Talk:Capital punishment/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Recent updates and restructuring

I have just re-read this article for the first time in some time and would like to say that the editing that has taken place in between times has significantly improved it. Well done to all concerned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Firehorsefish (talk • contribs) 13:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Why is this link considered spam ?

MisterFine (talk) 05:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC) I tried to insert a link to Opposing Views' debate between Amnesty International and a leading national D.A. on the death penalty, which contains great arguments and detailed information. The content doesn't belong here, but it is certainly deeper and relevant. When I did it, someone struck it as spam... but it appears to meet all the guidelines. Why doesn't it meet the guidelines, and if it does how do I get it put in ?

What is the word 'gay' doing there?

'In most places that practice GAY capital punishment today, the death penalty is reserved as punishment for premeditated murder, espionage, treason, or as part of military justice.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.216.202.168 (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Obviously vandalized. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 20:03, 29 February 2008

What picture? There are a few & all look fine. Ok, I see now what you mean when one hides the content. I'll move the map down then. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 21:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ancient rome

Death penalty was abolished for a few decades before the roman empire. i believe this should be included in the page194.199.137.149 (talk) 13:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Another song

Craigg1 (talk) 11:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC) There is a song by Steve Earl called Billy Austin that was used in the soundtrack of Dead Man Walking which is about a man on death row. I think it deserves to be included as a great example of "death row" music.

Another song by the swedish band Candlemass - "At the gallow's end" is about a man who is waiting for his execution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.134.235.18 (talk) 21:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I looked through the list a couple times and I'm pretty sure "Bohemian Rhapsody" is not on there. I might have just missed it, but how can that not be on there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchmexploding (talk • contribs) 16:54, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Debate summary

Has anyone made the argument that a slow death of natural causes after decades of confinement is a worse punishment than a quick and painless death?

Also what is the deal with these Wikiproject boxes here on the talk page, to the right? Could someone please put them back up top in a multiple-Wikiprojects-box so they don't bunch the [edit] links? SBPrakash (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC) 58.106.129.98 (talk)

I am not sure where or how to make the entry, but recently the History Channel has documented that Iran executed a 16 year old girl for the crime of seducing a 50 year cab driver. They claimed she seduced him for the first time when she was only 13 years old.

It seems to me that this 50 year old cab driver raped this 13 year old little girl and did so repeatedly over a number of years and according to Islamic Law, when a girl gets raped its always the girl's fault, even when she only 13. Pastorart1974 (talk) 00:14, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

This article isn't really the place to examine individual cases. David Underdown (talk) 08:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

proposed citation

I propose the following citations for sentence in the summary where it is stated that capital punishment has a higher financial cost than incarcerating an inmate for life. The following applies to the United States only and most of the studies following are done within a single state, are therefore not applicable throughout the country, but do provide proper citation to the theory that capital punishment is more costly.

Gold, Russell. The Wall Street Journal: Counties Struggle With High Cost Of Prosecuting Death-Penalty Cases. The Wall Street Journal, January 9, 2002.

Tempest, Rone. Death Row Often Means a Long Life; California condemns many murderers, but few are ever executed. Los Angeles Times, March 6, 2005.

Kansas Audit of Department of Corrections. Legislative Post Audit Committee. Legislative Post Audit Committee, December 19, 2003.

Vermont Legislative Research Shop. Deterrent Value and Cost of Death Penalty. The University of Vermont, April 23, 2001.

Judicial Conference Committee on Defender Services. Subcomittee Report. Subcommittee on Federal Death Penalty Cases, 1997.

Phillip J. Cook & Donna B. Slawson. The Cost of Processing Murder Cases in North Carolina, 1993. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jssfub (talk • contribs) 01:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject

I would propose creation of a Wikiproject on capital punishment. I do not think that it is too arcane of a subject, and many large articles could fit under the scope, including those dealing with lethal injection and human rights in China, among many others. CopaceticThought (talk) 23:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Where's the article on public executions?

You know, like in the olden days such as revolutionary France where little old ladies would do their knitting in front of the Madame Guillotine, etc.?

Why does "Public Execution" redirect to here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.211.78.60 (talk) 05:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you should add "The Stranger" to the Lit section. Here is a quote from Wikipedia:(The novel tells the story of a man, Meursault... who eventually kills a man. The story continues as Meursault waits to be executed.) Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.49.111.78 (talk) 19:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Relevance to Christianity?

Noticing Wikiproject boxes, why is this article relevant to Christianity, especially over any other religion? It seems either biased, or improperly placed. Can someone please explain why these two are connected? Thanks! Neuro√Synapse ▪ ∆ 08:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I moved the template box to the bottom under the others, but really any project can add any article to their domain. Take it up on their talk pages if you must. --70.142.44.220 (talk) 18:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Cause of death

The text, 'Thieves would be imprisoned in suspended cages and left to die by dehydration', located at the beginning of the History section and attached to the first image as a caption, seems to imply that locking someone in a cage causes them to die by dehydration. If the prisoner were to die by some other means, their incarceration has still served its purpose. Can we simply omit 'by dehydration'? - Mhitchens (talk) 21:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Fine by me. (I'm the one who wrote the caption.) – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 01:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect Map

The world map on this page is incorrect and I propose that it be deleted unless an alternate can be found. Specifically, the map of the US on the world map is incorrect when compared to the United States map on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States

If the "Retains, though not used for at least 10 years" classification is used on other countries and US States are pictured with differences in capital punishment law, then the "Retains, though not used for at least 10 years" must also be used within the US to accurately show American attitudes toward capital punishment.Rander26 (talk) 21:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

"Retains, though not used for at least 10 years" would describe Colorado, Nebraska, Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Kansas and New Hampshire if my count is correct. Rmhermen (talk) 06:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

As stated on the map, the federal death penalty remains applicable in all states, so the US is considered retentionist overall - perhaps it would be better ot remove the state boundaries from the map. David Underdown (talk) 10:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

We used to have a map that had a single-colored U.S., and I support that. I believe that map was removed for having several countries colored wrongly so if it could be found it would need to be fixed/updated. Rmhermen (talk) 15:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Please remove references in the article to 'more developed nations/countries'

For example: 'South Africa, which is probably the most developed African nation'.

These are opinions and are not facts.

Particularly offensive is the sentence: 'Singapore, Japan and the U.S. are the only fully developed countries that have retained the death penalty.'

Which gives the view that other nations that are retentionist are not somehow 'developed'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.148.96 (talk) 03:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Attacking comment removed by Booglamay (talk), 17:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of image

An image was deleted on the following ground: "it does not illustrate the capital punishment". But it clearly does as it shows people "waiting to be shot" as follows from title of the painting.Biophys (talk) 19:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of note on China on 2007 figure table

Deleted the 6000 figure in the table and the note" Based on publicly available reports. Other sources suggest the real tally in China for example may be as high as 6,000", since the table is for verifiable figure and that figure is unsourced and cannot be verified.Also added citation needed tag on this figure in the previous paragraph.

The 6000 figure comes from exactly the same source as the rest of the figures there, Amnesty's published data - it is sourced to them and is just as well sourced as anythig else there. David Underdown (talk) 09:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

It seems the figure from Amnesty's reference to Dui Hua foundation is not sound.From Dui Hua's own website the figure is 5000,they also say this figure is based on a combination of published and anecdotal evidence, the latter of which is almost impossible to verify.You can say it is an educated guess but by no means is it reliable statistics. http://www.duihua.org/hrjournal/2008/06/welcome-reduction-in-use-of-capital.html

Dui Hua estimates that around 5,000 people were executed in China in 2007. We can make this statement based on a combination of published and anecdotal evidence despite the fact that the Chinese government closely guards its statistics on capital punishment on the grounds of "state secrecy."

I changed the reference to this direct link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.210.68.66 (talk) 21:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

michigan abolition date

abolition section: "In the United States, the state of Michigan was the first state to ban the death penalty, on March 1, 1847."

public opinion section: "The United States is a notable exception: some states have had bans on capital punishment for decades (the earliest is Michigan, where it was abolished in 1846), while others actively use it today."

