Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But if you look at percentages of how many black offenders get the death penalty vs white offenders, that's where the results would show the skewed pattern. You wouldn't go by what percentage of crimes are committed by blacks overall.
The race of the murder victim also makes a difference in many cases. That might make more of a difference than race of defendant.
Respectfully, I don't look at total crimes committed over all, but rather capital crimes, which basically is intentional homicide as a matter of practice. Again, black offenders continue to represent more than 50% of all homicide offenders in this country each year, this despite the fact that blacks comprise less than 15% of the population.
If the argument is going to be that, adjusting for already disproportionate numbers, white offenders are still less likely to be charged with capital murder, that still doesn't tell us much. As I mentioned in another post, your narrative fails to take into account location, to include the approach of a local prosecutor, some of whom run on being tough on the death penalty and others who don’t. And then you have to think of the population and ideological leanings of potential jurors within a county, some who based on politics may be more willing than others to even recommend the death penalty. All of this is to say that there is a lot of nuance that goes into this debate, but efforts to simply blame the disparity on so-called systemic racism never touch on those and so do society a disservice in terms of getting to the actual truth I argue. Indeed, to my point above, the systemic racism argument treats all whites and all blacks the same in this country no matter where they are, failing to take into account the very real political and ideological differences between communities (some of which I touched on above), which is actually very troubling in itself. I have found that when people try to blame imbalance on racism today, the truth is actually often much more complex and nuanced, and decidedly non racist.
The narratives on "systemic racism" also fail to account for the specifics of each case, to include the defendant's criminal history and/or the heinous nature of the crime itself, which also play a significant role in sentencing recommendations.
All of this is to say that, I'd be open to the argument that you're making if they were shown to be true in light of all of what I wrote. The problem I have with many of the people and organizations making the arguments that you do is that they don't look for common and reasonable nuances that could explain things beyond a racial lens.
As for race of murder victims, I also point out that (using blacks and whites as an example) black offenders kill a significantly higher percentage and number of white victims than the other way around.
More recently (and this general trend has held true for decades as seen by US Department of Justice nationally compiled data), in 2018 FBI/DOJ data show that whites killed 234 blacks, while blacks killed 514 whites.
These aren't outlier numbers, but represent the reality of the situation year after year (in terms of lopsidedness).
Taking what I wrote above into account, the fact that more blacks are on death row for interracial violence (than the other way around), while alarming at the outset, does not inherently seem so once other factors are considered.
To close, on the interracial homicide and death penalty front, and going back to my earlier point, how many people are actually on death row for interracial murders to begin with? In a country of 330 million people living in vastly different regions having different political and ideological beliefs, talk of percentages, alone, isn't convincing. Most homicide offenders aren't sentenced to death, period, which leaves a small fraction of those who are sentenced to death. I don't know if I can read much into disparities that are added up from a few cases here and there (especially in light of the overall imbalance) and say that this is a sign of systemic racism. But that's part of the problem that I have with the systemic racism argument. This reminds me of a case in NYC where the fact that 89% of persons ticketed for jaywalking over a 9 month period were black or Latino led some to conclude this was evidence of "systemic racism" in policing. But the actual numbers told a different story. Considering the overall count of 316 tickets in that time period, the absurdity of the matter and claims became all the more clear. What people wanted others to believe were cops got together and figured out a schedule of who would issue the 1 summons per day to someone black. Truth is, if something is systemic, I argue we'd see things at much, much more significant numbers. Percentages are nice, but they aren't exactly very helpful on their face to understanding what exactly is going on.
Last edited by prospectheightsresident; 02-02-2022 at 11:23 AM..
Again, black offenders continue to represent more than 50% of all homicide offenders in this country each year, this despite the fact that blacks comprise less than 15% of the population.
I would specify that black offenders represent more than 50% of all convicted homicide offenders in the country, and I don't think it's a distinction without difference. Something approaching 40% of homicides go unsolved in the US each year now, and of those that are "solved" not all result in conviction, or the conviction of all parties involved. Additionally, it's generally accepted by criminologists that the homicide rate is higher than we think it is, with certain types of homicides being more likely to go undetected, although estimates as to how many per year vary quite a bit. Basically, data about the overall pool of homicide offenders is extremely incomplete, so it's not possible to say what percentage of offenders total are of any particular demographic.
I agree that the US black population is almost certainly overrepresented, but I also think it's important to be more thoughtful about what the stats you're citing actually represent.
Death sentences used to be carried out much more expeditiously. There was never any problem. And it was present in the minds of young people that, "I better keep away from that kind of stuff or it might be me next."
Children who murdered was an unknown phenomenon. It was almost always men, 18+ up to 50 or 60 or so.
Death sentences used to be carried out much more expeditiously. There was never any problem. And it was present in the minds of young people that, "I better keep away from that kind of stuff or it might be me next."
Children who murdered was an unknown phenomenon. It was almost always men, 18+ up to 50 or 60 or so.
I never knew a single person who thought that. I have never seen any evidence that the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. And there certainly were problems. Because of DNA, 185 death row inmates have been completely cleared just since 2011. There were probably many hundreds if not thousands of innocent people put to death before DNA.
Death sentences used to be carried out much more expeditiously. There was never any problem. And it was present in the minds of young people that, "I better keep away from that kind of stuff or it might be me next."
Children who murdered was an unknown phenomenon. It was almost always men, 18+ up to 50 or 60 or so.
Yeah we used to do that. Than, as I indicated in a previous post we learned innocent people were ending up on death row. The Innocence Project has saved eighteen people wrongfully condemned to death. This is only possible because of an extended appeals process. In fact, if you want to go back to 1973, there are over 100 examples of innocent people being wrongfully condemned to death.
