Member since Apr 20, 2017



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Editorial: Abolish Louisiana’s death penalty

You write:

"if the death penalty were a deterrent, Louisiana wouldnt have Americas highest murder rate."

Well, no.

Since 1998, there have been 28 US studies finding for death penalty deterrence (1). The foundation for the deterrent effect is executions which, as you stated, La. doesn't really conduct anymore.

It has never been disproven, nor can it be, that all sanctions, all negative prospects and all negative incentives deter some.

I would much rather "risk" saving more innocent lives. Those asking for death penalty repeal would rather risk sacrificing more innocent lives.

In addition, the death penalty/executions spares innocent lives to a degree better than does a life sentence (2).

1) OF COURSE THE DEATH PENALTY DETERS: A review of the debate
99.7% of murderers tell us "Give me life, not execution"

2) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives

Posted by dudleysharp on 04/28/2017 at 11:36 AM

Re: “Editorial: Abolish Louisiana’s death penalty

Death Row: The "Exoneration" Frauds

Why fact checking matters.

It has been well known, for, nearly, 20 years that the "exoneration" and "innocence" claims, by anti death penalty groups, were a, simple, easy to discover fraud (1).

It took me 5 minutes to figure it out.

Anti death penalty folks just redefined "exonerated" and "innocent", as if they had redefined lie as truth, and then stuffed a bunch of cases into those definitions, as detailed (1, 2).

If you won't fact check, just call or email the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), the creator of this fiction, at -- 202-289-2275 -- dpic@deathpenaltyinfo.org -- ask them, "For how many of the, now, 158 "exonerated" do you have confirmation that they are actually innocent and what is that confirmation?"

Based upon the DPIC's fabricated definitions of "innocent" and "exonerated", all 158 "could" be actually guilty murderers. They're not.

Various studies indicate that we are looking at from 29-49 actual innocents identified and removed from death row (1), or about 0.4% of all those so sentenced, with all of those, inclusive of the 158, having been released.

One of the countless problems for the anti death penalty folks is that within those 158, 12 of those they claim to be "exonerated" are from Texas.

Texas has a specific law whereby post conviction claims of actual innocence can be made and ruled upon, by the courts.

Only one such death penalty case has qualified, with Anthony Graves being declared actually innocent (1) and freed.

Another Texas case, that of Michael Blair, must be included as a proven death row innocent (1), but was excluded under a provision of that law. He remains a lifer with four sexual assaults on children convictions.

So, 2 out of 12, meaning an 83% error rate in the Texas death row "exoneration" claims.

I suspect, but do not know, that your 11 death row exonerees in La. may number 2-3 actual innocents, if consisent, with Texas.

That's, generally, what we're dealing with.

The 4.1% "Innocent" on Death Row: More Nonsense

This study is a real beauty. It's foundation for the "false conviction" rate is the very same deceptive database from DPIC, that was exposed, above. (3).

No one wants any actual innocents arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced and/or executed.

Nor do we want to be lied to.



The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti Death Penalty Strategy

2) An Open Fraud in the Death Penalty Debate: How Death Penalty Opponents Lie
A look at how well destroyed the "EXONERATED" and/or "INNOCENTS" list is and how it has been so deceptively used by the anti death penalty movement.

The "Innocent", the "Exonerated" and Death Row

3) The 4.1% "Innocent" on Death Row: More Nonsense

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by dudleysharp on 04/28/2017 at 11:22 AM

Re: “Louisiana Legislature to consider banning the death penalty in this year's session

There is no reason that housing death row inmates should cost more than housing lifers.

So, there is no incentive, there.

All sanctions, all negative prospects and all negative incentives deter some. It has not and cannot be proven that they deter none.

So the options are to risk sacrificing more innocents by not having the death penalty or to "risk" saving more innocent lives by using the death penalty.

Pretty easy decision.

Posted by dudleysharp on 04/20/2017 at 1:14 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2018 Gambit
Powered by Foundation