thumbnail

Countries With the Most Executions

Name the countries that executed the most people from 2015 to 2018, according to Amnesty International.
Quiz by burntfrost
Rate:
Last updated: April 29, 2019
You have not attempted this quiz yet.
First submittedApril 29, 2014
Times taken62,958
Average score69.2%
Rating4.36
4:00
Enter country here:
0
 / 13 guessed
The quiz is paused. You have remaining.
Scoring
You scored / = %
This beats or equals % of test takers also scored 100%
The average score is
Your high score is
Your fastest time is
Keep scrolling down for answers and more stats ...
#
Country
Thousands annually
China
Unknown
North Korea
Unknown
Vietnam
Unknown
Malaysia
> 2,304
Iran
#
Country
> 607
Saudi Arabia
> 487
Pakistan
> 291
Iraq
> 144
Egypt
#
Country
> 76
Somalia
96
United States
29
Singapore
25
Japan
119 Recent Comments
+17
Level 69
May 15, 2014
I don't see any way in which the death penalty is justifiable. Just saying, America, 5th is nothing to be proud of.
+11
Level 82
May 15, 2014
I can think of plenty of people that deserve to be executed but never will be. People these days are way too sensitive about human life, as if people are going to live forever anyway. Especially people who use their country's newfound love for the sanctity of life, hypocritically ignoring the fact that a short time ago those same countries would happily commit massacres all over their global empires and pull people into pieces after being publicly disemboweled and then stick their head on a pike for public display, or worse, as justification for acting morally superior.
+2
Level 82
Jul 9, 2014
because they're not in a position to.
+3
Level 82
Jan 19, 2015
Oh, that's a relief. Then the rest of the world constantly bitching about the US meddling in their affairs or setting the tone for international politics should stop any day now... and of course they'll also stop complaining whenever the US decides to intervene anywhere (Libya), or when they don't (Syria). Because they're no longer in a position to act unlike the entire rest of the world and so get judged based on every decision and indecision by the gallery of masturbatory spectators and has-been tyrants. good to hear.
+17
Level 39
Jan 28, 2016
You don't make sense Kalbahamut.
+1
Level 82
May 22, 2016
Makes perfect sense to me. Would you like me to explain something?
+11
Level 64
Aug 10, 2016
The problem is plenty of innocent people have been executed, but America only realises it after they've done it. Clearly the justice system isn't perfect so execution should happen.
+3
Level 82
Aug 10, 2016
If someone is forced to live through seeing 10, 20, 30, 60 years of their life wasted away in prison where they are deprived of liberty, subject to rape, abuse, whatever... this is worse than killing them. Death does not hurt the person you kill. Once you are dead... I promise you won't give a crap anymore. It only hurts surviving loved ones. But imprisonment is likely worse as the family can't move on. Imprisonment actually harms the individual incarcerated. The death penalty shouldn't be seen as a punishment. Remove our silly and illogical fear of death, and it's not. It should be seen as acknowledging that an individual has no value to, or hope or returning and playing a role in, society. And that there's no point prolonging such a person's life.

In the meantime, yes, please, shine a bright spotlight on all the inadequacies of the justice system. Those need to be addressed. But an imperfect justice system is not a good argument against the death penalty for the reasons above.

+14
Level 76
Aug 29, 2016
I'm sorry, but Ryan's statement above is just completely bonkers. To repeat what he said: "An imperfect justice system is not a good argument against the death penalty". That is making excuses for a system that allows for the judicial killing of people for a crime they did not commit. Everyone has the right not to be killed for something they didn't do, and countries that allow judicial killing will always kill a proportion of people who did not do what they were accused of.
+1
Level 82
Sep 12, 2016
It's not at all bonkers if you're smart enough to understand the point. How can you be nuts enough to think that I am making excuses for killing people for a crime they didn't commit? THAT is bonkers.

In imperfect justice system is NOT a good argument against the death penalty. YES. That is worth repeating. It may seem counter intuitive. But that's because your intuition is terrible.

I'll try to sum up my many long arguments here. Please try to keep up. If the justice system is bad, this is a good argument for improving the justice system. A person falsely convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment is not a good outcome. Life imprisonment is not better than execution. Taking away the sentence of execution does nothing to fix what's wrong with the justice system, if there is indeed a problem. And in the USA, people sentenced to death actually get BETTER access to justice than anyone else.