1846 or 1847...? Jessi1989 (talk) 03:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

1847 according to [1] Rmhermen (talk) 03:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

It could also be the difference between when the Act was passed, and when it actually came into force. David Underdown (talk) 13:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

'History' section

If you notice, there are two of them (1. History and 3. History) Merge? ~Chemicalrubber (talk) 12:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you are right, there is 2 of them! By the looks of it, it should get merged, thus I'll bring the one below towards the top section. Thanks for noticing that! That-Vela-Fella (talk) 04:35, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Spectacles

Executions were public spectacles for a reason. That was to show what happens to criminals who murder other people. Thus, capital punishment was considered to be a deterrent or counter–motive. The other meaning of "spectacle" is also relevant. Lawyers tell their guilty clients to wear eyeglasses or spectacles in court. This impresses the jury in that the defendant looks studious, intellectual, and therefore non–violent (innocent).Lestrade (talk) 03:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Christian Views

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Didn't a guy called Jesus you USAians so love to quote say something against that old sentiment? Or are you implying that the justice system is without sin? ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.38.4.194 (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 88.11.150.118 (talk) 20:58, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Lol wat? "USAians" is not a proper demonym for any nationality on this Earth. You are clearly confused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.237.59.92 (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

On the use of the phrase "human development" in reference to non-state societies

This should be changed/clarified in this article. Non-state societies are not biologically less evolved as the term "human development" implies. No country contains members who are more physically evolved than any other. This term is a reminant of 19th century evolutionist thinking.

Also, when revising this avoid using the ideas of social evolution. Although societies are organized in various ways, there is not a lock-step progression of societies from "simple" to "complex" forms.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.42.98 (talk) 19:01, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

The section on Islam says "Although the Qur'an prescribes the death penalty for several hadd (fixed) crimes—including rape—murder is not among them." This is not true, the only instances where the Qur'an accepts killing people is in the context of war, or as a punishment for murder (although death penalty for murder isn't encouraged either: the Qur'an only says a murderer may be killed for his crime (5:32). The victim's family can choose whether they want the murderer executed, whether they want him to pay a financial compensation or whether they decide to forgive altogether, which is the course encouraged by the Qur'an). Death penalty in Islam for murder, aldutery, homosexuality and apostasy comes only from sayings or practices attributed to the prophet and are controversial for the more liberal Muslim theologians as these things arguably contradict the Qur'an. At the end of the day it amounts for the same, as the mainstream traditional interpretion retains death penalty for these crimes but I just wanted to point out that the sentence I quoted is not accurate. The Qur'an doesn't "prescribe" death penalty for "several hadd crimes" except making it permissible for murder. Paradoxally, the article says the exact contrary. It should be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.247.85.103 (talk) 21:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The stoning of the adulteress and Christianity.

I'm surprised that the whole "may he who is without sin cast the first stone" bit is not mentioned in the Christianity section, as it seems to be much more directly related to capital punishment than "turn the other cheek". This should be self-evident, but I've learned to never underestimate how anal retentive some fellow editors can be about demanding a New York Times article to confirm that the sky is blue and the Pope is Catholic. I'm going to add it, but if anyone has a serious objection to this let me know (rather than reverting it, please) and I'll google something. Wormwoodpoppies (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Oops, my bad, the verse was already mentioned. But I added a brief summary of the story for those of us who don't have every chapter and verse of the Bible committed to memory. Wormwoodpoppies (talk) 22:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

New Mexico has abolished the death penalty!

New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, after weeks of many struggles with the death penalty issue, has finally signed a bill abolishing capital punishment into law! So the US states with capital punishment are now down to 35 today! Story here. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 02:37, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

There's more: Amensty International Applauds Governor Bill Richardson for Abolishing New Mexico's Death Penalty. --Angeldeb82 (talk) 16:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Execution for drug-related offenses --> China

They are not listed here in the article. I have heard numerous stories of people being executed for drug relating offences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aediasse (talk • contribs) 22:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

POV problems

In reading and reviewing this article, it would appear that there are some galring POV problems. One that jumps out is the heading "Movements towards 'humane' execution." The use of quotes around 'humane' definately give away the author's point of view on the topic. This specific problem is rather widespread, particularly in that section. Also, the sidebar "Homicide" box might be going a little overboard. Without specific elaboration, it gives the distinct impression that all forms of homicide are capital offenses, when, as point of fact, they are not. Case in point, self-defense (e.g., justifiable homicide) is not a capital offense, despite being technically homicide. All that, and the fact that more attention is given to the controvery (with distinct POV problems) surrounding capital punishment than to capital punishment itself gives this article some glaring problems. Smit8678 (talk) 04:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

1. Advocates of the death penalty talk about humane and inhumane forms, so I don't see how that is a problem. Are you saying that there is a point of view which sees all forms of execution as equally humane? (even stoning?) 2. Capital punishment is a form of justifiable homicide. 3. I don't think your assertion of giving more attention to the controversy than capital punishment itself holds up in light of the actual numbers of characters in this article. Most of the discussion of the controversy has been pushed out into the other articles in the sidebar. SBPrakash (talk) 10:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

"The recent executions of Mahmoud Asgari, Ayaz Marhoni and Makwan Moloudzadeh became international symbols of Iran's child capital punishment and the flawed Iranian judicial system that hands down such sentences.[45][46]"

POV much? 00:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)00:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)00:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.131.67 (talk)

First sentence

Either my comprehension English is really bad or the first sentence is rather meaningless. Please fix, whoever is fluent in the topic. Dzied Bulbash (talk) 23:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Fixed! Didn't make sense why someone repeated the same word again & another took out the wikilink to another word. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 00:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Backwards Reference to Footnote #21 Concerning Cost

The first reference to source #21 states:

"...that [capital punishment] is less expensive than life imprisonment[21]..."

But source #21 is an article on DeathPenalty.org arguing exactly the opposite: that it costs millions to execute a convict rather than give him or her a life sentence without parole.

In the next sentence, the same source is linked in reference to the opposing viewpoint (which actually corresponds to the source):

"Opponents of capital punishment argue that it ... is more expensive than life imprisonment[21]..."

OBJECTIVELY, I think the first reference to source #21 is backwards, illogical and confusing. PERSONALLY, I feel it also creates a false impression that there is data to support the notion that capital punishment is less expensive than a life sentence.

Colinmorris (talk) 15:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)Colin Morris 17:24 [GMT +1] 26 April 2009

Correct, thus I removed the same link to the article since it doesn't say it there. If there's another link supporting that argument, then it should be put there instead. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 19:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Capital punishment/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Make the list prose, however, these are still okay, but I will say no.

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Requires more citations in sections "History" and "Movements towards humane execution."

   C. No original research:

   Questionable in the "Global distribution" to name one.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Definitely one the better parts of this article.

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   Broad range of views.

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Seems to have a history of vandalism...

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   I would recommend adding an image in the lead section.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   I recommend fixing what I said needs to be fixed. This is making more prose and more references please. Obviously, the stable-ness of article can't be change because it is about such a controversial topic. --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 23:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Mandatory Death Penalty for certain Federal Crimes in US

It says in the article that there are certain Federal drug offenses which mandate the death penalty, may I ask which particular offenses? I thought mandating the Death-Penalty was unconstitutional since the Gregg v. Georgia ruling in 1976. Are there any other mandatory federal death-sentences? AVKent882 (talk) 02:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Opiniated Writing and POV

1. Under the Juvenile section, every country is titled by the country name solely with the exception of Iran where "and child executions" is attached. There should be no double standards since the section deals with juvenile executions, there is no need to further clarify that for the subheadings.

2. The usage of Juvenile is used for the writings of all other countries, whereas for Iran the word "child" or "children" is used instead. These should be changed to "juvenile" and "juveniles" accordingly under the Wikipedia NPOV rules.

3. For the Juvenile section under Iran, it is added "and the flawed Iranian judicial system that hands down such sentences." despite the sources not justifying or proving a flawed judicial system, the section does not concern injustice or flaws in a judicial system and any matters in disregard with juvenile executions should be excluded.

I will go ahead with the changes in accordance with the aforementioned in 2 days if no objections are made here. --94.193.135.142 (talk) 00:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Support

Can someone please either support this claim with an article, or remove it from wikipedia (it seems like rubbish to me):

"Support for the death penalty varies, though it is generally popular among most societies - worldwide, for every person against it, there are 1 to 2 who support it, depending on how you define support or opposition" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jusau (talk • contribs) 14:46, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

"in the U.S.and Europe surveys have long shown a majority in favor of capital punishment."

