Post by: Smossy on May 16, 2013, 09:27:17 AM
Really, that's all? If they keep up super hardcore punishments like that well never see poaching again. :rolleyes:
But really....
They need to start cracking down on people like that, totally not cool.
Truly hope those guys aren't on here.
:bash: :bash:
Deer Poachers Arrested, Washington Game Wardens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMWhCqPOTDk#ws)
Post by: vandeman17 on May 16, 2013, 09:32:01 AM
Post by: Smossy on May 16, 2013, 09:34:48 AM
If it was the guy's first offense then I think two days in jail and community service isn't a bad punishment. It is more then a lot of others that I have heard. :bash:I don't think its nearly enough.
People need to be "scared" to poach because of the punishment. Not "Oh hey lets just hope we don't get caught".
Post by: vandeman17 on May 16, 2013, 09:35:57 AM
If it was the guy's first offense then I think two days in jail and community service isn't a bad punishment. It is more then a lot of others that I have heard. :bash:I don't think its nearly enough.
People need to be "scared" to poach because of the punishment. Not "Oh hey lets just hope we don't get caught".
I totally agree and I wish it was harsher punishment. All I was saying is given the punishments I have read about in the past, this ones seems to me more stiff. A step in the right direction.
Post by: turkeyfeather on May 16, 2013, 09:37:19 AM
Post by: Mudman on May 16, 2013, 09:41:24 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 16, 2013, 09:48:26 AM
Post by: Smossy on May 16, 2013, 10:02:48 AM
There is more than news said, im sure a ban and big fine was imposed. Youth, first offense etc. Judge cut em slack. You can bet a second offense would be very stiff. Besides Jail isnt always the best way for people to learn and can often do more harm than good. Week of comm. service is no picnic either. :dunno:Community service can be written off without even doing any work. I know from experience. Not proud of it I just know how people can bypass the system. Jail is not fun. I think two weeks would make anyone think twice before killing an animal out of season/without proper licensing tags. Just sayin.
Post by: quadrafire on May 16, 2013, 10:12:48 AM
Post by: Mudman on May 16, 2013, 11:10:08 AM
Post by: seth30 on May 16, 2013, 11:18:27 AM
Post by: Mudman on May 16, 2013, 11:24:08 AM
Post by: elk247 on May 16, 2013, 11:46:57 AM
Post by: elk247 on May 16, 2013, 11:50:49 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 16, 2013, 11:53:27 AM
My neighbor shot robo deer two years ago and still cant hunt. He also lost a big chunck of change. Sound like you get in more trouble for shooting robo deer than the real thing :bash:
I guess that's what happens when you forget what the rules say. :tup:
Post by: link on May 16, 2013, 02:20:11 PM
Post by: Smossy on May 16, 2013, 03:20:59 PM
Ya, no kidding! Its easier to plead guilty then prove your innocent. Messed up system, guilty til proven innocent based on the police report. Just the way it is. Rules are made up and broken based on variable technicalities by judges and prosecuters. Seen it first hand. Twice. You are right Smossy, and you know how the system doesnt work right. They got a first offense break. Promise we would have had different results. Youth, mistakes are common. :twocents: We can hope they learn from it. Heck we lock up more people then any other country in the world. Hows that working for us? Smossy you are proof that people can overcome and learn from mistakes made in youth. I have as well, and many others. We all made dumb decisions as youth. Im ok with these kids punishment for the first offense. Now second time should be 6 months min.Yeah. You make some sense, wish I would have got an easier punishment for MY first offense. Nope. Three years, straight to maximum security at 20 years old.
Post by: Smossy on May 16, 2013, 03:23:25 PM
The dead buck in the picture with the two bozos posing with it, is not the same buck in the live shots. I guess they could be pictures of "Henry" from last year, or maybe Henry is still alive!uh oh we have a conspiracy now! :lol4:
Post by: jackmaster on May 16, 2013, 03:24:03 PM
Post by: elk247 on May 16, 2013, 04:05:06 PM
Post by: BsB on May 16, 2013, 04:17:59 PM
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 16, 2013, 04:19:38 PM
Uhm.... That's not a trophy buck. Damn news has probably never seen anything bigger than a spike.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
For fines, I'm not sure how the state decides it's a trophy animal. The minimums may be small. I think they should levy that big fine on all poached critters, doe, spike, trophy alike.