+4
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
"if you're smart enough to understand the point"

"How can you be nuts enough to think"

"that's because your intuition is terrible"

"Please try to keep up"

You seem like such a nice person. Funny how you insist that you're not passionate about these things and are just providing thoughtful, reasoned remarks on them, but just lay into relentless character attacks on the people you're responding to.

+1
Level 82
Jan 16, 2020
I do make less sense now that the comments I was responding to are gone. I think drunken gandalf's, in this case.
+3
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
"People these days are way too sensitive about human life..." Congrats, you just made the NSA watchlist!
+20
Level 28
May 15, 2014
Agreed. All human lives have worth, and to take ones live through the death penalty makes you just as bad as the criminal.
+8
Level 82
Jul 9, 2014
Disney movie nonsense.
+4
Level 82
Jan 19, 2015
Right, gandalf. God, you're nuts. Let's pick one case completely at random. Executions in 2014. Top of the list I see some guy Michael Wilson. Never heard of him before. Look up the case... apparently he and his friends were planning to rob a store. The clerk was worried about it and alerted police. This was something they thought out, completely premeditated, no "passion." Wilson and his friends entered the store, dragged an innocent man into the cooler, bound him, and beat him to death with a baseball bat striking him 54 times as he was pleading for mercy. They had trouble getting the safe open, so one of the robbers put on the victim's uniform and manned the cash register to avoid arousing suspicion, while the victim lay dying in a pool of blood for the duration. The robbers then took their money and went to buy some new Nike tennis shoes which the police found them with when they were apprehended. These people have no right to live. Killing them is justice.
+2
Level 82
Jan 19, 2015
Yet according to you, carrying out the perfectly just and deserved sentence against Wilson is worse than what Wilson did to the innocent man in the store.
+3
Level 82
Jan 19, 2015
Also one more thing... there was one guy on the list who had 30 years between receiving his death sentence and actually having it carried out. Charming and probably misunderstood "I will beat you to death with a bat for a pair of Nikes" Wilson had 16. During that whole time they are living for free in facilities with libraries, gyms, cable TV, 3 square meals a day, all paid for by the tax payer, and also they have access to the legal system and are able to make multiple appeals to their sentence if they wish, most of them do, which is part of why it can take 30 years to carry out the sentence.

But... yeah... that's more terrible a crime than straight up cold blooded murder.

+15
Level 76
Apr 4, 2015
I believe the point of punishment should not be revenge, but rather protection of the society from criminals and helping the offender realize his mistake whenever possible. Justice simply cannot be the reason to kill somebody. A person's behaviour is not only his responsibility, but it is related to the influence of society as a whole. If we were to kill someone for their criminal acts, we might as well kill his family, or maybe his schoolmates, or maybe kill ourselves, for not treating that person as we should have. Or maybe it's just his own evil mind. Maybe. But we can never be sure. We should not judge someone's acts to define his quality as a human being, as if we were gods. We just can't, and if we think we can, we're being arrogant to the extent that we become criminals ourselves.
+2
Level 82
Apr 20, 2015
george, that makes sense. But what if all we're doing is acknowledging that a person has no value at all to society, that allowing him to reenter society poses a great danger, and that keeping him locked inside a box forever is neither more just, nor more civilized, nor really any different than ending said person's life in a completely humane way such as lethal injection? No pain, no suffering, no more an act of revenge than a doctor cutting a tumor out of someone's brain is getting revenge against cancer.
+8
Level 76
Apr 24, 2015
I see your point there, but would the death penalty really be more humane? I agree it is a physically less damaging course of action for someone to be killed through, say, a lethal injection, than to be imprisoned for life, but what about the emotional toll this takes? If subjecting a person, especially a criminal in a disturbed state of mind, to the certainty of imminent death isn't the most emotionally and mentally destructive experience they could have, then what is? At least life imprisonment gives criminals a chance of rethinking their actions and finding some peace with themselves and other people. Faint though this chance may be, I think it again comes down to our inability to conclusively judge a human being's qualities.
+1
Level 82
May 2, 2015
If that's what they're worried about then why go to such pains to prevent prison inmates from committing suicide? People these days just have this weird obsession with keeping everyone alive as long as possible, whether there's good reason to or not.
+3
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
Yeah, so weird it's almost like they think life is valuable or some crazy hippy nonsense like that, am I right? If we're all gonna die anyways why don't we all just hurry up already. Huh, who's with me?
+11
Level 39
Jan 28, 2016
Kalbahamut, beside your "nah, you stupid" worthy arguments that just shows how insecure you are about your ideas, please aknowledge that in California a death sentence cost 10 times more to the state than a life-long sentence. You look way more interesting and accurate on subjects you actually know about.
+1
Level 44
Feb 13, 2016
Cedo, justice shouldn't have a price. If you think that Kalbahamut is immoral for believing in the death penalty, then you should DEFINITELY know that not wanting to serve justice because it 'costs too much' is just as bad. Most of those given the death penalty premeditated their attacks, and are given ample time to prove their innocence. If they still can't do it, then isn't the justice system functioning as it should?
+2
Level 82
May 22, 2016
Cedo, that is a terrible, inhumane, *barbaric* argument. The ONLY reason that people can say that the death penalty is MORE expensive than life imprisonment is because people on death row have greater access to the appeals process, they go to court more and have more access to lawyers. Their cases are fully vetted and they are given every chance possible to prove their innocence and have their convictions overturned. The increased cost you cite is ALL about court costs. What did you think it was? The price of needles?

