The state of North Carolina executed Kenneth Lee Boyd early this morning, the nation’s 1,000th execution since capital punishment resumed in 1976. I’m not morally opposed to executing a murderer. But application concerns make me conclude that the death penalty isn’t worth it.
For example, death penalty defendants are disproportionately poor and minority (though if you are a rich minority, like O.J. Simpson, you can get away with murder). Whether there is a death penalty case also depends on how aggressive the district attorney is (thus, similar crimes occurring in different parts of the same state may have different punishments). There is also the horrifying possibility of executing an innocent person. And not that money should be a big driver on this, but the legal costs of capital cases often are more than the cost of life in prison. Executions also seem to have little deterrent effect on future crimes.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/23
- Daniel on Too many exemptions
- BobChi on Let immigrants run
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- BobChi on Moore has had enough of House
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
17 Comments
While I am not necessarily a proponent of capital punishment, I can see a definite deterrent factor. Consider the 1000 that have been put to death will never kill anyone again.
But, sometimes I believe the death penalty is too kind for people like Richard Rameriz (the ‘night stalker’) who loved to torture his victims just to hear them scream. How about locking him in a room with relatives of his victims?
Pipedream, I know. Sadly, with the imperfections of the legal system and the absolute finality of the death penalty, I harbor serious doubts about its continuing use.
True, some people deserve to be released from life, but this country needs to come to grips with the fact that killing them accomplishes nothing. It does not deter crime, it is not going to stop the whacked out nutcase from killing whomever he or she wants.
Lock all the convicted killers, with life and no chance at parole, together in the same prison, seperated from other prisoners. Hell seperate them from everybody,and let them live out the rest of their lives in solitary. They’ve basically given up the right to be anything.
Rich folks generally kill wives or business partners who do us wrong (or hire some poor guy) — nothing particularly heinous about these types of crimes unless we do an OJ in conjunction with the deed. Most poor folk get greedy, habitual or angry and make a mess of it, like poor Tookie. Sure, a fancy team of lawyers help but that is a rare case. The vast majority of murderers do not go free nor do they get the death penalty. The only ‘miscarriage of justice’ cases I have heard about COULD be explained by some zealot sneaking into an evidence room and tampering with the DNA or simply losing it.I do agree, however, that keeping a convicted killer on Death Row with decades of appeals is asinine. If there is reasonable doubt he gets out. Maybe a second level for Death should be to allow truth serum, lie detectors and anything else currently inadmissible into the Life in prison vs. death decision.Of course the death penalty does not deter murder. It would but all potential murdurers know Death is a very, very remote possibility. The worst they can expect is a private cell for life.
America has excelled in the lst few years at quite a few noteable things:
America has Killed using the death penality 1000 human beings.
At the same time, America has expanded and added more and more prisions, jails, and detention centers. They even confine some prisoners in their own home in America becausw they a running out of money to build new jails. Building new prisions is a booming business there too!
At the same time America is offloading 3 million computer programer jobs to India and over a thousand aeronautical engineering jobs from Boeing to Moscow in Russia, no one can keep track of how many jobs are lost to China! Boeing even closed it’s airpland modification center in Wichita and opened a brand new one on China.
The remaining jobs at this time in America are: Prision warden, Prision guard, policeman, Prision builder, Stripper, sandwich assembler (now rated as manufacturing), CEO Offload Specialist, and mortician. Many have sought refuge in jail either to have food to eat or a chance earn a living through crime.
If India, Russia, and China ever thank us for all the old American jobs that used to make our country strong – we should be real proud!
A survey of all those on death row in the seventies showed a majority of those never considered before committing their crime. That they could be put to death for the crime, the thought of punishment has never been a deterrent to any criminal. So why have the death penalty if it is not a deterrent?
One, no repeat offenses as has been pointed out. Two, it was stated by a news reporter that witnessed her first execution: A society needs a visible, graphic way of saying that certain actions will not be tolerated by a society. To make a statement that we as a civilized people shall not allow certain crimes to be committed within the society. Recognizing that there are some crimes that there can be no restitution from, no forgiveness for by a civilized people. There is no vengeance or revenge in this, as in most cases the death suffered by the criminal does not compare to the crime that was committed. Nor should a society view such actions in that light. Both concepts end up being hollow and unrewarding, no the statement to be made is that society as a whole has a standard of behavior that to violated it can not be tolerated by the society.
