PONDERINGS

I am for capital punishment. Why keep them around in the prison system as a drain on our resources when they will most likely never become a productive member of society?

I always cringe when I watch a superhero movie and it gets to the usual part where he has the bad guy right in his clutches but he lets him go because it's against his character to kill someone. And then in the sequel the bad guy runs free and nearly kills his girlfriend and... oh yeah the rest of the world. If the superhero realized it was him or the rest of the world, I think he might find that the more just and right thing would be to see to it that the bad guy will no longer be fit for global destruction.

There are a lot of petty criminals who are more or less dragged into crime by necessity or ignorance. A lot of these people really can turn around and become functioning parts of society. These people are NOT the ones we're talking about when Capitol Punishment is proposed. I think a lot of people miss this part.

People aren't proposing we kill criminals who stole a pack of gum from a convenience store, jaywalked, or smashed bread in a bakery (Yes someone actually went to jail for this). We're talking about the people who are so mentally or morally unstable that they have no qualms with killing other human beings, and have been caught in the act of doing so repeatedly. We're talking about the kind of criminal who will never be returned to society because they are just too dangerous. This class of criminal has only two options. They can rot in prison for the rest of their life, consuming enough food and resources to feed a lot of good, hard working Americans. They can live in luxury compared to many people in this world. The other option is to prolong the inevitable and end their life on the spot.

I'm never a fan of killing someone and there are very few times I consider it morally acceptable. But just like in war times, if someone is going to kill you, you better darn well kill him first. Most criminals up for execution are in the same category. If they ever do get loose, we could all be in trouble.

I also think that any death sentences had better be monitored VERY closely and scrutinized heavily to keep innocent people from being executed. Any movements to make this more widely used or to allow executions for lesser crimes could lead us down a very dangerous path. If our legal system became too lax, and our punishments too harsh, we could end up sending many innocent people to their deaths. Once the trend is set, it opens up the doors for a lot of problems.  

Both sides of the debate have very good points and I understand why the issue is cause for such conflict. I think both sides of the argument need to look a little closer at the bigger picture. I think if both sides considered the very valid and true points made by their opponents, we would all be a lot better equipped to defend our standpoints.

1. It's morally wrong, and the government should not be engaged in murder.

2. If the criminal is already behind bars, society is protected.

3. It costs more to execute a criminal than to keep him imprisoned for life. Much of the expense is because of the appeals process, but given the number of people we now know have been imprisoned though innocent, to do less would be inhumane. (Florida leads the nation in exoneration of death row prisonsers.)

4. It is not a deterrent to crime. The US is the only nation in the western world that engages in executions, and still we have the highest murder rate.

5. Because the US executes prisoners, we have lost all credibility in regard to other nations' human rights records.

I unknowingly opened an unaddressed envelop that contained color photos surreptiously taken that same day at Jesse Trafero's execution by electrocution, It was one of several times Florida botched an execution. In this instance, the prisoners head caught fire, and he lived for eight minutes before enough electricity could be transferred to kill him.

A friend of mine who was a Pulitzer Prize finalist was the AP pool reporter chosed by lottery to represent the media at Trafero's execution. She left journalism, left Florida, and became a house painter for a few years before attending law school. She now represents capital appeals cases in Sacramento.

Since Trafero's execution, evidence was presented that exonerated his wife, who was also on death row. Jesse Trafero's innocence is now also generally accepted

Here are some links to websites for Trafero and the Innocence Project of Florida. Good luck.

www.quixote.org/.../Jesse%20J.%20Tafero.html

www.floridainnocence.org/Default.html

Panda, I also came across the 1999 column my friend wrote after Trafero. You might be interested.

http://www.slate.com/id/32298/

That's the link you need for Ellen McGarrahan's calumn if you're interested in her reaction.

Panda, I would love to be for it.  I would be if I thought we got it right 100% of the time or that the process was efficient.  Having watched our courts in action, I don't believe they are good enough to make that kind of call.  When a crime is committed there is a feeling that seems to take hold of people that there must be retribution.  I believe personally that it clouds peoples judgement and prevents them from weighing the facts.  Our court system seems to be one of the best there is, but that isn't saying much.

as kurt above mentioned, the process is not fool proof. i urge anyone who still thinks it is to <a href="www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php about falsely convicted death row inmates</a>.

but aside from the issue of erroneously executing criminals, i am more against it because i do not believe in murdering people to, you know, teach them that murder is unacceptable.

Emcee Christmas, if you have a rapist, murderer, pedophile or all three and you are 100% sure they have done something so horrible that they are beyond redemption in this world, then sending them to the next is doing them and society a favor.  In my opinion it's not punishment.  It's just a sad fact that they stepped over a line of no return.  

I won't even say where I stand on the actual issue of capitol punishment but I'll point out some things people seem to fail to realize.

There are natural consequences for doing something so obviously and horribly wrong. If you don't want to be executed, don't go on a mass killing spree. I don't have a lot of sympathy for those who do.

I'm against war, and I would advocate just about any measures to keep war from happening, but the fact is it happens. It is sometimes necessary to kill to protect the world. I'm sorry that people had to die, but I don't regret that my forefathers killed people to make this country free. I don't regret that our ancestors killed people to set slaves free. I wouldn't regret killing people who were trying to come to my country and kill my family. I would rather any other option, but sometimes there is no option. It's not the right or just thing to sit back and let someone come in and kill your family.

Just like war is considered morally acceptable because it's defending those you love from death and danger, executing murderers is the same thing. So I can't agree with Emcee's statement that executing murderers to protect society from them is itself murder.

ok, I see it like this... I'm almost positive that what Writer Lady said was incorrect, umm, it does cost more to keep the person in our jails than to acutally kill them.  WE now have the benefit of lethal injection and the such.... I'm not sure what kind of execution she's referring to but, paying for someone's life for say.... 30 years, their food, their babysitters, their clothes... their rent.... water.... lights... and the such... it gets kind of expensive.

For the sympathy... well, I do not sympathize with these mass murders, and repeat rapist, I may empathize with them... but sympathize, never.  A rapist, 2/3 times, will rape again... a killer, unless it is just a spur of the moment thing, and still even then, will most likely kill again.  We need these people off the streets.  Now, if we take them off the streets, they should not become a burden to me.  I should not have to pay because of a criminal.  So, this is what I say.  Until there is a prison that can stand on it's own, pay for itself, and those who watch over it, then the criminals who will do some atrocity to our society should be put away with no burden on me.  If the only way that can be done is capital punishment, then so be it.  They know before they commit the crime that they may be killed for it.

I think writer lady was correct. It costs 30K to 35K a year per prisoner to keep them alive.  If you are convicted of murder and sentenced to death, you usually spend several years in prison before execution.  The legal process is very very expensive and you are given special funds to investigate the murder, 50K I believe. I have heard this stat before but it could easily cost millions dollars to execute someone in at least our state of Florida.  The Tampa Tribune reports it costs an average of 3.2 million per execution.  

www.fadp.org/.../MGBK14JORUD.html

In fact, the recidivism rate is very low for murderers, according to the US Dept. of Justice:

--Within 3 years of release, 2.5% of released rapists were rearrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for a new homicide.

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/.../crimoff.htm