So... basically what you are saying is that everyone who is convicted of a crime... lock 'em up and throw away the key!! Because it saves money. Yeah, that's very civilized of you.

+2
Level 73
Jun 21, 2016
I'm not really "against" the death penalty when used properly, but if the reason it's more expensive is because of the court costs, that should absolutely be considered a factor. I don't ever want a system in place where people who receive the death penalty don't have the ability to appeal. Those things are in place because it helps make a wrongful conviction less likely, and wrongful convictions should be avoided at all costs. That being said, I think Kal is right that some people place too much importance on everyone living as long as they possibly can, even if that person is a violent criminal.
+1
Level 82
Aug 10, 2016
A violent criminal... or an elderly person with a terminal disease who wants to die, or basically a collection of unfeeling cells like a blastocyst, or a braindead vegetable (see Terry Schiavo). Humans in Western civilization have a very perverted sense of the value of life. I think it stems from their own irrational fear of death. Life is not in and of itself valuable. Death is not the worst thing imaginable, or even necessarily objectively bad. This is hard or impossible for most Westerners to wrap their heads around.
+2
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
"Life is not in and of itself valuable." Please explain I'm just a silly Westerner who can't wrap my irrational, perverted little mind around this impossible concept.
+3
Level 75
Aug 12, 2016
When it comes to end of life decisions, people need to learn there comes a point when it is no longer prolonging life, but prolonging death. When my time comes I hope my family lets me go with dignity. I'd rather they hang on to fond memories than a frail body.
+2
Level 47
Oct 16, 2016
Agree with kalbahamut
+8
Level 70
Oct 24, 2018
@kal - you've posted quite a bit here and I might not be able to respond to it all. While it is true that executions happening in the US now are generally less bad than the original murder, I still don't think you are at all right to say that "killing them is justice". No, it is not. It is revenge. On hearing that story emotional responses are triggered that make people angry enough to want those people executed. This is too subjective to be real justice. The fact that these people had to wait a long time to be executed is not a point in your favour. At the very best it has no relevance whatsoever. Lethal injections are not a humane way of killing people, that is a ridiculous and extremely dangerous falsehood. There really is no way of doing it humanely unless the person is already suffering (e.g. from a terminal illness) but more humane methods (counterintuitively) probably include beheading and firing squad.
+3
Level 70
Oct 24, 2018
Also death is absolutely not an irrational fear. I challenge you to name one fear that is more rational than the fear of death and justify it in a way that I could not use to justify the fear of death. Of course we fear death. Evolution quickly gets rid of any organism that does not. It is true to say that death is not objectively bad, but this is much more abstract (when applied to the death of humans) than the question of whether governments should kill people it is in charge of. It is clear to me that the answer to that is no.
+1
Level 82
Dec 31, 2018
I'm not and never was arguing for revenge. I think I've stated clearly here, multiple times, that I do not believe that the death penalty should be used as punishment against criminals whose crimes were especially bad. (but I forgive you if you missed it, since you're right, there has been a lot said in the comments here)

On the contrary I believe that free will is an illusion and that a punitive criminal justice system does not make any sense. I believe any criminal justice system should be a system that attempts to correct bad behavior, not punish it. But some criminals are irredeemable. Their continued existence will only cause pain to themselves and to others. Since I do not fetishize the prolongation of life, humanely ending these criminals' lives to permanently remove them from the world that their existing in would only cause further suffering is, I believe, the only civilized and humane thing to do.

