Stop the Death Penalty

I've been a little slow getting around to this but legislation has been introduced in the California State Assembly to suspend executions. You can find more at Death Penalty Focus:

On June 14, 2005 California State Assemblymembers Paul Koretz (D-West Hollywood) and Sally Lieber (D-Mountain View) announced that they were introducing the “California Moratorium on Executions Act” (AB 1121). The act, if passed, would suspend all executions in California until January 1, 2009 while the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice conducts a thorough study of the state’s criminal justice procedures. Asm. Koretz declared, "For the state of California to continue to execute prisoners, while an official governmental body investigates the findings and allegations of error and justice and unfairness in the criminal justice system, just doesn't make sense."

The death penalty is one of the rare controversial topics where, I believe, the facts can truly shift your stance from one of support to one of opposition. I've seen it happen.

I have numerous reasons why I oppose the death penalty. Executing a healthy human can not be called justice. Far too many innocent people have been found on death row. Race and income play far too large a role in determining who gets it and who doesn't. And finally, it undermines the whole notion that life is sacred, that murder is wrong. But ultimately, I would like you to have reasons to oppose the death penalty. I urge you to research the facts and really think about it. In a perfect world where only the really bad bad people would be put to death, it might make some sense. But in the real world that's not the case. The death penalty is not justice. Justice is the righting of a wrong. If I steal your car, for justice to be served I must return it. In the case of murder, justice cannot be served.

Consider the following:

"Ernest Willis became the eighth person exonerated from Texas's death row on October 6, 2004, and the 117th person freed nationwide since 1973. Willis was sentenced to death 17 years ago for allegedly setting a house fire that killed
two people." (Death Penalty Information Center)

Now some take the above evidence and say, "See, the system works. That's over a hundred people that were not falsley executed." But if 117 people were found innocent, might not there have been 118 who were actually innocent, 130? Is there any way to know? DNA evidence is not always usefull in murder cases. The very fact that we have discovered 117 innocent people on death row should give us all pause. Is anybody so confident in our system that they believe that the 117 people found represents a 100% success rate? If you think it is working, please consider that

in a 1987 study covering a period between 1900 to 1985, it was found that 350 people were wrongly convicted and sentenced to death; 23 of these people were executed.Radelet, Bedau, and Putnam 'In Spite of innocence' (1992)

As a society can we live with the possible execution of innocent people?

Should race be a determining factor in who gets the death penalty? Most of us would agree it shouldn't be. But study after study reveals a clear link between race and the likelihood that one will recieve the death penalty.

"Examinations of the relationship between race and the death penalty, with varying levels of thoroughness and sophistication, have now been conducted in every major death penalty state. In 96% of these reviews, there was a pattern of either race-of-victim or race-of-defendant discrimination, or both. The gravity
of the close connection between race and the death penalty is shown when compared to studies in other fields. Race is more likely to affect death sentencing than smoking affects the likelihood of dying from heart disease. " (The
Death Penalty in Black and White: Who Lives, Who Dies, Who
Decides)

Is this tolerable? Consider that "Between 1930 and 1990, African-Americans were about 12 percent of the nation's population. During this period 4,016 persons were executed in the USA. Of these, 2,129 (or 53 percent) were African-Americans."NAACP. LDF. "Death Row. USA, 'Spring, 1992

Another factor in determining who we kill is often one's socio-economic status: i.e., how much money do you have?

Approximately ninety-percent of those on death row could not afford to hire a lawyer when they were tried."Tabak, in Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review (1989)

Well a few innocent people might be put to death. Minorities and the poor are subjected to the death penalty at higher rates. But it deters crime. It makes our streets safer, right? There is absolutely no clear evidence that the death penalty deters crime. Some will point to the fact that in the past ten years the number of executions have climbed and the murder rates have dropped as evidence that it's working. However, this neglects the fact that states without the death penalty have consistently lower murder rates than those that have it.

Then there are the financial costs of the death penalty. Here we have a system that is clearly not a deterrant to crime or murder, a system that has a relatively high level of fallacy when considering the irreversible outcome, and a system that is based more on race and income than the severity of the crime committed. A Tennessee Study done in July 2004 found the following:Death penalty trials cost an average of 48% more than the average cost of trials in which prosecutors seek life imprisonment.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center "In Texas, a death penalty case costs taxpayers an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years. [3] In Florida, each execution is costing the state $3.2 million. [4] In financially strapped California, one report estimated that the state could save $90 million each year by abolishing capital punishment. [5] The New York Department of Correctional Services estimated that implementing the death penalty would cost the state about $118 million annually.[6] "

Finally, the death penalty undermines the very notion that life is sacred, that murder is wrong. Life is either sacred or it is not. Murder is either wrong or it is not. The United States of America is the only Western Democracy that still uses the death penalty. We are also one of only five nations in the world that still executes children (see my journal entry on kids and the death penalty) The other four? China, Iran, Congo, and Pakistan. Are we leading the way on this issue? Or are we trailing behind? I'll leave that for you to decide. The hypothetical situations we typically come up with in support of the death penalty sound very good, but do they match up with reality? Do only the most heinous murderers recieve this sentence? Or are other factors such as race and economic status also large factors? The death penalty is a barbaric relic, an anachranism in the modern age. Innocent people have been executed. Many innocent people have been convicted. Race plays a huge role in determining who gets the death penalty. Another large factor is one's economic status. States without the death penalty have consistently lower murder rates than states that do have the death penalty. There is nothing that conclusively shows it to be a deterrant to crime. And it costs millions more in court costs and other related fees. It is a broken system that needs to be relegated to the trash bin of history. I urge you to sign this petition and help stop this brutal practice. Click here to sign it.

| +Save/Share | |