Europe here should be cited or deleted? All the surveys listed are US, and [2] seems to suggest that's not the case, at least in the countries they have listed. 90.201.172.67 (talk) 21:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Similarly, the statement "In some abolitionist countries, such as the United Kingdom and certain countries in Eastern Europe, the majority of the public supports or has supported the death penalty" seems superflous, or maybe even not NPOV without some kind of reference. Particularly thinking of the UK, I don't imagine that the majority of the public supports the death penalty. And as for "has supported"...well, that could be true of every country. I won't make this edit because I am not involved enough in WP to know that I'm not doing something wrong, but if there is no disagreement in a few days, could someone please do it?86.134.27.67 (talk) 18:47, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Statistic lacking citation

" [...]worldwide, for every person against it, there are 1 to 2 who support it, depending on how you define support or opposition. Both in abolitionist and retentionist democracies, the government's stance often has wide public support and receives little attention by politicians or the media. In some abolitionist countries, such as the United Kingdom and certain countries in Eastern Europe, the majority of the public supports or has supported the death penal."

No citation is given for this information and it seems mainly to be the personal theory of the author rather than a fact. Therefore, should it not be removed unless proper citation can be given? --83.77.171.194 (talk) 23:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Such things do need citations yes, not sure how long those claims have been in the article but if sources cant be found for the claims it should be deleted, alot sounds like guesses or presumptions.

One of the sentences you mention also contradicts itself...

"For every person against it, there are 1 or 2 who support it" and "Both in abolitionist and retentionist democracies, the government's stance often has wide public support" . How can there be more people who support the death penalty if in "abolitionist" democracies the public support the governments stance. It simply doesnt make sense.

Theres lots of other problems with it too, 1 or 2 people being against something thats a huge difference, its like saying 1 billion support something or 2 billion do, i think we should be rather more clear. The bit about " has supported the death penalty" is also silly, every country at some stage has had the death penalty and it may of been supported back then.

Anyway if sources cant be found, these claims should be deleted pretty soon BritishWatcher (talk) 23:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

May I suggest the changing of the text from "Support for the death penalty varies, though it is generally popular among most societies - worldwide, for every person against it, there are 1 to 2 who support it, depending on how you define support or opposition. Both in abolitionist and retentionist democracies, the government's stance often has wide public support and receives little attention by politicians or the media. In some abolitionist countries, such as the United Kingdom and certain countries in Eastern Europe, the majority of the public supports or has supported the death penalty" to "Support for the death penalty varies. The government's stance often has wide public support and receives little attention by politicians or the media." For now, I think that this would make the paragraph far more fact based until someone is able to provide a decent citation. --Île flottant (talk) 22:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Due to no citation having been given. I have deleted the paragraph: "Support for the death penalty varies, though it is generally popular among most societies - worldwide, for every person against it, there are 1 to 2 who support it, depending on the definition of support or opposition. Both in abolitionist and retentionist democracies, the government's stance often has wide public support and receives little attention by politicians or the media. In some abolitionist countries, such as the United Kingdom and certain countries in Eastern Europe, the majority of the public supports or has supported the death penalty." --Île_flottant~Floating island (talk) 13:00, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Spelling

Not sure where to put this, since the article is semi-protected, but there's a mis-typed sentence in the "executions for drug-related offenses" section. The sentence: "Several coutries retain the death penalty for murder, but not for drugs offences." Has several spelling errors. A suggestion for a correction: "Several countries retain the death penalty for murder, but not for drug-related offences." (or crimes) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.198.64 (talk) 04:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Well i corrected the spelling and tried rewording it a bit which will have to do for now. The mention of the human rights issues seems pretty pointless as Human rights groups / activists condemn all executions. I had a look on Amnesty website (which was the source), but i could only find them using the exact same wording for both executions of murderers and drug traffickers, in both cases they "strongly condemn" and call on the government to abolish the death penalty. If theres some international organisations which do view the two things differently and only strongly condemn executions for drug related offences then it should be added. I dont think that section is looking very good with just a list of a dozen countries taking up space like that anyway. BritishWatcher (talk) 06:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

life imprisonment cheaper than a bullet?

the explanation given is we have extra trials, etc... shouldn't we do this for life imprisonment? keeping an innocent person in jail for life is almost worse than killing him can we take this BS out? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.8.61.31 (talk) 15:37, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Most countries that use the death penalty don't just shoot them. In the US for example, there's the lethal injection and the electric chair which are the most frequently used, both of which are more complicated that simply stabbing someone with a needle or making someone touch an electric wire. In the US they use a system of confinement, whereby a prisoner is confined to a cell on his own for the most of the day. This is another reason for the higher costs. Also, trained medical professionals and electricians don't usually like to work on minimum wage, when they could be working in a fairly well paid hospital or be working as a contractor (who, as we all know, are fond of high prices! ;)). Extra trials do cost a lot, judges are well paid in all but the most barren of nations. As are barristers (lawyers; as you will), solicitors, clerks, bailiffs etc. Also, death row lasts several years, and in death row, prisoners cost far more than elsewhere. --Île_flottant~Floating island (talk) 11:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

But the point remains that the actual execution is not very expensive (whatever the means used). Most of the cost referred to here is from the incarceration until execution, the constant appeals (mostly to switch to life imprisonment). A swiftly implemented, no alternative (ie: the ONLY allowed penalty for the crime in question) death penalty would be very cheap. Khajidha (talk) 19:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Death Penalty Rituals

I did some digging on this topic, and I discovered on a Chinese site (of questionable reliability, mind you) that British judges, before they issue the Death Penalty, would wear a black shroud on their head before sentencing the condemned. This is something that I often see in Hong Kong TV dramas as well (Hong Kong follows the British legal system, because of their former colonial status). However, I cannot find a reliable English source to back this up. Can anyone find such a source? Kiteinthewind ^{Leave a message!} 21:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The Black Cap is pretty well known, I'm not sure it emrits an mention in this article though. David Underdown (talk) 10:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

the entire "Global Distribution" section should be deleted, especially the "freedom" map, except for the last two paragraphs

What is this map and chart showing which countries are "free" and "not free" doing in an article about capital punishment? The effect is to say, "The United States may allow capital punishment but it's still a free country", which is very POV and irrelevant.

If someone doesn't delete it soon, I will. 68.198.150.179 (talk) 01:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)captcrisis

I disagree, I personally believe that the 'freedom' rating/map shows which DP states are democratically free and which are not. I would therefore argue that it stay. --Île_flottante~Floating island ^Talk 03:10, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Which DP countries are "democratically free" (a partly subjective evaluation) and which are not, might be worth one sentence (as opposed to a map and chart which are so prominent). It is not relevant to this article unless you also want to also include other, possibly more relevant factors such as economic status, overpopulation, or the extent of religious fundamentalism. And it has nothing to do with the title of the topic: Global Distribution of the death penalty. One expects to see, right away, a map showing DP countries. Instead one sees a map of the "free world". 69.121.6.97 (talk) 13:57, 6 August 2009 (UTC)captcrisis

It does seem a little odd that the first image in this section doesn't show the actual (more or less) current distribution of DP usage. David Underdown (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the section should be summerised and a new article Death penalty in relation to freedom rating ought be written? --Île_flottante~Floating island ^Talk 19:49, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

The section has been there for a long time, but the chart & map had been recently added. It does seem to be out-of-place for an article such as the this, since the level of "freedom" has no obvious relevance to a state's status of it's DP. If there was a valid source pointing to a research done that does show a correlation, then ok, but otherwise as said above, it may bring other subjects that shows no real direct relationship to capital punishment in itself. The addition then should be removed, since it currently stands to be original work at the moment. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 18:00, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad someone has already started this discussion. What does the "freedom map" have to do with anything? Put the freedom map in Freedom House, this is Capital punishment. --65.127.188.10 (talk) 00:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

"Global Distribution" is a worthwhile section but the freedom map is not relevant. Removed. --Uncle Bungle (talk) 00:40, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Music

Bohemian Rhapsody should be added to the list of songs that have to do with the death penalty.