+1
Level 82
Dec 31, 2018
Fear of death is irrational because once you are dead you will feel no pain, you will experience no suffering, it will be exactly as bad as the time before you were born.

Fear of pain, public speaking, imprisonment, etc is all far more rational. These things can and do cause mental anguish in people and that is very unpleasant. Being dead is not unpleasant at all. We fear it, yes, and this fear is probably in our DNA, but that does not make it rational. Any more than cats jumping in panic when they turn around and see a cucumber on the floor behind them is rational. It might be instinctual, natural, normal, common, or understandable - but that doesn't make it rational.

+2
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
The only way you'd know all this is if you've been dead before
+10
Level 70
Jan 14, 2019
I know you say you are not arguing for revenge, but when you say that certain people "deserve" to be executed or that they have no "right" to live, it is difficult to imagine what you are appealing to other than a desire for revenge. I know that you are saying "free will is an illusion" as if that means any specific action should be taken, but to me it is irrelevant whether or not free will is an illusion because even if it wasn't that wouldn't mean I would think retribution was the purpose of punishment. I don't know that there necessarily are any criminals who are irredeemable, and I don't think that it is possible to say whether or not their continued existence will "only" cause pain. I would personally much rather exist than not exist, even if the interactions I had were minimal. Then you said that killing the criminals was the only humane and civilised thing to do. "Civilised" isn't a term that I think really means anything, but I can say that executions as they occur in the USA
+9
Level 70
Jan 14, 2019
are not humane. And perhaps more to the point than anything I've said so far, they are not motivated by any of the things you are talking about, or at least the people voting for them are not. They are motivated by a desire for revenge, deterrent and to some extent by the "don't mess with Texas" ideology that amounts to the same thing as the national chauvinism you have criticised as a reason for people to reject the death penalty.
+6
Level 70
Jan 14, 2019
As for the thing about death being an irrational fear, I do sort of get what you mean about "rational" meaning something different to what people have evolved to do. But it is difficult at this point to define exactly what is rational. The fear of pain is a good example, as your reason for why it is a rational fear is that it is "very unpleasant". The same could be said of almost anything, including death (the experience of being dead wouldn't be unpleasant because it is nonexistent, but the fact that you won't get to do anything again is for many people unpleasant). Imprisonment is probably also a good example, but public speaking is not because if you do it you soon get used to it and the experience of worrying about it is probably worse than actually just doing it.
+1
Level 82
Apr 30, 2019
"when you say that certain people "deserve" to be executed or that they have no "right" to live, it is difficult to imagine what you are appealing to other than a desire for revenge."

If that's true then the problem is with your imagination. You are projecting your own sentiments on me. A cancerous tumor doesn't have a right to grow inside of my body. If it's causing harm to me, I'll get someone to cut it out. I'm not seeking revenge against the tumor. I'm identifying a problem and dealing with it.

+2
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
Holy cow, you're intolerable sometimes. "A cancerous tumor doesn't have a right to grow inside of my body"? What the heck kind of logic is that? Props on the subtle metaphor, too.
+1
Level 82
Apr 30, 2019
"I know that you are saying "free will is an illusion" as if that means any specific action should be taken, but to me it is irrelevant

It's extraordinarily relevant. If free will is NOT an illusion, then retributive justice can actually make sense. If people are capable of making choices other than the choices that they make, then it could be argued that they deserve punishment for making bad choices. But if you recognize that people only seem to make choices, and in reality they act the only way that it is possible for them to act, then you can understand that retributive justice makes no sense. In the same way that if a rabid dog is attacking people, you're not angry at the dog, but you may decide to have the dog put down. In the same way that if you are attacked by a bear, you might take precautions against a future attack but you're not angry at the bear. It's just being a bear.

+1
Level 82
Apr 30, 2019
There are several different reasons for punishment in criminal justice. Instead of going in to them all here's a link that briefly explains many. I don't believe in retributive justice, though in the American system and in virtually all other justice systems in the world, retributive justice is a major component of the law. I believe the other reasons given are all valid, though.

I don't see how executions in the USA are inhumane and the arguments I've read for why they are not are pretty stupid and desperate.

I agree that many of those people voting for the death penalty believe in retributive justice. It's my opinion that they are ignorant. So what? Many people voting for sending aid to starving orphans do so because they believe that an invisible man in the sky wants them to do kind things for other people. Is that a good reason to not help starving orphans?