Post by: vandeman17 on May 16, 2013, 04:20:22 PM
Uhm.... That's not a trophy buck. Damn news has probably never seen anything bigger than a spike.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
For fines, I'm not sure how the state decides it's a trophy animal. The minimums may be small. I think they should levy that big fine on all poached critters, doe, spike, trophy alike.
I agree that it shouldn't matter the size. Hammer them all!
Post by: gaddy on May 16, 2013, 04:27:00 PM
if not agreeable, then 4 willy whack's a day for two weeks incarcerated & loss of hunting the state for life.+ cost of incarceration
end of a poacher.
Post by: Old Man Yager on May 17, 2013, 08:21:48 AM
Post by: RoyBoy on May 18, 2013, 02:50:52 AM
Post by: jrebel on May 18, 2013, 08:56:18 AM
If this is their first offense then the penalty fits the crime. They will now have a criminal record that will follow them for a while (depending on their age).
The real problem is that people with criminal histories don't care how much you fine them or how long their stay in county jail is. They probably won't pay the fine anyway. Put them in jail and the tax payers have to pay for them. It is a loose loose system. If they prove to be habitual offenders they should be taken to pasture and shot......but that is not politically correct either. Our criminal system is broken. How do you punish someone, hold them accountable, and still give them a chance to be productive members of society????
Long story short....If this is their first offense, the punishment is suitable and with any luck it will not follow them for the rest of their life. If it does they will likely continue to poach as they have no opportunity to do it legally. :twocents:
Second offense....well can't fix stupid so we should just cleanse the jean pool. :twocents:
Post by: ghosthunter on May 18, 2013, 09:07:58 AM
I think they went too light on them. Its one thing to make a mistake and shoot a two point or something. It is another to see a deer out of season ,go home get a bow ,trespass and kill the deer, than be happy about it. :twocents:
Post by: mpetersen on May 18, 2013, 09:18:50 AM
Post by: Pathfinder101 on May 19, 2013, 07:52:05 AM
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2013, 08:02:16 AM
My thoughts on the topic...
If this is their first offense then the penalty fits the crime. They will now have a criminal record that will follow them for a while (depending on their age).
The real problem is that people with criminal histories don't care how much you fine them or how long their stay in county jail is. They probably won't pay the fine anyway. Put them in jail and the tax payers have to pay for them. It is a loose loose system. If they prove to be habitual offenders they should be taken to pasture and shot......but that is not politically correct either. Our criminal system is broken. How do you punish someone, hold them accountable, and still give them a chance to be productive members of society????
Long story short....If this is their first offense, the punishment is suitable and with any luck it will not follow them for the rest of their life. If it does they will likely continue to poach as they have no opportunity to do it legally. :twocents:
Second offense....well can't fix stupid so we should just cleanse the jean pool. :twocents:
I can almost guarantee this isn't their first offense. It's only the first time they've been caught. I agree that they shouldn't spend much jail time for a first offense, but I think that not only should they lose their hunting privileges, they should lose the guns used in the act, be fined stiff penalties, and have to take Hunter Education over again before they're allowed to hunt. And, if the penalties are so stiff, it "forces them to poach again" (kind of a ridiculous argument), then the next time, they should be charged with felonies.
I don't support that you go soft on crime just because criminals don't care what the penalty is. Especially with wildlife infractions, when they see the cost of getting caught, they're going to be much less likely to reoffend. AND, others will take note that this isn't taken lightly by LE.
Post by: Knocker of rocks on May 19, 2013, 08:14:43 AM
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021008237_animalsexxml.html (http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021008237_animalsexxml.html)
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2013, 08:18:56 AM
How does this fit in with the need for a stiff sentance
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021008237_animalsexxml.html (http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021008237_animalsexxml.html)
Unbelievable.
Post by: danderson on May 19, 2013, 08:27:38 AM
Post by: Sitka_Blacktail on May 19, 2013, 09:01:21 AM
If it was the guy's first offense then I think two days in jail and community service isn't a bad punishment. It is more then a lot of others that I have heard. :bash:I don't think its nearly enough.