Er, how? I don't think there is any reference to capital punishment in it. It starts "mam, I just killed a man, put a gun against his head, pulled my trigger now he's dead. Mama, my life had just begun and now I've gone and thrown it all away". That is because he is condemned, that he has condemned himself. Not that he is going to do the short walk. SimonTrew (talk) 13:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Unclear what table represents

The table in the Global Distribution section is not explained. What do the numbers represent? It's not clear. If someone knows, please fix it. Otherwise it should be deleted. omc (talk) 19:16, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Drug Related Offences

I think there should be some sort of a note next to the US under the Drug Related Offences category. The current note makes it sound as if it would be possible to place someone on death row for a drug related offence, but there have been 2 Supreme Court cases that I know of limiting imposition of the death penalty to crimes actually causing a death. 97.114.94.180 (talk) 23:59, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

"Our concern here is limited to crimes against individual persons. We do not address, for example, crimes defining and punishing treason, espionage, terrorism, and drug kingpin activity, which are offenses against the State." From the Supreme Court's opinion in Kennedy JCO312 (talk) 07:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Cuba missing on the list of countries

Please include Cuba on the list of countries where capital punishment is applied. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.70.114.99 (talk) 13:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

You can do it yourself, if you have the information. SimonTrew (talk) 13:55, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

No he can't; the article has been semi-protected since at least February. -- 67.98.206.2 (talk) 21:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Cost

"In 2009, eleven state legislatures considered bills to end capital punishment and its high costs were part of these debates." Ridgeway, James (2009-10-21). "The Death Penalty's Big Tab". Mother Jones. The expensive nature of the punishment doesn't seem to be covered in the article. -- 67.98.206.2 (talk) 21:46, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

State legislators of which states of which country? --Île_flottante~Floating island ^Talk 17:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

If you read the link that was given, you'd know it was in the USA. Anyways, I thought the expenses were already covered in the debate section of the article, although it could be expended further if needed. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 10:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit out BNP

The BNP is primarily a nationalist party, citing them as a "pro-death penalty" source is about as disingenuous as citing the KKK as a "Christian organization" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlvandruff (talk • contribs) 01:32, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

But the thing is that the BNP supports the DP and the KKK is a christian organisation... --Île_flottante~Floating island ^Talk 08:27, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I do not understand why the BNP are included either, they are a fringe organisation with a couple of MEPs and a few thousand members. Should we also mention every religious sub group (with far larger memberships)?- where does one stop? or is this an attempt to boost their google rankings? The included link doesn't even take you the part of the site where they (briefly)mention Capital Punishment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.44.185.90 (talk) 07:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The BNP is given WP:UNDUE-weight. --4wajzkd02 (talk) 07:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Jerusalem Post wants death penalty back in Israel

This site: [JP] has an article published on Israeli newspaper Jerusalem Post , claiming for the return of death penalty to Israel.Agre22 (talk) 13:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)agre22

It's also just an opinion, so that has no change on here. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 06:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

EU death penalty prohibitation (Article 2: Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union)

Changed the text about EU member states being prohibited by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in light of the recent ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. Gav235 (talk) 16:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

This sounds childish

end of the first paragraph... "apply the death penalty and are unlikely to abolish it at any time soon"

May I suggest "in the near future" to sound more mature? —Preceding unsigned comment added by VahichiNiChihosan (talk • contribs) 10:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Deadlink

As of 13NOV2009, the "External Link" ("In Favour"):

"Capital Punishment – A Defense"

http://www.yesdeathpenalty.com/deathpenalty_contents.htm

is a DEADLINK.

(It is currently a GoDaddy.com lawyer referral page.)

An editor should remove it.

72.82.181.174 (talk) 20:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done--Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd ^Talk 20:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Death penalty for pedophiles

In recent years, several U.S. states have examined proposals to extend capital punishment to certain aggravated cases of pedophilia. It might be a good idea to mention this in the article somehow, since there are significant cases where the death penalty is extended beyond direct condemnations for murder. [3][4][5][6] ADM (talk) 15:25, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe the supreme court of America ruled that a death sentence can only be passed in a crime in which a life has been lost. --Île_flottante~Floating island ^Talk 17:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

That is not the case. See, for example the U.S. Federal Death Penalty Act of 1994, which provides

... constitutional procedures for imposition of the death penalty for 60 offenses under 13 existing and 28 newly-created Federal capital statutes, which fall into three broad categories: (1) homicide offenses; (2) espionage and treason; and (3) non-homicidal narcotics offenses.

[emphasis added]
--4wajzkd02 (talk) 07:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Well they can pass laws until they're blue in the face, but if the supreme court rules it unconstitutional that's that. No one is on death row in America for non-homicidal crimes, and it's safe too assume if any government tried to impose it they'd be able to get it reversed by the supreme court.65.0.98.148 (talk) 14:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

See WP:DNFTT --4wajzkd02 (talk) 02:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I am uncertain what your point is here. This is not discussion about the topic in general. You are saying that the article should state that the US has capital punishment for non-homicidal crimes. While we have such laws on the books, the supreme court has prohibited the death penalty for such crimes, and so the point is moot.65.0.98.148 (talk) 03:32, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Per Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008), "there is a distinction between intentional first-degree murder, on the one hand, and non-homicide crimes against individuals, even including child rape, on the other. The latter crimes may be devastating in their harm, as here, but in terms of moral depravity and of the injury to the person and to the public, they cannot compare to murder in their severity and irrevocability...the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim’s life was not taken". --Jatkins ^{(talk - contribs)} 15:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

AI or Hand off Cain

In 2008, AI recorded at least 1718 executions in China, while HOC recorded 5000 ones —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cristiano Toàn (talk • contribs) 10:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

The deterrence factor

Most academics now agree that the DP is an effective deterrent of crimes, even going so far as to submit that reversals of wrongful convictions increase crimes. We need more academic sources on this topic. Imagine Reason (talk) 16:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Where did you get that from? It's a well documented fact that countries without the death penalty have lower major crime rates (i.e. murder). --Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd ^Talk 19:52, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

"Most" academics? lol...a bit of the old "weaselworditis" here. Some citations giving numbers of these "most". In any event, it would have been nice to see the commonly expressed arguments both for and against DP listed, eg; Those found guilty never reoffend, versus, people don't normally go out with the intention of being caught, etc.82.6.1.85 (talk) 23:37, 2 February 2010 (UTC)Lance Tyrell

The Ballad of Reading Gaol

Could someone add Oscar Wilde's "Ballad of Reading Gaol" to the literature section, it's a significant work concerning the psycological impact of prisoners who witness the last few days of a man to be executed. It's also a protest aimed at the cultural and religous hypocracy of the beurocratic society that distances itself from the "evil" that it concents to/put's into action. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.229.124 (talk) 03:44, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Peru has at least 1

In the table of countries under the Global Distribution section, Peru is not listed. As far as I know, at least one person has been executed after World War II. This happened in 1979, under the military government of Francisco Morales Bermudez. The name of the executed was Julio Vargas Garayar, who belonged to the Peruvian Air Force and was accused of selling military secrets to Chile (reference: http://www.miamiherald.com/579/story/1338880-p2.html). --W1k1w4lt3r (talk) 05:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, but that table is referring to those that were done recently in 2008, not since 1945. What you are wanting to look at is already mentioned in 1979 here: Use of capital punishment by nation. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 19:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

You're right! Apologies. For some reason I had overlooked the 2008 remark at the end of the first paragraph and I had incorrectly concluded that the table was a cumulative list from 1945. Thanks for the other link by the way. --W1k1w4lt3r (talk) 15:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Russia

File:Death Penalty World Map.svg shows Russia as blue, but Capital punishment in Russia seems to indicate that the ban won't take effect until 2012, and that even when it does it will only extend to peacetime (ref 1, uses a & b). Could someone clarify, and perhaps correct the map accordingly? —what a crazy random happenstance 08:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

US drug crimes death penalty

Although it is on the books that there are some drug crimes for which the DP may be sought, I find it hard to imagine that in a post-Kennedy environment the DP would be upheld for such crimes. Therefore, I think that the US needs to be removed from the list of countries with the DP for drug crimes.74.240.49.222 (talk) 22:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Spelling

Organisations is not spelt correctly, it's organizations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.191.234.235 (talk) 21:03, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