+1
Level 82
Apr 30, 2019
I've never heard a compelling argument for why to be alive is better than to be dead, or for existence being preferable to non-existence. Every argument I've ever seen on this subject is nonsense; emotional and irrational, based on feelings without reason.

I understand why evolution selects for a fear of death.

I can see why death is considered bad, as it affects the still-living.

I can see why societies would outlaw murder, even against people that nobody is going to miss.

And yes if you are alive and conscious it's likely that you would prefer to stay that way, it's in your genetic programming to prefer this. But that doesn't mean you would feel the same way once you are dead.

Humans have evolved to want to remain alive, therefore they want to argue that life is good somehow. Acknowledging this non-sequitur is actually much closer to the center of my argument than any desire to punish wrong-doers.

+2
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
Maybe all the arguments are "based on feelings without reason" because they're being made by people who are alive and, once those people are dead, they categorically will not be able to make arguments about the merits and drawbacks of being deceased. This seems dangerously nihilist on the whole. What's the meaning of human existence if it has no value and is just as good as human non-existence?
+1
Level 74
Apr 17, 2024
“Every argument I've ever seen on this subject is nonsense; emotional and irrational, based on feelings without reason.”

Once you have purged a human of emotion, feelings, nonsense as you put it, where then lies the difference between the human and the machine? I hope you don’t actually believe those sentiments, because those would deem you a person on the desperate, self-destructive journey towards finding objective reality and the steps you take towards this unattainable goal will just hollow you out making you more and more grey, unfeeling automaton. Please embrace the nonsense, it’s all we’ve got!