People need to be "scared" to poach because of the punishment. Not "Oh hey lets just hope we don't get caught".
While 2 days seems light for deliberately breaking just about any law, the scare them out of breaking the law scenario doesn't really work either. (I haven't seen the death penalty "scare" anyone from committing murder. It just insures no repeat offenders) We need penalties that fit the crime. What's a first time DUI conviction get you in Washington? ( 1 day jail (if BAC is less than .15%); 2 days jail (if BAC is .15% or greater) I personally find that a more heinous crime than poaching a deer, just to put this 2 day sentence in perspective.
Post by: Knocker of rocks on May 19, 2013, 09:05:00 AM
If it was the guy's first offense then I think two days in jail and community service isn't a bad punishment. It is more then a lot of others that I have heard. :bash:I don't think its nearly enough.
People need to be "scared" to poach because of the punishment. Not "Oh hey lets just hope we don't get caught".
While 2 days seems light for deliberately breaking just about any law, the scare them out of breaking the law scenario doesn't really work either. (I haven't seen the death penalty "scare" anyone from committing murder. It just insures no repeat offenders) We need penalties that fit the crime. What's a first time DUI conviction get you in Washington? ( 1 day jail (if BAC is less than .15%); 2 days jail (if BAC is .15% or greater) I personally find that a more heinous crime than poaching a deer, just to put this 2 day sentence in perspective.
And our Legislature between battles to impliment gender neutral verbaige, has now stiffened the DUI laws to make the fourth DUI a felony, versus the fifth.
How about doing something, and making the first or second DUI a felony
Post by: Mudman on May 19, 2013, 09:59:09 AM
Post by: jrebel on May 19, 2013, 03:46:48 PM
My thoughts on the topic...
If this is their first offense then the penalty fits the crime. They will now have a criminal record that will follow them for a while (depending on their age).
The real problem is that people with criminal histories don't care how much you fine them or how long their stay in county jail is. They probably won't pay the fine anyway. Put them in jail and the tax payers have to pay for them. It is a loose loose system. If they prove to be habitual offenders they should be taken to pasture and shot......but that is not politically correct either. Our criminal system is broken. How do you punish someone, hold them accountable, and still give them a chance to be productive members of society????
Long story short....If this is their first offense, the punishment is suitable and with any luck it will not follow them for the rest of their life. If it does they will likely continue to poach as they have no opportunity to do it legally. :twocents:
Second offense....well can't fix stupid so we should just cleanse the jean pool. :twocents:
I can almost guarantee this isn't their first offense. It's only the first time they've been caught. I agree that they shouldn't spend much jail time for a first offense, but I think that not only should they lose their hunting privileges, they should lose the guns used in the act, be fined stiff penalties, and have to take Hunter Education over again before they're allowed to hunt. And, if the penalties are so stiff, it "forces them to poach again" (kind of a ridiculous argument), then the next time, they should be charged with felonies.
I don't support that you go soft on crime just because criminals don't care what the penalty is. Especially with wildlife infractions, when they see the cost of getting caught, they're going to be much less likely to re offend. AND, others will take note that this isn't taken lightly by LE.
All I am saying is a guy (kid / young man) can be ruined if it were always black and white. We don't know if it was the first or second or 100th time........but if indeed they had a lapse in judgment, as many of us have at somepoint in our life, they shouldn't be hung at the cross for a fist offense. With the information given we have to assume it is their first attempt, we have no proof otherwise. Right??
With that being said, I don't think my argument is ridiculous. If you label someone in our society and you take away all their rights with a first offense then what makes you think they care if they get caught again?? They have already lost everything so they have nothing else to loose.
Though I agree the penalties should be stiff, I don't believe the punishment for a first offense should result in an insurmountable hurdle that otherwise ruins and labels a person for life.
Should a person caught speeding for the first time loose their license for a year and pay a $5,000 fine?
Johnny
Post by: pianoman9701 on May 19, 2013, 04:33:12 PM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on May 19, 2013, 04:48:05 PM
If first dui was a felony hunting would all be archery! ALOT of people have had a dui. Sounds like great gun control!!!
This isn't about the perps hunting rights, this is about keeping drunks off the roads.