See WP:ENGVAR, organisation is a valid spelling in British English, and the earliest versions of this article used British English. David Underdown (talk) 09:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I did you the favour of correcting your attempted correction. -- Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd ^Talk 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Cultural universal

There was a line about capital punishment being a "cultural universal" as it has occurred in nearly all countries and societies. I think the phrase "cultural universal" is a value laden term which implies acceptance. Rape and murder also occur in nearly all societies. Would we write up an article on rape as it being a universal cultural norm? I have removed any reference to whether or not the death penalty is good or bad, and instead inserted a statistic stating the number of countries who are completely abolitionist and retentionist. The full statistic is as follows: "Abolitionist for all crimes: 95 Abolitionist for ordinary crimes only: 9 Abolitionist in practice: 35

Total abolitionist in law or practice: 139 Retentionist: 58" However, I have stuck with complete abolitionist and retentionist for reasons of space. I think if there is any cultural norm at present it is towards the abolition of the death penalty in the same way as there was at one point support for slavery globally but currently it is outlawed in the majority of nations--Confusedmiked (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

"Capital Punishment" was and is Legal Murder: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.112.6.6 (talk) 08:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Legal murder is an oxymoron; capital punishment is legal homicide. --Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd ^Talk 19:01, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Haha, I find this funny: "The death penalty was banned in China between 747 and 759." Great job, China, for banning the death panelty for 12 years over 1000 years ago. I wonder what made the Chinese relegalize the death panelty? WikiYoung27 (talk) 04:37, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

What a is fully developed country?

"Singapore, Japan and the U.S. are the only fully developed countries that have retained the death penalty" I think the Chinese will be pissed off when they see that their nation is (still) developing. So what constitutes a "fully" developed country? Galanom (talk) 22:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

EDIT: Oooh, I didn't read all of this: "The death penalty was overwhelmingly practiced in poor and authoritarian states, which often employed the death penalty as a tool of political oppression" NOW I see why China is not included in developed nations.

I'm sorry for being sarcastic but this (part of) article is for uncyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Galanom (talk • contribs) 22:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

No, it isn't. China is not regarded as a developed nation. It is regarding as a developing nation. China is authoritarian and undemocratic. I don't see your point, frankly. --Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd ^Talk 20:49, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

That's a POV. I for example think that the US have a fake democracy, choosing between two parties with similar political views (both support free market for example). Once F. Castro said "if I see a communist posting in Washington Post, I will be open to all counter-revolutionaries (American backed)" So in MY pov is that the US is a undemocratic nation, which supported dictatorships around the world (especially in Latin America), murdered millions with its wars supposedly against terrorism (war in Iraq). So really, the US is an authoritarian and undemocratic nation. So you see there is NO objective criterion for democracy, not even pluralism will do, because everyone defines democracy as they fit. But even if China is undemocratic, you have no PROOF that it uses the death penalty to repress its people. If you insist so much to write about repressive regimes, say that "it has been alleged that some regimes use death penalty to firm their power".

And about development, whatever has batteries or a power cord is made in China. Are you sure you would call it a developing nation? Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UN_Human_Development_Report_2008.svg

Galanom (talk) 21:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

America is not a dictatorship, it's a corperatocracy. In fact, any company is free to give an unlimited amount of money to any campaign, or candidate now, legally. Sanctioned by the supreme court, essentially giving the large corporations of America free reign. As if they weren't that way sense Nixon anyway.71.94.63.105 (talk) 07:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

In the US, any citizen is free to form their own political party and stand for election. In China, you can only stand for election if you're part of the communist party. America, through its voting chose to have the democratic and republican parties. China had it forced upon them. Yes, China is a devoloping nation; the standard wage is far below developed countries. In the countryside, a massive proportion of the populace are illiterate. China is developing, but is not developed. --Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd ^Talk 16:49, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

In the US you may be unemployed. In China state finds you job. In the US if you're poor and sick you die. In China there is free care. In the US you pay for your education. In China is free. Will we continue these arguments? We won't have a capitalism vs. socialism argument. For good or for bad, in all (ex) socialist states wage is low but there is free or almost free homing, health care, transportation, etc. Being a socialist state (which is really disputed for China since it houses all the US business) is not a factor that makes the state developing. Pluralism is an indicator for democracy but not the only one. The other one is if ruling class represents the interest of the mass. Which clearly does not happen in the US. Of course China fails on freedom of press (and web), but this is getting better. All in all we do not need your opinion on the (disputed) socialism of China. This is clearly POV. When a Cuban looks at the US healthcare he would conclude that the US is a disorganized state. It would be my POV. Or better do you want MY POV? Whichever nation allows lawful murder (or death penalty as you say) is barbaric. So in my POV, both US *and* China are barbaric states.

PRC is a developed country according the UN as noted to the corresponding article in wikipedia, and as CLEARLY shown at the image I linked. The index is above borderline, end of story. JUST LOOK AT THE IMAGE I LINKED. Galanom (talk) 23:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

The Chinese government has complete control over the media, which it fills with distortions, propaganda, and even outright lies. As a result, few Chinese people even realize that they're in a totalitarian state, and the few that do either move to America or "disappear". Read 1984, mentally replacing Oceania with China, the Party with the CCP, Big Brother with Wu Jintao, the telescreens with the Golden Shield, and the Ministry of Love with the People's Courts and the police. You'll notice that most of it's still true. All of the social services in the world don't make up for a complete lack of freedom. China is not developed. --J4\/4 <talk> 16:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Are you saying that anyone anti-government individual is murdered secretly? Wow, that's a great accusation, do you know something specific? Can you direct me to a WP article mentioning this? Because if you can't I'll just assume that this is just hideous American propaganda, outright lies and much more than simple distortions. DON'T tell me anything that you cannot prove. I'm certain you are absolutely believe what you're saying but for me is just American propaganda.

So, back to provable data. I provided a link to wikipedia mentioning that PRC is a developed nation. I am NOT saying democratic. I am saying economically developed. Have you anything to say for this? If you find the wikipedia link accurate, please correct the article. Galanom (talk) 13:13, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

All right, can we please calm down? First of all, Wikipedia has a no ‘capital letter’ policy for these types of arguments. Now, a democratic country does not necessarily mean a developed country and vice-versa, however by the two terms are correlated. On the developed country page of Wikipedia, there are multiple definitions of a developed country. One of these is: ‘a developed country is one that allows all its citizens to enjoy a free and healthy life in a safe environment’. I think most of us can agree that if using this definition, China is not a developed country. The most common way of determining the state of the country’s development is by its human development index. Based on 2007 data, China scored in the developing countries range(I think you'll find, that a this is provable data). I therefore think that China should not be included in the developed countries with the death penalty section of this article. If anyone would like to disagree with me, can we please be civil!Greggydude (talk) 17:15, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you entirely, Greggydude! -- Île flottɑnte~Floɑting islɑnd ^Talk 22:27, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

"free and healthy life in a safe environment" is not a safe definition. Being myself dependent on expensive medication, I greatly value free medical coverage which is far more available in China than in the US. So if I lived in the US I would have to pay thousands of dollars a month for meds alone because of "preexisting condition", when in civilized world (the world with free medical coverage) I pay nothing. Isn't this a fundamental freedom? The right to live. This is something that China offers but the US don't. So please exclude this definition. For human development index I posted a link that NO ONE seems to have checked, that shows China as a (marginally) developed country.

Do you have a better source for this index?

94.65.129.217 (talk) 11:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Can we please refrain from using capital letters, it is regarded as shouting.

The link that you posted rates China's HDI the same as Irans. Wouldn't you agree that Iran is not a developed country? Whilst I agree that universal healthcare should be a right of every citizen, and living in the UK enjoy the benifits of a national health service, it is (unfortunatly) irrelavent to this subject. Finally, the UN regards China as a developing nation! See developed country Greggydude (talk) 16:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Both freedom of press and healthcare (and safety) are irrelevant to development. The reason I am upset is that we tend to assume that every country which does not allow pluralism is third world and undeveloped. Take an example, South Africa. It was the only racist nation that existed on earth but it was the only developed country in Africa. Also the very paragraph we were talking about tends to imply that "developed" nations do not allow executions while the nations who allow it are mainly undeveloped or developing. Certainly there is a correlation but it is not absolute. Anyway, if you have a better source for HDI I rest my case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.65.129.217 (talk) 12:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Global distribution table

The table in the "Global distribution" section isn't clear about what exactly it lists. Is it each country's total number of executions? Just those in 2009? Of the 58 death penalty countries, does it only include the ones that potentially killed someone last year? --Explodicle (T/C) 18:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it shows the total updated amount during 2009 for those 18 countries, as the statement says above the table. The other 40 nations with death-row inmates didn't carry out any executions last year (if it did, it would obviously say so). I'll list the numbers in the list for clarity on the 18. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 10:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

What happend if the execution fails?