+1
Level 82
Jan 16, 2020
Gandalf above was arguing that to execute a convicted criminal is a worse crime than any committed by those being executed. Those comments are gone now.
+1
Level 22
May 15, 2014
Where's Pakistan and India?
+10
Level 69
May 15, 2014
Roughly between and beneath Iran, Afghanistan, China, Nepal, Bhutan, Burma and Bangladesh.
+2
Level 21
Nov 10, 2014
you missed tajikistan
+2
Level 45
Jun 20, 2019
Only 4 people have been executed by the Indian government in the 21st century.
+3
Level 71
May 15, 2014
This list is misleading. While countries like Japan and the United States give real data and those who are sentenced to death get trials and retrials, a vast majority of countries do not give real data. Communist countries like Cuba and North Korea execute way more people than a majority on the list. Also, in many countries the police shoot first and the citizens are not given a fair trial i.e. Brazil, Venezuela and a majority of Central and South America, The same can be said a many war torn African nations,
+1
Level 28
May 15, 2014
Taiwan is quite a surprise.
+3
Level 82
Nov 11, 2017
Asians tend not to have the same attitudes about life and death as Americans and Europeans. And it's not for a lack of civilization.
+1
Level 85
May 15, 2014
Similar to my quiz; http://www.jetpunk.com/user-quizzes/42254/countries-which-execute
+3
Level 24
May 18, 2014
North Korea has never reported to execute prisoners, we only have testimonies of alleged witnesses as proof.
+17
Level 48
May 19, 2014
Jong-Un? Is that you?
+5
Level 30
Aug 11, 2016
Interesting that you are able to type this when you have no internet
+2
Level 47
Feb 13, 2016
WHY JAPAN!!!!!!!!!!! it is an amazing place but whhhhyyyyyyy!
+1
Level 82
May 22, 2016
If I had to guess it would be because they don't have the same Christian religious tradition Westerners do teaching them to fetishize prolonging life. Japanese culture is much more accepting of death as something natural; even noble and dignified.
+8
Level 70
Oct 24, 2018
It has nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity. A knowledge of the history of medicine relating to Medieval Europe should convince you of this. I actually think it comes from the question of how to run a country and/or the world when people realised that Christianity wasn't the way to do it. Doesn't Christianity say that you go to heaven when you die anyway? (as long as you shifted all your original sin onto Jesus by believing in him). If so what is the point in prolonging life? The sanctity of life is basically an example of where a religion has claimed something for its own that it didn't invent. The idea that killing people is bad, or that it a sad when someone dies, has been around far longer than religion.
+1
Level 82
Dec 31, 2018
of course it has. But the meme that all life is sacred (no matter what, even to the point of including dangerous psychopathic murderers, elderly people with no quality of life whatsoever, people who *want* to commit suicide but by law are not allowed to, brain dead vegetables like Terry Schiavo, or unthinking globs of cells like fertilized human ovums) is something that has caught on in the Judeo-Christian world, and the defense of these values in that world is almost always dressed up in Christian theology. Therefore, this meme has very much become part of contemporary Christian belief. Of course beliefs and religions both change over time.
+3
Level 70
Jan 14, 2019
A lot of arguments that people make if they are Christian are dressed up as Christian theology, particularly if they are about the most basic or most fundamental ideas, as it is quite hard to argue something with somebody who disagrees with all of the steps you used to reach a conclusion. Also lots of ideas that people refer to look like Christian theology even if they can be reasonably defined and be a useful concept without it (an example of this is "free will" - considered to be a God-given ability by Christian theology but also something that can be used as an assumption to base decisions on, even if the universe is algorithmically deterministic). The point is that virtually all of the arguments I think you are referring to can be "translated" (i.e. edited slightly) to produce an atheistic argument that works.
+1
Level 82
Apr 30, 2019
So what if they can? That doesn't change the fact that these memes first evolved out of a Judeo-Christian culture and tradition. And that the same memes, in the same form, do not exist in Japan.
+1
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
Well, duh. A meme is a cultural phenomenon, why would they take the same form in two parts of the world that had little cultural influence on each other before three centuries ago? You're whole shtick about 'fetishizing prolonged life' doesn't make any sense to me. Pretty much all forms of Buddhism and Hinduism I know of essentially value all life as sacred, but somehow to you it's just a Christian thing that all Westerners buy into (much to your chagrin and that of other similarly enlightened people who realize that being alive isn't really all that special).
+1
Level 82
Aug 10, 2016
I expect we'll see the Philippines and Turkey join this list soon. Erdogan's gonna have to do something about all those crowded post-coup prisons and Duterte seems to have a bit of a fetish for killing drug dealers. I also expect we'll see the Egypt figure spike when all the sentences that have been dished out are carried out. Personally I don't particularly like the death penalty and I think the US is keeping rather poor company here. As an anti-crime mechanism it seems pretty ineffective based on any comparison of crime in countries that do and don't use it, so we can assume its primary purpose is not to make society safer, but rather to extract retributive justice. Personally I think satisfying a thirst for revenge is not something the state should be involved in. That said, I can understand the appeal on an emotional level - there are definitely some cases that you read about and think, "The world would be a better place without that person."
+1
Level 82
Aug 10, 2016
The Philippines would already be near the top of the list if you count summary executions by police, and Duarte encouraging civilians to practice vigilante justice against drug dealers resulting in hundreds of shootings. Brazil maybe for the same reason. They have way more cop shootings than the US does.
+2
Level 82
Aug 10, 2016
The death penalty should not be used as a deterrent, or for vengeance. It should be used when someone has no value to society and cannot be rehabilitated, redeemed, or returned to society without significant threat to other people. Locking someone in a box for the rest of their lives without any chance of escape doesn't make you civilized.
+1
Level 70
Aug 10, 2016
where is israel
+1
Level 60
Aug 10, 2016
Next to Egypt,
+4
Level 48
Aug 10, 2016
Capital punishment has only been used once in Israel, in 1962. It is illegal in Israel today.
+2
Level 89
Feb 14, 2020
Killing people without charges, trial or conviction isn't considered execution.
+3
Level 37
Aug 10, 2016
Funny how every country on this list is either from Asia or Africa... Except for the United States...
+2
Level 82
Aug 10, 2016
Not so funny. This is a short list. There are a lot of countries in Asia. There are a lot of countries in Africa. Not so many in the Americas. Europeans have made it social religious canon that the death penalty is evil. This meme has no caught on so well in Asia or Africa, though it's starting to take hold in the United States. Many US states have abolished the death penalty.
+3
Level 82
Aug 10, 2016
And incidentally, though this won't convince anyone here to stop acting like they're somehow more enlightened and civilized if that's how they've been acting:

Michigan abolished the death penalty in 1846.

Rhode Island in 1852.

Wisconsin in 1853.

Maine in 1887.

The United States Supreme Court effectively banned it altogether in 1972. Though it was reinstated in some places in 1976.

Belarus still allows the death penalty.

Latvia abolished it in 2012.

The Netherlands (in all its territories) in 2010.

Russia in 2009.

Albania in 2007.

the UK in 2006 (Jersey), or 1998.

If only there were an Olympic medal for fastest mounting of a high horse...

+4
Level ∞
Jun 20, 2019
Belgium didn't abolish the death penalty until 1996, those savages.
+3
Level 86
Sep 14, 2019
This is a little misleading...