What’s macabre is what these killers did to their victims.
By thier vicious and brutal actions against the innocent, they have chosen a path that rightly should end thier miserable existence.
Actually, Hammertime, state-sanctioned killing is pretty gruesome, too. Particularly when the person is innocent.
I’m glad Codie finds rich people killing each other perfectly acceptable (no comment). And, Codie, did you not hear about this?:http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/11/illinois.death.row/
Guess you were down in the soundproofed room. . . .
What you can say about someone who thinks we should bring psuedoscientific claptrap like “lie detectors” and “truth serum” int the mix?
Ray, studies show over and over that deterrence doesn’t enter into it. Someone who’s crazy enough to commit murder is typically not planning to get caught. Here’s the closest thing I’ve ever heard: Back before Kansas brought back the death penalty, Richard Grissom coldly killed three women in Missouri–which did have one–but dumped the bodies in Kansas, just in case. Comforting, isn’t it?
Statistics also show that murder rates are not higher in states without a death penalty.
I’m with J.M. on this one: lock ‘em up and forget about them.
Rage,
I guess it depends on how you look at it…locking prisioners up and forgetting about them- would be in a lot of people’s minds- a fate WORSE than death.
I suppose it’s more politically correct though. Personally, I’m not that sensitive.
Rage.’Not heinous’ is not the same as acceptable. It just does not qualify them for death under most state laws.Death Row serves two purposes. It isolates those who have no qualms about killing. It is expensive but it protects the guards and the general prison population from him. Folks like BTK start out in isolation but eventually will have the opportunity to enjoy his favorite pastime.NO, it should not cost so much. A time limit with expedited appeals is needed. 25 years waiting death for ‘Tookie’, the father of the Crips is obscene.BTW, the truth serum, etc. was to give a convicted killer an opportunity to get out, not in. And a mere 1000 executions is pitifully low considering the nature of the gentlemen still waiting.
Capitol Punishment is a third world practice. Most civilized countries have abolished it. Where does that put us?
Hammertime:”locking prisioners up and forgetting about them- would be in a lot of people’s minds- a fate WORSE than death.”
Agreed. What were saying about being “sensitive” and “politically correct”?
I think that life is so valuble, that when a person chooses to take it from someone else, he should have to pay for that life with his own.It’s only fair.
XXX
“Where does that put us?”
That puts us in Fallujah, murdering to our heart’s delight.
Or is that just Karl Rove’s delight?
Damoon, “fair” is not a term any sane, well-informed person would apply to the way the death penalty works in practice. Imagine, just for a moment, you’re an innocent person who’s been arrested and charged. You have no money, so you get a public defender.
If you’re lucky, it’ll be someone who cares about their job. Or that person could be drunk, sleep through the trial, ignore obvious leads, or cynically collaborate with the prosecution. All of this happens in America, and frequently. It’s something that seems to be endemic.
So you’re convicted, sentenced to death row. You appeal. Because your attorney failed to object to just about anything, your only hope is pleading ineffective assistance of counsel.
It’s an uphill battle, as everything must be considered “in the light most favorable to the prosecution.” Unfortunately, the conservatized courts don’t give shit about you. Evidence of prosecutorial misconduct and incompetent representation are dismissed with the sweep of a hand. Again, this has happened, and frequently.
And now you get to die for something you didn’t do, while the killer walks free. That’s really fair!
Damoon,Read!http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/editorial/13328667.htm
We need to fix the system, not just put people in jail for the rest of their lives on the assumption that they could be innocent of the crime they’re charged with.A person who willingly murders another should pay with his own life, regardless of how rich he is or how good his lawyers are. The consequence should be the same for everyone with few exceptions.Those who have no regard for life shouldn’t be allowed to exist in our society. We need to focus on fixing the problems within the system so that’s it’s equal for everyone. That’s only fair.
Fix the system. A noble goal. Then we can go visit the fairy princess together.
But assuming this happens in, say, 40 years, that won’t help the innocent people who will die in the meantime. And there will never be a judicial system that doesn’t occasionally convict innocent people, at least not without letting a large of number of guilty go free.