Death

Most of you who know me know that I am 100% anti-death penalty...so it's no surprise that I would be in the minority in these arguments. I really do think that a lot of people in this country take the easy way out and give in to knee jerk emotional reactions. I don't think this is a horrible sin, but I do think that it is always easier to quickly eliminate the 'problem' and move on, than actually exercise critical thinking and refrain from sweeping our dirty secrets under the rug of perceived "justice"
    Many people say I am soft on crime for this. And most of the time I just roll my eyes at their stereotype. The opinion that anti-death penalty advocates are more sympathetic to criminals than victims is just wrong. If someone brutally killed someone I love would I want the state to execute them? No I'd probably want to do it myself in the most brutal and painful way possible. I do not find this hypocritical though, as I believe it is a civilized government's job to not to allow that to happen. I know I would be filled with rage and hatred towards the criminal as most of us have and do feel for a monster like Tim McViegh. When it comes to him, do I believe he deserved to die?...If anyone does he does...Do I believe that he has no worth as a human being?...Most likely yes. Do I believe that it should be the job of the state to execute him? No. The fact is, there is no rational or compelling reason to execute anyone, regardless of how satisfying it might feel to watch him die.
   And here's why: First, The death penalty has never been a deterrent to crime, not since the beginning of time. Scientific studies have consistently failed to find convincing evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than other punishments. The most recent survey of research findings on the relation between the death penalty and homicide rates, conducted for the United Nations in 1988 and updated in 1996, concluded: "Research has failed to provide scientific proof that executions have a greater deterrent effect than life imprisonment and such proof is unlikely to be forthcoming. The evidence as a whole still gives no positive support to the deterrent hypothesis..."
(Reference: Roger Hood, The Death Penalty: A World-wide Perspective, Oxford, Clarendon Press, revised edition, 1996, p. 238, paragraph 328)

   Second, Whether you support or oppose capital punishment there is mounting evidence that the system is broken. A review of death penalty judgments over a 23-year period found a national error rate of 68 %. In a matter of life and death, we are getting it wrong more often than not. We need a moratorium on executions to give us time to figure out why the system is not working.

   Third, As long as the death penalty is maintained, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminated. Since 1973 more than 90 US prisoners have been released from death row after evidence emerged of their innocence of the crimes for which they were sentenced to death. Some had come close to execution after spending many years under sentence of death. Recurring features in their cases include prosecutorial or police misconduct; the use of unreliable witness testimony, physical evidence, or confessions; and inadequate defense representation. Other US prisoners have gone to their deaths despite serious doubts over their guilt. The Governor of the US State of Illinois, Republican George Ryan, declared a moratorium on executions in January 2000. His decision followed the exoneration of the 13th death row prisoner found to have been wrongfully convicted in the state since the USA reinstated the death penalty in 1977. During the same period, 12 other Illinois prisoners had been executed. Announcing the moratorium, Governor Ryan said: "I cannot support a system which, in its administration, has proven so fraught with error and has come so close to the ultimate nightmare, the state's taking of innocent life... Until I can be sure that everyone sentenced to death in Illinois is truly guilty, until I can be sure with moral certainty that no innocent man or woman is facing a lethal injection, no one will meet that fate. (If only others could be so responsible!)

   Fourth, there isn't uniformity. At it's best the death penalty is inconsistent, at it's worst blatantly racist. The percentages of white criminals sentenced to die are significantly less than the percentage minority criminals convicted of the same heinous crimes. If we are going to assume the power of life and death it should at least be administered in a level handed way.

   Fifth, those of you who say that tax payers should not be forced to pay 'extra' money to support a killer for a lifetime should know that on average, the total cost to execute a criminal is in fact more than the cost to incarcerate that criminal for life. With the biggest disparity ironically being in the state of Texas, where it costs over twice as much to execute a criminal as it does to keep him locked away for life.

   Sixth, The death penalty is barbaric, and the way it is used in this country is in ridiculously poor company. For example: International human rights treaties prohibit anyone under 18 years old at the time of the crime being sentenced to death. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the American Convention on Human Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child all have provisions to this effect. More than 110 countries whose laws still provide for the death penalty for at least some offences have laws specifically excluding the execution of child offenders or may be presumed to exclude such executions by being parties to one or another of the above treaties. A small number of countries, however, continue to execute child offenders. Seven countries since 1990 are known to have executed prisoners who were under 18 years old at the time of the crime - Congo (Democratic Republic), Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and The USA. The country that carried out the greatest number of known executions of child offenders was the USA (14 since 1990). That's a great group to belong to don't you think? Is it any wonder why we are seen as hypocritical for our stance on human rights for other countries? (We lost our seat on the United Nations Human Rights Coalition...something that was of course not heavily reported by media in this country..but that's another rant). 88 per cent of all known executions take place in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the USA. Over half the countries in the world have now abolished the death penalty in law or practice. For some reason, we cling to our base natures.
   Lastly, Many people believe that all this is meaningless...that the only thing that matters is "an eye for an eye." The punishment mentality is flawed on many levels. First, a foolish obsession with retribution against such warped individuals is nothing but an attempt at vengeance that almost never leaves the victims of the crime with any real sense of closure or peace, and for the most part let's the criminal escape a life time of punishment exiled from society. Secondly, there is no chance of closure or peace brought to fruition in the future. Thirdly, Truly unremorseful souls that have the possibility of affecting radical groups or society at large gain extra "punch" as a glorified martyr for their sickening cause. State empowered executions have always created excuses for extreme groups.
So, after all this...I hold firm to my belief that The Death Penalty is a barbaric, unreliable, unthinkable breach in human rights, and critical thinking.