Last execution in the UK: 1964

Last execution in the Netherlands: 1952 (military execution for war crimes)/1948(civilian execution for war crimes)/1860 (peacetime)

Last execution in Belgium: 1950 (war crimes)/1863 (peacetime)

Last execution in Latvia: 1996

Last execution in Albania: 1995

Last execution in Russia: 1996

In fact with the exception of Belarus, the last execution in Europe was in Ukraine in 1997. And when talking about Belgium and the Netherlands, it was abolished in the 19th century and only brought back for war crimes committed in WWII.

So yes, it's in recent memory that some of these countries abolished the death penalty, but practically most Western European countries abolished it in the mid twentieth century and former Communist countries in the 1990s.

+1
Level 82
Jan 16, 2020
which was after 1846
+1
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
"If only there were an Olympic medal for fastest mounting of a high horse..." I know right, you'd be rich with gold in no time, kalbahamut!
+1
Level 56
Jan 5, 2021
More specifically, only south-east Asia and/or Muslim countries. It is interesting.
+1
Level 65
Aug 10, 2016
What a country! What great company it keeps on this list.
+6
Level 70
Sep 12, 2016
Counting extrajudicial killings, this list would be pretty different.
+2
Level 82
Oct 16, 2017
Yes. In the Philippines everyone from suspected addicts to political rivals of those in power are gunned down routinely and unprosecuted as part of their war on drugs, plus there is the summary executions of Muslim separatists in the southern provinces now. In Brazil police kill about 10 people every day.
+2
Level 73
Apr 29, 2019
Philippines was also one of my first guesses. In fact, I was so certain it should be here that I typed it a couple of times to make sure I didn't make a typo. And then I realized the point you make, that it's all out of court and without prosecution... And then there are people who say that their president is not so bad, because he builds good infrastructure.
+1
Level 82
Apr 30, 2019
There are also many Filipinos who support all the extrajudicial killings and believe Duterte is "tough" and going to clean up crime and corruption etc, the image he wants to project has taken hold strongly with most of the poor and uneducated, which is most of the country.
+1
Level 46
Mar 8, 2017
I thought Sudan was on this list
+1
Level 82
Dec 31, 2018
They were a few years back. Pretty high on the list, too.
+1
Level 76
Apr 29, 2019
Not Syria?
+1
Level 74
May 3, 2019
These days you have to either be a patient or staff in a hospital for the Syrian govt to execute you.
+2
Level 94
Apr 30, 2019
I believe the death penalty has a purpose in civilised society but my personal application of it would only be in extreme cases i.e. multiple murders and there is 100% certainty that the person committed those acts - not just proven 'beyond reasonable doubt' (or whatever the particular countries standard of evidence is). I expect this will be very rare (in European countries and Canada, at least). I think a death sentence being an option WILL be a deterrent, if not for people choosing not to murder because they don't want the risk of execution, it will definitely mean the person will not be able to commit any more crimes/murders themselves (ending their life is the ultimate deterrent for that particular individual)! In the situations where I think it should be used, that person is obviously a danger and no use to society - even in prison, they would be a danger to others. So I believe it is best to put them down. It is clearly a very difficult topic to consider and hard to implement
+1
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
This is sort of what makes the most sense to me. Like, in the US we have videos of people walking into schools, grocery stores, nightclubs, places of worship, restaurants, movie theaters, etc. with assault weapons and tactical gear to gun people down and then they spend years in the system and periodically pop into headlines. If people want the death penalty for a teenager that murdered a room full of second graders, be my guest.
+1
Level 48
Apr 30, 2019
Come on America, we can get to #1 !
+3
Level 82
Apr 30, 2019
will never happen, it's not even close.
+2
Level ∞
Jun 20, 2019
All we have to do is execute another 20,000 people or so every year!!

But seriously, only 25 people were executed in the United States in 2018. It probably cost the government over $1 million per execution. Even if you are pro death penalty, you have to wonder why we bother. It's just political posturing. The death penalty is effectively null in the United States right now.