Is it true that the capital punishment (execution) will be abolished if the execution fails to kill the convicted to death? I wonder if there is a law about this state or it's just a custom or myth? please answer if you know because I want to write an article about this subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.205.112.114 (talk) 13:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

This argument was attempted (and rejected) in Francis v. Resweber — a 1947 US Supreme Court case in which a condemned prisoner had survived an electrocution and tried (unsuccessfully) to argue that a second attempt to execute him would constitute double jeopardy. Richwales (talk) 02:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

this is wrong

i cant edit this article, but to any wikiperson out there,please make this say that is is a wrong and terrible punishment that no living thing deserves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedeathpenaltyisunethical (talk • contribs) 16:50, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but that particular edit proposal cannot be accepted because it would violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 17:21, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Missing facts

"Capital punishment has in the past been practiced in virtually every society". and "Execution of criminals and political opponents has been used by nearly all societies" There is no source or way to verify this statment, it should be removed. To verify this, one would have to make a list of all societies and their use of capital punishment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.233.5.32 (talk) 21:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

This is quite a bold statement

In Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Latin America, and Western Europe, the death penalty has become relatively unpopular, with the majority of the population opposing it,

Why isnt there a link for this, wheres the evidence that most europeans oppose the death penalty —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmoloney (talk • contribs) 18:33, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

'though these are generally emotionally based and fade away', emotionally based? as opposed to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.55.150.4 (talk) 01:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Totally, I personally don't like the death penalty but I think most people in Britain want to bring it back, and I'm sure that that is well documented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.78.30 (talk) 17:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I added a source.[7] In 2005 support for capital punishment in the UK had dropped to 49% and it probably has fallen since, since it has in other couyntries. TFD (talk) 20:44, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

make the article reflect that this is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedeathpenaltyisunethical (talk • contribs) 16:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Religious views

Can't edit the article The section on Eastern Orthodoxy is short and without sources. Here is an official document of the Russian Orthodox Church, in English: http://www.mospat.ru/en/documents/social-concepts/ix/ The section should probably be: "Eastern Orthodox Christianity does not officially condemn or endorse capital punishment. It states that it is not a totally objectionable thing, but also that its abolishment can be driven by genuine Christian values, especially stressing the need for mercy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.140.107.126 (talk) 11:32, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

That is a good source & will add it in. It does seem to not prefer for it, but doesn't want to go against the political situation it may be in. I'll for now add in also what you said above until someone else may have more or better wording to use later.That-Vela-Fella (talk) 22:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Removing China "thousands"

I decided to be bold and remove the "thousands" from from the figure listed for China in the table, and replace it with "hundreds" in the text above. There's no way to know that each year's total for China amounts to "thousands," and even Amnesty International - which is strongly anti-death penalty, and certainly no apologist for the Chinese gvt. - estimated 1700 in the source that was cited: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8432514.stm

So going with the Amnesty number, this doesn't constitute "thousands," and there are probably other estimates which are even lower. In any event, for Wikipedia to state that it numbers in the "thousands" (without better sources to document this) is not NPOV, and is likely misleading. Helvetica (talk) 21:39, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

It is better to use the Amnesty International figure of 1700 (in the table as well), since it is the best estimate. The table could read "1700 (estimated)". TFD (talk) 22:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it should say the amount as given. I'll adjust accordingly.That-Vela-Fella (talk) 22:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Released murderers who kill again are not mentioned in this article, yet 'unlawful deaths' are given a paragraph

More people have died at the hands of released murderers (since a 'life' sentence no longer means that) than have been proven to be executed unlawfully/mistakenly in the west.

This needs to be added to the Controversy and Debate section, since it is currently providing a biased view of the effects of Capital Punishment.

It is estimated that hundreds of people have died unnecessarily at the hands of 'repeat offenders' who, under a Capital Punishment System would have been executed. Therefore, more 'innocent' lives are lost by releasing Murderers back inrto the community than by executing the offenders in the first place.

This information seems to be deliberately repressed by the anti-CP lobby.

Example citation: Repeat killings by released murderers in the USA http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html from a Pro-Death Penalty website, but -factual- nonetheless and worthy of inclusion.

We should NOT skew the available facts to suit the political views of the anti-DP lobbyists.

Teriodin (talk) 11:29, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

You will need a reliable source for that. It is interesting too that the only western nation that executes people has a murder rate five times higher than countries that do not. Apparently having a death penalty leads to a higher murder rate. TFD (talk) 13:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Skew

The article currently is substantially skewed toward discussing the for/against debate rather than trying to broadly cover the topic itself. For example:

• The article barely touches on the various methods of execution.
• The article barely discusses the modern rationales behind capital punishment nor does it really get into any details/statistics regarding the deterrent effect (or lack thereof). To the extent that this is touched on at all it is brought up in the controversy section which inherently biases the discussion.
• The article doesn't really get into the legal frameworks surrounding modern capital punishment. Granted this varies greatly around the world but it is worth at least giving a broad view of the laws in various jurisdictions regarding capital punishment, including how this affects extradition between nations.
• The religion section is very large compared to the rest of the article. As this is not inherently a religious topic (the fact that religion has a lot to say about it does not make it a religious topic) having this as a top-level section is inappropriate. The Religion and capital punishment is the best place for most of that content. 2-3 paragraphs on the religion views are probably all that this article merits.

--Mcorazao (talk) 15:32, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Agreed Greggydude (talk) 22:19, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Map Subscript Error

The map has the Netherlands Antilles as a full abolitionist country, and the NA are abolitionist now, no problem there, but in the subscript it said that it depicted the situation as of June 2009, and back then the Netherlands Antilles were retaining capital punishment as an optional punishment for some nasty forms of treason during war, so it should have been green, they only got around to abolishing their never used death penalty by hanging in March 2010. ThW5 (talk) 12:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Rights?

While reading this page, I noticed that no one had posted anything about Americans' right to life. I'm wondering why the United States allows people to vote on employing the death penalty, when Americans have the right to life? Can anyone help there? Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pha77y (talk • contribs) 16:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Americans do not have a right to life, but cannot "be deprived of life... without due process of law".[8] TFD (talk) 23:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Euphamism

Comment: The lead sentence currently reads

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is the execution of a person by judicial process as a punishment for an offense.

The term execution in this context is, strictly speaking, a euphamism and as such IMHO it is not really good to use in a lead sentence. I would recommend being more explicit using something like

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is the putting to death of a person by judicial process as a punishment for an offense.

or something similar.

--Mcorazao (talk) 15:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Ironically enough, your proposed "putting to death" is an euphemism for "killing", whereas "execution" is a technical term for the same thing. TomorrowTime (talk) 12:57, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Isn't it the sentence of death that is executed, not the prisoner? TFD (talk) 16:56, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from JohnLloydScharf, 3 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Inmates being executed do not "rest" on a gurney. They are RESTRAINED on a gurney.

