Post by SoulTrainOz on Jun 26, 2006 20:51:36 GMT -5
It seems every few years or so legislation is introduced that would lead to the death penalty in Michigan.
Well, it's happening again.
State Rep. Dan Acciavatti, a Republican from Macomb County, has introduced a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow the death penalty to be considered in first-degree murder cases.
Michigan is 1 of 12 states that doesn't allow capital punishment. The state ban has existed since Michigan first became a state in 1837.
There are several levels to this debate.
Are state-sponsored executions moral?
What are the costs of executing murderers compared to the costs of imprisoning them the rest of their lives?
Is capital punishment a deterrent to violent crime?
When dealing with human lives, this should not be a dollars and cents issue. The costs of housing prisoners is expensive, but as a society that is the choice we make in order to be civilized.
Morality debates are important, but we could spend the next 50 years arguing over what is and isn't moral.
In the business of deciding how to punish criminals, this is the bottom line: does the death penalty deter violent crime?
We don't believe it does.
We feel if someone is of the mindset to kill another human being, or if drugs have forced them to a life a violence, or if a fit of rage leads to a violent moment, then neither life in prison or the death penalty will sway them.
We simply believe the person who finds herself or himself at that place in life cannot connect the dots. They are either unable or are so vicious that reason simply isn't part of the equation.
The death penalty is not a deterrent. And if it's not, then in adopting it we would be doing so for all the wrong reasons.
(source: Editorial, Escanaba Daily Press)
Well, it's happening again.
State Rep. Dan Acciavatti, a Republican from Macomb County, has introduced a proposed constitutional amendment that would allow the death penalty to be considered in first-degree murder cases.
Michigan is 1 of 12 states that doesn't allow capital punishment. The state ban has existed since Michigan first became a state in 1837.
There are several levels to this debate.
Are state-sponsored executions moral?
What are the costs of executing murderers compared to the costs of imprisoning them the rest of their lives?
Is capital punishment a deterrent to violent crime?
When dealing with human lives, this should not be a dollars and cents issue. The costs of housing prisoners is expensive, but as a society that is the choice we make in order to be civilized.
Morality debates are important, but we could spend the next 50 years arguing over what is and isn't moral.
In the business of deciding how to punish criminals, this is the bottom line: does the death penalty deter violent crime?
We don't believe it does.
We feel if someone is of the mindset to kill another human being, or if drugs have forced them to a life a violence, or if a fit of rage leads to a violent moment, then neither life in prison or the death penalty will sway them.
We simply believe the person who finds herself or himself at that place in life cannot connect the dots. They are either unable or are so vicious that reason simply isn't part of the equation.
The death penalty is not a deterrent. And if it's not, then in adopting it we would be doing so for all the wrong reasons.
(source: Editorial, Escanaba Daily Press)