Post by SoulTrainOz on Jul 17, 2006 23:13:10 GMT -5
By David Hampton
dhampton@clarionledger.com
It's hard to debate the death penalty with any reason when the state is on the countdown to give somebody the big needle.
It's hard to argue against the death penalty when the prospect for execution is Bobby Glen Wilcher. If there ever was a thug worthy of the death penalty, Wilcher is your guy.
But that is usually the case. The death penalty is usually debated in the context of the latest execution. The exhuastive news coverage gives all the details of the crime, the loss of the victims and the history of the years of frustrating appeals.
In Wilcher's case, he brutally stabbed two women for no apparent reason other than cruel meanness. He has been found guilty multiple times, and even talked about the gory details of the crime. Wilcher has been on Death Row for 24 years and has said he wants to die.
NEWSPAPER SUPPORTS
But the Supreme Court last week halted the execution minutes before the state was to shoot the poison into his veins. The wait continues and the debate, as always, continues.
This newspaper supports the death penalty. It has throughout its history. I personally do not.
Although it is the job of editorial writers to write the position of the newspaper, not their personal beliefs, my colleagues who do support the death penalty usually take those duties, which I appreciate. I have had to make the arguments for, however, and understand them fully. These comments are my own.
I oppose the death penalty mainly on moral grounds. I don't think the state should kill people. I understand that a moral argument is just that and we could debate it ad nauseam with no conclusion. So, I'll leave the moral argument there.
But I also just don't think it works.
It is not a deterrent to crime and serves little purpose toward the aims of justice. Perhaps there is no deterrent to the crimes that the people on Death Row commit. Some are so heinous that they are just evil.
But killing someone for a crime a quarter of a century after the fact removes any deterrence. Perhaps a few remember, but there is no statement of justice from a society and its judicial system.
NO ROOM FOR MISTAKES
I also don't trust the competence of the state to carry out the ultimate sanction of the death penalty.
The judicial system is not perfect, and we accept that. But in dealing with life or death, "beyond a shadow of a doubt" becomes essential. How many innocent people have been put to death because of a mistake?
The advance in science with DNA testing has proven the flaws in the system. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 120 Death Row inmates have been released since 1973 after new evidence proved their innocence.
The politics of the death penalty are difficult, especially in the South. It is difficult for officials to openly oppose it. I admire Illinois Gov. George Ryan who a few years ago put a moratorium on the death penalty because of the questions raised by DNA testing. That was not easy.
Deep down, I don't think Americans really want to face the death penalty. If we started putting the more than 3,000 inmates on Death Row to death on television every night, I doubt it would last long. That is one reality show that wouldn't make it.
But we will continue to hear about it when a Bobby Glen Wilcher's time is up. We will consider the awful crimes and bemoan the length of time it took to carry out the sentence. We won't talk much about the lack of effectiveness or purpose for the death penalty in our justice system.
Life in prison should mean life in prison and the death penalty should be relegated to history.
Source: Clarionledger.com
www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060716/COL0408/607160319
dhampton@clarionledger.com
It's hard to debate the death penalty with any reason when the state is on the countdown to give somebody the big needle.
It's hard to argue against the death penalty when the prospect for execution is Bobby Glen Wilcher. If there ever was a thug worthy of the death penalty, Wilcher is your guy.
But that is usually the case. The death penalty is usually debated in the context of the latest execution. The exhuastive news coverage gives all the details of the crime, the loss of the victims and the history of the years of frustrating appeals.
In Wilcher's case, he brutally stabbed two women for no apparent reason other than cruel meanness. He has been found guilty multiple times, and even talked about the gory details of the crime. Wilcher has been on Death Row for 24 years and has said he wants to die.
NEWSPAPER SUPPORTS
But the Supreme Court last week halted the execution minutes before the state was to shoot the poison into his veins. The wait continues and the debate, as always, continues.
This newspaper supports the death penalty. It has throughout its history. I personally do not.
Although it is the job of editorial writers to write the position of the newspaper, not their personal beliefs, my colleagues who do support the death penalty usually take those duties, which I appreciate. I have had to make the arguments for, however, and understand them fully. These comments are my own.
I oppose the death penalty mainly on moral grounds. I don't think the state should kill people. I understand that a moral argument is just that and we could debate it ad nauseam with no conclusion. So, I'll leave the moral argument there.
But I also just don't think it works.
It is not a deterrent to crime and serves little purpose toward the aims of justice. Perhaps there is no deterrent to the crimes that the people on Death Row commit. Some are so heinous that they are just evil.
But killing someone for a crime a quarter of a century after the fact removes any deterrence. Perhaps a few remember, but there is no statement of justice from a society and its judicial system.
NO ROOM FOR MISTAKES
I also don't trust the competence of the state to carry out the ultimate sanction of the death penalty.
The judicial system is not perfect, and we accept that. But in dealing with life or death, "beyond a shadow of a doubt" becomes essential. How many innocent people have been put to death because of a mistake?
The advance in science with DNA testing has proven the flaws in the system. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 120 Death Row inmates have been released since 1973 after new evidence proved their innocence.
The politics of the death penalty are difficult, especially in the South. It is difficult for officials to openly oppose it. I admire Illinois Gov. George Ryan who a few years ago put a moratorium on the death penalty because of the questions raised by DNA testing. That was not easy.
Deep down, I don't think Americans really want to face the death penalty. If we started putting the more than 3,000 inmates on Death Row to death on television every night, I doubt it would last long. That is one reality show that wouldn't make it.
But we will continue to hear about it when a Bobby Glen Wilcher's time is up. We will consider the awful crimes and bemoan the length of time it took to carry out the sentence. We won't talk much about the lack of effectiveness or purpose for the death penalty in our justice system.
Life in prison should mean life in prison and the death penalty should be relegated to history.
Source: Clarionledger.com
www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060716/COL0408/607160319