JohnLloydScharf (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 19:00, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Abolition of capital punishment

I found:

• "[http://books.google.com/books?id=4fvTGbsofY4C&dq=Lethal+injection+procedure+TDCJ&source=gbs_navlinks_s The death penalty:

beyond abolition, Parts 42-43]." by the Council of Europe WhisperToMe (talk) 05:15, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Midasmilton, 26 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} In the "Film, television, and theatre" section, one notable ommission is the film "Last Dance" (1996) Directed by Bruce Beresford. In this film, young lawyer Rick Hayes (Rob Morrow) is assigned to the clemency case of Cindy Liggett (Sharon Stone), a woman convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death. Midasmilton (talk) 12:35, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Done -Atmoz (talk) 17:08, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

==========Somalia execution of minors

http://allafrica.com/stories/201010290101.html Another execution of teenager girls in Somalia by Al Shabab. Maybe it worths to put a note about this new case too.58.9.41.245 (talk) 18:51, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Adding a link to "In Favor" section of article

I have created a website "In Favor" of capital punishment. The main focus is to counter what is perceived to be Catholic Church teaching against the death penalty. The "official" historical magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church supports capital punishment. The link is tcreek.jimdo.com

My question is: If the link is acceptable, how do I add it to the Capital Punishment page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcreek1 (talk • contribs) 13:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I have one other contribution to Wikipedia, also a link, this to the pro section of the Teilhard de Chardin page tcreek1.jimdo.com Tcreek1 (talk) 23:21, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

add an external link

hello. i would really like to add an external link to this page about a group in texas that is not an advocacy group, they are totally neutral toward capital punishment group which seeks only to listen to people who have been involved in some respect with a murdered loved one and/or had a loved one executed and/or is involved in social issues surrounding these topics. they publish the interviews both in video and transcripted form. their work is fascinating. here are some relevant links: home page: http://texasafterviolence.org/ page where you can browse the interviews: http://www.texasafterviolence.org/stories

ok thanks. let me know if this link is able to be added to the external links part on this page.

Alxnd (talk) 23:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC) alxnd

Edit request from Mrtechguy1995, 23 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

EDITedit Mrtechguy1995 (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

What would you like changed on the article? Mhiji (talk) 22:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Capital punishment in Oklahoma

{{edit semi-protected}} Under the Methods section Oklahoma needs to be listed three times its listed under Lethal injection and Shooting but it needs to be listed under Electric chair also as its one of Oklahoma's back ups. Plus under the Shooting one it reads like Oklahoma still does this which is wrong it needs to be re worded to say that its an option should Lethal injection and the Electric chair be outlawed. 68.227.115.100 (talk) 20:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.Please provide a reliable source to verify this information; if you have a source, please make a new edit request. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The sources are already provided in the article there's no need for me to look anything up when their there in the article already.--68.227.115.100 (talk) 06:31, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Peter Leopold II of Tuscany

Holy Roman Emperor Leopold II was Peter Leopold of Tuscany, but not Peter Leopold II of Tuscany - this may confuse him with Leopold II of Tuscany, who lived a century later. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.185.146.80 (talk) 11:27, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request From cellmaker, 6 Feb 2011

Under section Methods, this awkward bulletpoint could use some cleaning up:

Lethal injection (all states in the USA that are using the capital punishment, except from Nebraska, with electric chair as an alternative, Philippines, Guatemala, Thailand, the People's Republic of China, Taiwan, Vietnam)

98.218.240.162 (talk) 12:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

"Infliction of death" vs. "killing"?

The opening sentence of this article currently reads: "Capital punishment, the death penalty, or execution is the infliction of death to a person by judicial process as a punishment for an offense." Aside from the correct preposition ("infliction of death" should take "on" or "upon", not "to"), I believe that the opening sentence ought to say that capital punishment, etc. is the killing of a person by judicial process, etc. In my view, expressions such as "infliction of death" or "putting to death" violate WP:EUPHEMISM and WP:SPADE. A recent editor has suggested that "killing" is POV here, but I believe "killing" is a perfectly proper word (and probably the least POV of the various possibilities). Another alternative phrasing which some have proposed — "Capital punishment or the death penalty is the execution of a person...." — may be a circular definition, unclear to some readers (especially those who may have reached the page via the Execution redirect), in addition to arguably failing WP:EUPHEMISM. What do others think about this? Is there any consensus for any specific wording? Richwales (talk · contribs) 18:47, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't agree with that, a newspaper will never announce a judicial execution by "M.Smith is killed", unless it a virulent anti-death penalty newspaper. It will announce "M.Smith is executed". I know no neutral use of the word "kill" for describe the death penalty. John Doe 1346 (talk) 13:37, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I do agree that Capital punishment is killing someone - however the word "killing" implies wrong doing - Now you may not believe a State has this right to imposes the death penalty on its citizens, but its all done legally so the word "Killing" is misleading and many give undue weight to anti capital punishment POVs. We have to be careful in the wording - Euthanasia is killing someone but has very different implication - hope all see this train-of-thoughMoxy (talk) 18:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I think killing, although blunt, is an appropriate word choice. It's direct, it's simple, and it's accurate. "Infliction of death" strikes me as an undesirable WP:EUPHEMISM. It also feels like an effort to hide a ten-cent concept that makes us squeamish behind fifty-dollar words—rather "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain".

John Doe is correct that "M.Smith is killed" is never going to be used, but that's because it's bad grammar. So is "M.Smith is executed". The syntactically correct phrases are "M.Smith was killed" and "M.Smith was (or has been) executed."

The use of phrases like "killing" are provably in use, e.g., The Kangleipak Communist Party (MTF)...stated that he was killed for his anti party activities and ...rape and murder convict Leo Echegaray, who received capital punishment and was killed via lethal injection in 1999.

I don't think that killing implies wrongdoing. I kill bugs and (unfortunately) houseplants. The butcher kills cows. Some governments kill people. These aren't the same things morally, but the same word encompasses all of them, without passing judgment. (Murder passes judgment. You may have noticed that animal rights activists frequently talk about murdering animals [e.g., for food], not merely killing them.)

The "execution" idea seems circular to me. Also, there are extralegal executions, so it might be less accurate than other options. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I see this a bit differently - I believe we have words to describe certain actions. A butcher "slaughters" things - People "exterminate" bugs - I "harvest" my nice green smelly plants - as for y your so mean to your plants i would say its neglect not a premeditated act on your part I hope. LOL :) .Moxy (talk) 03:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

No, it's the usual problem: First they nearly die of "drought", then I accidentally drown them. But killing them accidentally is still killing them. Malice aforethought is not a necessary condition for killing, as anyone who's lost a loved one to a sleep-deprived or otherwise impaired driver can assure you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:58, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The word "kill" for describe the death penalty remains mainly marginal and on the contrary it is often used by those who opposes the death penalty.

People sentenced to imprisonment are incarcerated, or physically confined, and not "sequestered". People sentenced to death are executed, or receives death, they are not "killed". John Doe 1346 (talk) 23:40, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

John Doe, you've said this several times, but I'm sorry, I simply don't agree with you that the word "kill" is an anti-death-penalty POV term. I do agree that "execute" or "put to death" would be the most common expression in ordinary use, but we are (or should be) talking here about finding a dictionary-level description using simple words that don't need to be explained or defined further. I believe "kill" is the simplest and least ambiguous word we could possibly use in this sort of definition — and that it's the most neutral precisely because of its straightforward simplicity — and if anyone wants to argue that "kill" is a biased term in the context of a simple dictionary definition, I believe it's reasonable to request sources to back up that claim.

WhatamIdoing, you're absolutely right that "killing" can be intentional or accidental. Perhaps we should say that capital punishment, the death penalty, or execution is the intentional killing of a person by judicial process as a punishment for an offence. To me, as a native speaker, this sounds completely neutral, straightforward, and simple. Richwales (talk · contribs) 00:17, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

For what it may or may not be worth, Wiktionary currently defines "execute" (in the sense we're discussing here) as "To kill as punishment for capital crimes.". Richwales (talk · contribs) 00:25, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Did you contest the following facts :

• The word "killing" is widely used by anti-death penalty activists ;
• The word "execution" is widely used by neutral texts.

These facts, by themselves, clearly demonstrates how I am right.