Post by: elk247 on May 19, 2013, 04:58:07 PM
Thats an entirely different topic. THIS thread is about poaching. My vote is make it hurt so bad the first time that no one will reoffend. I don't think someones life need to be ruined to accomplish that.If first dui was a felony hunting would all be archery! ALOT of people have had a dui. Sounds like great gun control!!!
This isn't about the perps hunting rights, this is about keeping drunks off the roads.
Post by: jrebel on May 19, 2013, 07:59:21 PM
No, the punishment should fit the crime. They committed a serious crime. They should pay dearly for it and maybe they won't the next time. Or, maybe it'll make someone else take pause before they do the same thing. Yes, everyone has lapses of judgment. But, when those lapses of judgment break the law and you get caught, you must pay the penalty. It's called keeping social order.
I guess that is where we dissagree....A fine, two days in jail and a criminal history is pretty severe to me (this is assuming they recieved no other punishment that may not have been mentioned). Now, if they don't learn their lesson and are caught poaching again they should pay a much harsher penalty.
They shot a deer out of season.....YES SERIOUS, but not death row worthy. :twocents: Especially on a first offense.
Post by: JODakota on May 19, 2013, 08:19:54 PM
I found this post very wise and right on the money. This isn't communist Russia.My thoughts on the topic...
If this is their first offense then the penalty fits the crime. They will now have a criminal record that will follow them for a while (depending on their age).
The real problem is that people with criminal histories don't care how much you fine them or how long their stay in county jail is. They probably won't pay the fine anyway. Put them in jail and the tax payers have to pay for them. It is a loose loose system. If they prove to be habitual offenders they should be taken to pasture and shot......but that is not politically correct either. Our criminal system is broken. How do you punish someone, hold them accountable, and still give them a chance to be productive members of society????
Long story short....If this is their first offense, the punishment is suitable and with any luck it will not follow them for the rest of their life. If it does they will likely continue to poach as they have no opportunity to do it legally. :twocents:
Second offense....well can't fix stupid so we should just cleanse the jean pool. :twocents:
I can almost guarantee this isn't their first offense. It's only the first time they've been caught. I agree that they shouldn't spend much jail time for a first offense, but I think that not only should they lose their hunting privileges, they should lose the guns used in the act, be fined stiff penalties, and have to take Hunter Education over again before they're allowed to hunt. And, if the penalties are so stiff, it "forces them to poach again" (kind of a ridiculous argument), then the next time, they should be charged with felonies.
I don't support that you go soft on crime just because criminals don't care what the penalty is. Especially with wildlife infractions, when they see the cost of getting caught, they're going to be much less likely to re offend. AND, others will take note that this isn't taken lightly by LE.
All I am saying is a guy (kid / young man) can be ruined if it were always black and white. We don't know if it was the first or second or 100th time........but if indeed they had a lapse in judgment, as many of us have at somepoint in our life, they shouldn't be hung at the cross for a fist offense. With the information given we have to assume it is their first attempt, we have no proof otherwise. Right??
With that being said, I don't think my argument is ridiculous. If you label someone in our society and you take away all their rights with a first offense then what makes you think they care if they get caught again?? They have already lost everything so they have nothing else to loose.
Though I agree the penalties should be stiff, I don't believe the punishment for a first offense should result in an insurmountable hurdle that otherwise ruins and labels a person for life.
Should a person caught speeding for the first time loose their license for a year and pay a $5,000 fine?
Johnny
Post by: Bob33 on May 19, 2013, 08:21:59 PM
If this was simply a mere lapse in judgment, they need a judgment readjustment.
They made several decisions along the way, any of which would most likely have mitigated the outcome. They chose to trespass. They chose to kill an animal without a valid license and tag. They chose to not report it. They chose to brag about it.
We all make mistakes, and when we do there are often consequences. Two days in jail seems reasonable considering the facts.
Post by: Shooter on May 19, 2013, 08:27:22 PM
Post by: Knocker of rocks on May 19, 2013, 08:29:25 PM
Post by: elk247 on May 19, 2013, 08:35:40 PM
The circumstances are that the animal was essentially a well known neighborhood pet, the animal was shot while trespassing on private land, the animal is considered a trophy, and the men bragged about their kill to others including to a WDFW enforcement officer.Didn't they ask the undercover warden to take the picture while they posed with the buck? These guys knew better. I would hope the punishment not only teaches them but others as well.