Yeah we used to do that. Than, as I indicated in a previous post we learned innocent people were ending up on death row. The Innocence Project has saved eighteen people wrongfully condemned to death. This is only possible because of an extended appeals process. In fact, if you want to go back to 1973, there are over 100 examples of innocent people being wrongfully condemned to death.
I never knew a single person who thought that. I have never seen any evidence that the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. And there certainly were problems. Because of DNA, 185 death row inmates have been completely cleared just since 2011. There were probably many hundreds if not thousands of innocent people put to death before DNA.
Maybe you're not old enough to think that.
18 clearances a year is a small number by any measuring stick. That there weren't more shows how small a problem capital punishment was.
Those many hundreds if not thousands include many 99's and 999's that might have gotten off on technicalities instead of being innocent. Like the Georgia billboard say, "Just because you did it doesn't mean you're guilty."
18 clearances a year is a small number by any measuring stick. That there weren't more shows how small a problem capital punishment was.
Those many hundreds if not thousands include many 99's and 999's that might have gotten off on technicalities instead of being innocent. Like the Georgia billboard say, "Just because you did it doesn't mean you're guilty."
You are OK with states killing 18 innocent people per year?
18 clearances a year is a small number by any measuring stick. That there weren't more shows how small a problem capital punishment was.
Those many hundreds if not thousands include many 99's and 999's that might have gotten off on technicalities instead of being innocent. Like the Georgia billboard say, "Just because you did it doesn't mean you're guilty."
No, they are people whose innocence was established through DNA or other means.
Eighteen innocent people on death row annually or 185 on death row over a decade is indicative of a system that has failed. It is not indicative of a mistake.
Actually, this should not come as a huge surprise. We've known for years that the death penalty is disproportionately imposed on the poor and minorities. We've known that people under enough pressure will sometimes give false confessions to the police. We've known that public defenders are too overwhelmed to give some cases the attention they need.
If we are going to have the death penalty, I can only accept it with the type of appeals process we have in place.
Where does one even get an IQ exam these days? Are these still a thing? My kids are 5 and 7 and as far as I know they've never had an IQ test. I'm 43 and i'm not even sure if I've had one.
Seems like intelligence is measured by grades these days.
All that aside it's kind of astonishing to me that someone with a low IQ who is nearly 'mentally retarded' would be able to get a gun, then go party afterwards and brag about it. Most mentally challenged people I've known have been very sweet and kind. Perhaps I've led a sheltered life?
When I hear the word disabled I have to say that I think of someone who is in a wheelchair, blind, deaf or something along those lines. I guess I dont think of a disabled person as being someone who lacked intelligence but was able to acquire a gun, shoot someone and go to parties with friends and brag about it. The guy was dumb, not disabled.
My youngest's IQ is lower than this man's but I don't believe it to be accurate (I believe his is higher than what he tested as), because he was tested while still non-verbal (severe autism).
My IQ is very high but I don't believe it to be accurate (I believe it is lower), because I have hyperlexia (precocious reading ability) & I think that swung the test.
The issue with "just being dumb" is that being "low IQ" does not just happen on it's own, without there being neuroanatomical changes to the brain: Brain damage. Take a "hypoxic birth", where an infant is deprived of oxygen to its brain, resulting in brain injury. These people, especially during puberty, can become extremely aggressive & violent.
A traumatic brain injury (say, a motorcycle accident) can result in violent, combative behaviors, in people who were formerly very mild mannered.
It happens in Alzheimer's. It happens in Autism; my son is case in point. When his immune system was injured & he regressed; neuroanatomical changes occured in his brain & sensory neurons "plugged into" pain receptors. Pain sensing neurons plugged into parts of the brain that control anger. And he doesn't have any capability of controlling his response. Result: The sound of a human whistle causes intense ear pain, which he acts on with anger. He's 6 foot 5, 280 lbs & built like a pro football player & if your a whistling to yourself in the next aisle in the grocery store; he's going to come right through those shelves to get at you (think: that Kool-Aide guy).
He's strong & fast & doesn't "look" disabled. You wouldn't know, until he starts flapping or rocking, or if you tried to engage him in conversation, that he's disabled. You wouldn't know by watching him walk down the road, that he needs help with toileting, bathing, or wouldn't know how to call a doctor, or get to an ER, if his life depended on it.
So just "being dumb", usually means there are other brain abnormalities that can result in behaviors that are beyond the person's ability to control. What probably happened with this guy, is that he was in special education in school & during that time, his IQ testing was done. But if he was functional enough to respond verbally, complete his own toileting needs, or call a doctor/get to an ER; he wasn't "incompetent enough", for there to be concerns about his adult functioning. After school he was considered a free agent, with all the rights of any adult citizen.
Maybe nobody (a parent) was available to assume responsibility for him. Maybe they were afraid of him & wanted him away from them, I don't know. Somebody dropped the ball with this guy. Somebody should have had guardianship or at least conservatorship of him, after he turned 18. Brain damage & accompanying "low IQ" is the most poorly understood disability there is. If someone's legs don't work, we build them a wheelchair ramp. If someone's brain doesn't work ... They fall through the cracks. Nothing could convince me that this was a just execution.
I am my son's legal guardian. He turned 18 last November & I filed for & was granted, legal guardianship in court. If you trigger him somehow in the grocery store, I will be right there to stop him. I'm responsible for his actions legally. He doesn't have any rights to buy a weapon, nor can he access funds to do so. This protects both him & you (society). Somebody failed this guy a long time ago and both he & society have paid the price. It's just sad all the way around.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