+2
Level 89
Jun 20, 2019
I couldn't disagree more. How much does it cost to try and convict someone of murder, then keep them in prison for life? How much was saved because the death penalty was an option, but a plea deal was reached to avoid the death penalty, thereby sparing the government a costly trial?
+3
Level ∞
Jun 20, 2019
It costs more to execute someone than to imprison them for life. The endless legal appeals are extremely expensive. Keep in mind that people are often on death row for decades. But I suppose you are right that the possibility of the death penalty might encourage a plea deal that wouldn't otherwise be possible.
+2
Level 67
Jun 20, 2019
It can also save money though, because it is an important bargaining chip for prosecutors. If you have a first-degree murder case with strong evidence of the defendant's guilt, you need the threat of the death penalty to convince a defendant to plead guilty and accept a prison sentence, thereby sparing the expense of a costly murder trial. Without that element, there is no reason for the defendant to plead, because he's likely to face 25-to-life if he he pleads or 25-to-life if he's convicted. He may as well just go to trial. And trials, especially murder trials, can be very expensive.
+2
Level 82
Jan 16, 2020
the money-saving argument is in my opinion pretty barbaric and somewhat asinine. The only reason those on death row cost more is because they are given greater access to the appeals process. If you were stuck in prison for life you wouldn't want to have the same chance to appeal the sentence?
+1
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
How can it be barbaric if life has no value, as you've insisted repeatedly above?
+1
Level 66
May 15, 2023
Apparently some criminals actually fear being executed/for their own lives.

I think it's money well-spent. There are plenty other ridiculous things I'd vote to cut over executing people who tear down a society.

Some people only speak one language. Society must be willing to talk to them in a way they understand.

+1
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
"...executing people who tear down a society"? I didn't realize we were bringing politicians, economists, and TikTok influencers into this equation.
+1
Level 83
Jun 20, 2019
The tagline on the home page for this quiz is "Name the countries that executed the most people in 2015." The description of the quiz says that the data set is from 2015 to 2018. Not a huge deal, just thought I'd point it out!
+1
Level ∞
Jun 20, 2019
Fixed, thanks
+2
Level 65
Jun 20, 2019
I had typed "singapor" when time was over :/ now 12/13 instead of all
+2
Level 70
Jun 21, 2019
amnesty international... ehh, please ignore these propagandic "civil" organisations...
+2
Level 72
Mar 6, 2020
Japan is only on this list because of the 15 executions in 2018, 12 of which were due to the Tokyo Subway attacks. There have only been three executions in Japan since then. Over the same time period (2015-2018), Bangladesh executed 19 individuals, South Sudan executed at least 18, Indonesia executed 18, Jordan executed 17 people, Afghanistan executed at least 15, Yemen executed at least 14, and Belarus executed at least 10 prisoners.
+2
Level 56
Jan 5, 2021
That's interesting. I was rather surprised to see Japan on there.
+1
Level 67
May 13, 2021
6 seconds remaining let's gooo
+3
Level 57
Jan 31, 2022
singapore is really tough about their chewing gum laws
+1
Level 65
Mar 9, 2023
It's only a fine of a few thousands USD for that. But a small drug dealer risks the death penalty indeed, the threshold is 15 grams of heroin or 100g of marijuana. I also assume their justice system isn't soft on other crimes.
+2
Level 76
Aug 25, 2022
would it maybe make more sense to base the quiz on per-capita figures? china might be topping the list just because it has a lot of people so you would in theory expect more criminals and more executions. if you did it adjusted for population rather than just absolute numbers it might tell a different story (although i guess it would be tricky to divide 'unknown' by millions)
+1
Level 65
Mar 9, 2023
An estimated order of magnitude would need being used.
+1
Level 68
Oct 10, 2022
Sad that the US is on this list.
+1
Level 65
Mar 9, 2023
3rd most populated country in the world.

We can assume criminals knew what was they risked when they commited their crime, you don't get the death penalty for singing too loud at church...

+1
Level 79
Nov 7, 2023
Then why isn't India on here?
+1
Level 63
Dec 10, 2022
suprised belarus is not on the list
+1
Level 65
Mar 9, 2023
On the one hand it only has 9M inhabitants, and on the other hand being in Europe means its dictator cannot be too crazy with the law. Both factors limit the number. Not even Russia is on the list and it's 16x as populated. Now yes, it does not count extrajudicial assassinations, a dictator probably won't bother with a public trial to get rid of political opponents when they can simply "disappear"
+1
Level 67
Jan 18, 2023
You should make a per capita or percentage version. Most of these countries are near or within the 50 most populous countries of the world, so they would obviously be more likely to execute more people.
+1
Level 69
Feb 27, 2024
Has there ever been a comment section in which kalbahamut embarrassed himself even more than here? Absolutely ridiculous.