If this was simply a mere lapse in judgment, they need a judgment readjustment.
They made several decisions along the way, any of which would most likely have mitigated the outcome. They chose to trespass. They chose to kill an animal without a valid license and tag. They chose to not report it. They chose to brag about it.
We all make mistakes, and when we do there are often consequences. Two days in jail seems reasonable considering the facts.
Post by: 20 Minutes on May 19, 2013, 08:37:19 PM
I reported it to the game department and asked she send someone out to investigate. She said poaching goes on all over Wa, so they would not send someone out? I asked her; why don't they setup a trail camera or sting operation to try and catch these guys? She said they do what they can and she is sure that officiers in the area are aware of it.
I have a big problem with the response I got from the game department.
Post by: elk247 on May 19, 2013, 08:47:40 PM
Post by: 20 Minutes on May 19, 2013, 09:07:14 PM
Wow, thats a garbage response. A trail cam seems like the least they could do.
She basically said that due to the lack of officiers in the area, that they would make note of it and that is it. Seems like BS too me.
Post by: elk247 on May 19, 2013, 11:34:31 PM
Post by: 20 Minutes on May 19, 2013, 11:47:06 PM
They sell deer and elk jerky year round at the bars in town. I am guessing that jerky meat is poached. You don't get that much jerky out of an elk. When you sell it year round it does not last that long. I think that is part of the problem with poaching. Locals feel like it is their right to go out and shoot an animal whenver they want, because they live there. Others just thril kill them and let them lay. Now hoof rott and wolves will be the next to take their turn. All this pisses me off!
Post by: huntnnw on May 20, 2013, 12:51:27 AM
Post by: winshooter88 on May 20, 2013, 01:13:48 AM
Post by: hdshot on May 24, 2013, 12:32:42 PM
Wow, thats a garbage response. A trail cam seems like the least they could do.
Then what if they get a dude or two on a trail cam? If animals are boned out they won't be holding the head of other parts to prov 100% what animal they had.
The poaching case posted is very obvious. Unfortunately if a hunter makes an honest mistake they will face the same punishments and we know as hunters how tricky laws can get. This side of the tree season is closed and to the right season started with any buck, behind it is 4 point with 1 more day of the season after today, and to the left is any deer today on private property with a hunt with written permission sign.
These laws are so messed up the law does not even know whats going on. One time I knew the area but someone made a false report on me and the sheriff showed up. After a little chat schooling him he still took all my info and kicked me off to do his "investigation" of public hunting that was register to hunt. Wasn't worried about getting in trouble but still very upset about it to this day
Post by: Pathfinder101 on May 24, 2013, 01:54:09 PM
The mandatory wildlife poaching fine in this state for illegal take of a trophy (4 point or better) deer is I believe $4000 and cannot be reduced by a judge. For a trophy bull elk, a bighorn sheep, mountain goat or a moose is $6000. These fines were put in place a few years ago, the WDFW sought these criminal assessments because the courts were very quick to reduce or remove the fines on poaching cases.
That sounds correct to me. Like I said, these guys got hit with more than it said in the news story. Stuff that CANT be reduced by a touchy-feely judge...
Post by: hdshot on May 24, 2013, 03:00:41 PM
The mandatory wildlife poaching fine in this state for illegal take of a trophy (4 point or better) deer is I believe $4000 and cannot be reduced by a judge. For a trophy bull elk, a bighorn sheep, mountain goat or a moose is $6000. These fines were put in place a few years ago, the WDFW sought these criminal assessments because the courts were very quick to reduce or remove the fines on poaching cases.
That sounds correct to me. Like I said, these guys got hit with more than it said in the news story. Stuff that CANT be reduced by a touchy-feely judge...
The officer said jail and community service. Does the law state 4000 per person or 4000 per deer? Sounds like the fine could of been split between the 2 poachers and paid off by jail time and community service? It comes down to what the prosecutor wants to charge and what the judge enforces. That's why we vote for these people or for the people who put them in.
I'm sure the news would of loved to have reported the $4000 or $8000 in total fines.
