutorial discretion."

Sharp: With many of the studies, those conclusions disappear with fact checking and vetting, which we have confirmed that you do not do and that I do (6).

11) Martin: "Data Interpretation: The claim that white murderers are executed more frequently could be influenced by other factors, such as differences in legal representation, plea bargains, or geographic disparities in death penalty enforcement."

Sharp: "Could" - You could say that about everything that you have stated, but you wouldn't know because you do not fact check, nor vet, nor use critical thinking. You have just proven what a mess you have made and you don't even know it.

Martin could have fact checked and vetted, but refused.

12) Martin: "Costs of Life Without Parole vs. the Death Penalty Claim: Life without parole is more expensive than the death penalty. Refutation: Cost Analysis: Numerous studies indicate that the death penalty is more expensive than life imprisonment. For example: A 2011 study in California found that the death penalty system had cost taxpayers $4 billion more than life imprisonment since 1978."

Sharp: The California study is horrendous, if one fact checks and vets (7).

Read California, Nebraska, Nevada and Maryland, then move on (7).

13) Martin; "Ethical Implications: The death penalty raises moral and ethical questions about the state's role in taking life. Critics argue that it devalues human dignity and risks executing innocent people."

Sharp: As proven, above, innocents are more at risk without the death penalty. Human dignity is devalued by murders of the innocent, not by the just and proportional sanction for it (8).

Many moral and ethical foundations for the death penalty, here (9, 10). You had none.

14) Martin: "Global Trends: Many countries have abolished the death penalty, viewing it as incompatible with modern human rights standards."

Sharp: True. Keep in mind, they use the same nonsense that you do.

One example:

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.

Consistent activist reasoning finds the death penalty not a human rights violation. More Here (11).

In Closing

Journalists have lost their way, on purpose, nullifying journalism standards and ethics, while becoming anti-death penalty activists, for, at least 30 years.

There is no indication that will change, as detailed, herein and here (12) .

I just happen to be a death penalty expert, meaning I have no idea how often journalists act in this fashion, with other topics.

1) Research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone in a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.

The media/academic norm is to use anti-death penalty material, refuse to fact check or vet it and avoid all pro-death penalty research and experts. How will you know that is true? You haven't seen this material, prior.

The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents

https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-death-penalty-justice-saving-more.html

and

Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research

(7 pro-death penalty experts are included)

Students: Death Penalty Research

600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &

3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history

Pro Death Penalty Quotes

2) Of Course The Death Penalty Deters: A review of the debate

OF COURSE THE DEATH PENALTY DETERS

3) Death Penalty Deterrence: Defended & Advanced