And you are wrong about wikitionary. Because it use the word "kill" for "execute", but the words "putting to death" for execution. John Doe 1346 (talk) 18:50, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

No, he's not wrong. Wiktionary uses "putting to death" for the noun 'execution' and "kill" for the verb 'execute'. That fact suggests that both terms are accurate and that both are equally neutral. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:45, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

The phrase "put to death" would seem acceptable to all points of view. Bus stop (talk) 18:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Agree with the Bus guy!!!!Moxy (talk) 19:45, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I would still prefer "the intentional killing of a person" (per my earlier comments) — but if that idea is truly a non-starter, then I would prefer "the putting to death of a person", or "the act of putting a person to death". I still strongly feel that "the infliction of death upon a person" violates WP:EUPHEMISM. Richwales (talk · contribs) 21:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Un needed section

This section is unsourced and well useless to the topic at hand. Think if there is anything of use we should source it and add it back were need be....Anyone have an opinion on what is relevant??? This section just keeps getting bigger and bigger.Moxy (talk) 21:56, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

In arts and media

Literature

• The Gospels describe the execution of Jesus Christ at length, and these accounts form the central story of the Christian faith. Depictions of the crucifixion are abundant in Christian art.
• Valerius Maximus' story of Damon and Pythias was long a famous example of fidelity. Damon was sentenced to death (the reader does not learn why) and his friend Pythias offered to take his place while Damon went to say his last farewells.
• "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" is a short story by Ambrose Bierce originally published in 1890. The story deals with the hanging of a Confederate sympathiser during the American Civil War.
• Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities ends in the climactic execution of the book's main character.
• Victor Hugo's The Last Day of a Condemned Man (Le Dernier Jour d'un condamné) describes the thoughts of a condemned man just before his execution; also notable is its preface, in which Hugo argues at length against capital punishment.
• Anaïs Nin's anthology Little Birds included an erotic depiction of a public execution.
• William Burroughs' novel Naked Lunch also included erotic and surreal depictions of capital punishment. In the obscenity trial against Burroughs, the defense claimed successfully that the novel was a form of anti-death-penalty argument, and therefore had redeeming political value.
• In The Chamber by John Grisham, a young lawyer tries to save his Klansman grandfather from being executed. The novel is noted for presentation of anti-death penalty materials.
• Bernard Cornwell's novel Gallows Thief is a whodunit taking place in early 19th century England, during the so-called "Bloody Code" a series of laws making several minor crimes capital offenses. The hero is a detective assigned to investigate the guilt of a condemned man, and the difficulties he encounters act as a harsh indictment of the draconian laws and the public's complacent attitude towards capital punishment.
• A Hanging, by George Orwell, tells the story of an execution that he witnessed while he served as a policeman in Burma in the 1920s. He wrote, "It is curious, but till that moment I had never realised what it means to destroy a healthy, conscious man. When I saw the prisoner step aside to avoid the puddle, I saw the mystery, the unspeakable wrongness, of cutting a life short when it is in full tide. This man was not dying, he was alive just as we were alive..."
• Discipline and Punish: The Birth of The Prison, by Michel Foucault deals with capital punishment relative to how torture has been eradicated for the most part, and punishment is now quick and painless. Foucault believes that punishment is now directed more toward the soul than toward the body.
• A Lesson Before Dying follows a wrongly convicted man on death row.
• The Stranger (L'Étranger/The Foreigner, The Outsider), by Albert Camus, imaginatively describes a murderer sentenced to the guillotine, based on a trial that Camus attended in Algeria. At the end, the murderer accepts his coming death, and looks forward to the howls of execration from a huge crowd of spectators at his execution.

Film, television, and theatre

Capital punishment has been the basis of many motion picture and stage productions.

• The heroine of the Danish film, Dancer in the Dark (2000), faces execution by hanging and interacts with other Death Row prisoners.
• The 1995 American film, Dead Man Walking (based on the nonfiction book by the same name), tells the story of Sister Helen Prejean, who establishes a special relationship with Matthew Poncelet (played by Sean Penn), a prisoner on death row in Louisiana.
• The Execution of Gary Glitter is a 2009 film set in a fictional UK, where capital punishment has been reinstated.
• The stage play (and later film), The Exonerated, by Erik Jensen and Jessica Blank.
• Fourteen Days in May is a BBC documentary film about a man condemned to death. Later evidence reveals his innocence.
• The 1999 film, The Green Mile (based on Stephen King's 1996 serialized novel by the same name), features the story of a corrections officer on Death Row during the Great Depression and the supernatural events he witnessed.
• The film, Let Him Have It, is the true story of a young man, who after being controversially accused, is executed by hanging.
• The 2003 film, The Life of David Gale, features an active opponent of capital punishment who is accused of raping a student and later convicted of killing a friend who was also a capital punishment opponent.
• The HBO series, Oz, focused on counter-perspectives for/against the death penalty.
• Mel Gibson's 2004 film, The Passion of the Christ, depicts that final twelve hours of Jesus Christ's life beginning with the Agony in the Garden and ending with a brief depiction of his resurrection, between which occurs Christ's crucifixion.
• Prison Break is a 2005 television series, whose protagonist attempts to save his brother from execution by devising a plan that will help them escape from prison.
• The 2005 film, Pierrepont follows Britain's most prolific hangman, Albert Pierrepoint (Timothy Spall), from the time he is first trained for the job and accepted onto the list of the country's official hangmen in 1932 until his resignation in 1956.
• The Secret in Their Eyes, a 2009 Argentinian film honored with the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film, challenges the fairness of capital justice exacted on criminals charged with rape and homicide.
• The 2007 horror film, Seed, features a serial killer who is sentenced to death by electric chair, survives the jolts, is buried alive, and wreaks brutal vengeance on those who wronged him.
• Polish filmmaker Krzystof Kieslowski's 1988 film, A Short Film About Killing, offers a stark look into the event of a cold-blooded murder and the eventual hanging of the killer, juxtaposing the botched and messy nature of the former killing and the swift and flawlessly executed nature of the latter.
• The Stoning of Soraya M. is a 2009 film about a girl who is subjected to capital punishment by stoning.
• In Last Dance, a 1996 film directed by Bruce Beresford, a young lawyer Rick Hayes (Rob Morrow) is assigned to the clemency case of Cindy Liggett (Sharon Stone), a woman convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death.

Music

• "16 on Death Row", a song from 2Pac's posthumous album, R U Still Down? (Remember Me)
• "25 Minutes to Go" is a song written by Shel Silverstein and sung by Johnny Cash At Folsom Prison and The Brothers Four.
• "Capital Punishment" by Dutch rock band Sandy Coast, was recorded in 1968.
• "Capital Punishment" is a 1999 song by American crust punk band Aus-Rotten
• "Dead Man Walking" by Bruce Springsteen (from the movie, Dead Man Walking) is written from the perspective of the inmate about to be killed.
• Steve Earle's song "Ellis Unit One", is from the movie Dead Man Walking), which looks at capital punishment from the perspective of the jail guards.
• Freedom Cry is an album of songs performed by condemned prisoners in Uganda, recorded by prisoners' rights charity African Prisons Project, and available online.
• "Gallows Pole" is a centuries old folk song, popularised by Lead Belly, which has seen several cover versions. Led Zeppelin covered the song in the 70's, and it was subsequently revived by Page and Plant during their No Quarter acoustic tours.
• In "Green Green Grass of Home", the singer who is apparently returning home is revealed in the final verse actually to be awaiting his execution.
• "Hallowed Be Thy Name", by Iron Maiden, is about a man about be executed by hanging.
• The Bee Gees song, "I've Gotta Get a Message to You", deals with a man who is about to be executed who wants to get one last message to his wife.
• "Lightning" by Eric Church is a song from the perspective of a man being electrocuted, from he murder through his death. It Was inspired by the movie The Green Mile.
• "Long Black Veil" is a 1959 song which has become a country and folk standard in the US
• The song, "The Man I Killed", from the NOFX album, Wolves in Wolves' Clothing, is sung from the perspective of a death row inmate during his execution by lethal injection.
• "The Mercy Seat" by Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds (also performed by Johnny Cash) describes a man being executed via the electric chair who maintains his innocence until he is about to die, when he admits to his guilt.
• "Ride The Lightning", by Metallica, is also about a man being executed via an electric chair, although he is not ultimately culpable, as through insanity or loss of autonomy.
• "Shock rock" star, Alice Cooper, has used three different methods of capital punishment for his stage shows: the guillotine, the electric chair (retired), and hanging (first method, then retired, then used on the 2007 tour).
• "Two Hangmen", is a 1969 song by American Rock/Folk/Country band Mason Proffit. It tells the story of a hangman, who is hung for his objection to capital punishment.
• "Women's Prison" is a song from Loretta Lynn's Van Lear Rose album
• "Israel's Son" is a song from Silverchair's Frogstomp album, in which the music video involves a man escaping from his execution by hanging.

I've been bold and removed it. Ah I see you've already been bold. Cool. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:05, 24 February 2011 (UTC)