Post by: elk247 on May 24, 2013, 03:44:29 PM
If they get a dude or two with 8 different boned out elk we got a problem. I don't want to see people accused of poaching. If there is evidence though, guts with female organs in a bull only unit, bucks or bulls harvested in july then throw the damn book at the lowlifes responsable. It easy to see that laws are messed up, mistakes are made, but downright poaching, spotlighting and such is b.s.Wow, thats a garbage response. A trail cam seems like the least they could do.
Then what if they get a dude or two on a trail cam? If animals are boned out they won't be holding the head of other parts to prov 100% what animal they had.
The poaching case posted is very obvious. Unfortunately if a hunter makes an honest mistake they will face the same punishments and we know as hunters how tricky laws can get. This side of the tree season is closed and to the right season started with any buck, behind it is 4 point with 1 more day of the season after today, and to the left is any deer today on private property with a hunt with written permission sign.
These laws are so messed up the law does not even know whats going on. One time I knew the area but someone made a false report on me and the sheriff showed up. After a little chat schooling him he still took all my info and kicked me off to do his "investigation" of public hunting that was register to hunt. Wasn't worried about getting in trouble but still very upset about it to this day
Post by: beak-in-the-barrel on May 25, 2013, 06:44:31 PM
Post by: Pathfinder101 on May 26, 2013, 01:07:13 PM
The mandatory wildlife poaching fine in this state for illegal take of a trophy (4 point or better) deer is I believe $4000 and cannot be reduced by a judge. For a trophy bull elk, a bighorn sheep, mountain goat or a moose is $6000. These fines were put in place a few years ago, the WDFW sought these criminal assessments because the courts were very quick to reduce or remove the fines on poaching cases.
That sounds correct to me. Like I said, these guys got hit with more than it said in the news story. Stuff that CANT be reduced by a touchy-feely judge...
The officer said jail and community service. Does the law state 4000 per person or 4000 per deer? Sounds like the fine could of been split between the 2 poachers and paid off by jail time and community service? It comes down to what the prosecutor wants to charge and what the judge enforces. That's why we vote for these people or for the people who put them in.
I'm sure the news would of loved to have reported the $4000 or $8000 in total fines.
Has anyone ever heard of perpetrators "splitting" a fine? I am pretty sure that's not possible. Only one guy actually poached the deer. He would get the fine. They other *censored* would just be an accomplice. Different penalties. I am sure they both got jail and community service though. Probably why it was reported that way. :dunno:
Post by: 20 Minutes on May 26, 2013, 07:49:04 PM
The mandatory wildlife poaching fine in this state for illegal take of a trophy (4 point or better) deer is I believe $4000 and cannot be reduced by a judge. For a trophy bull elk, a bighorn sheep, mountain goat or a moose is $6000. These fines were put in place a few years ago, the WDFW sought these criminal assessments because the courts were very quick to reduce or remove the fines on poaching cases.
That sounds correct to me. Like I said, these guys got hit with more than it said in the news story. Stuff that CANT be reduced by a touchy-feely judge...
If they both shoot the deer, they each get a fine for "shooting and illegal deer". The final person who shoots and kills the deer, would get a fine for "wastage of game" etc. I am sure there are several fine options that can get slapped upon them.
The officer said jail and community service. Does the law state 4000 per person or 4000 per deer? Sounds like the fine could of been split between the 2 poachers and paid off by jail time and community service? It comes down to what the prosecutor wants to charge and what the judge enforces. That's why we vote for these people or for the people who put them in.
I'm sure the news would of loved to have reported the $4000 or $8000 in total fines.
Has anyone ever heard of perpetrators "splitting" a fine? I am pretty sure that's not possible. Only one guy actually poached the deer. He would get the fine. They other *censored* would just be an accomplice. Different penalties. I am sure they both got jail and community service though. Probably why it was reported that way. :dunno:
Post by: Simcoe hunter on May 26, 2013, 08:51:05 PM
Really? They have nothing left to lose? They have their freedom to lose. Let's not take the punishment away because then we'll have nothing left to hold over them. Capital punishment hasn't deterred murder because we don't use it often enough. We would rather let them have life in prison and ease our conscience that we aren't killers ourselves. Look up how many murders were committed in the US last year vs. how many convicted murderers were put to death.