Injecting them softly
Here's an interesting look at some factors, other than the obvious, that make Texas the best and easiest state within which to get killed by the justice system.
Provided without comment.
posted by Luke @ 11:27 PM
11 comments
11 Comments:
You have to be registered on this site to be able to see the article.....
And in California they're "Injecting Them, Hardly".
[rim shot!]
At least in Texas no one can accuse the courts of not trying to keep up with the backload.
[rim shot! heyoh!]
Oop, sorry about the flippancy. Lost my composure.
I am, in theory, in support of the death penalty. The one argument that might sway me against it is that of the possibly mistaken convictions, or as we are to infer from the referenced NY Times article, racist enthusiasm to convict. The argument that perhaps in that big vat of death-row inmates there may even be just one innocent sad sack and even if just for him we ought to just stop the process entirely. I can get with that idea, perhaps. Maybe. However, just such a possibility is what I believe 20+ years of appeals is supposed to ferret out. In fact, 20+ years of appeals, preceded by an amazing labarynth of courtroom technodance hijinks that make it pert near impossible to actually convict with the special circumstances necessary for the death penalty in the first place.
I don't know.
Hey, how's THAT for conviction. [rim shot!][I'm here every night, thank you very much]
Omni, it does in deed, I should have mentioned that.
http://bugmenot.com/
Okay, registration stuff is annoying and everything, but if there is one newspaper in the whole wide world that you should register for, it's the times.
And, Luke, http://nytimes.blogspace.com/ is a nice, NYT specific link thingy. You can even generate your own registration URLs.
Anyway, back on topic, I think the thrust of the article isn't whether it's better to be pro- or anti-death penalty. Instead, it's just commentary on how bad the Texas justice system sucks the big one. Right now, there are no anti-death penalty Supremes and they've still over-whelmingly voted to smack down cases coming out of the Fifth Circuit.
I guess Don is sort of on the mark in that, regardless of your beliefs, the worst courts in the country, backed up by the most careless and conservative circuit in the country, should not be in a position to decide whether or not an inmate lives or dies.
--Mike Sheffler
... turning to the 3-D map, we see an unmistakable cone of ignorance
It's the age old argument: Retribution versus rehabilitation.
Round and round she goes. . .
I haven't seen the stats on this but I'm not sure that Texas has that many more death row inmates per capita compared to other death penalty states. I could be wrong but in any case the difference is that they carry out the sentences. Putting aside the pro-death/anti-death argument for a second, the question becomes, is Texas overly enthusiastic about killing or are the other comparable states overly ginger? California in 30 years has executed something around 1% of their death penalty convicts. If you're a "deterrence" supporter this is doing your argument no good. I myself am more of a "retribution" guy. So I'm OK with these people rotting away in solitary confinement under the weight of a 20+ year nightly haunt of impending unnatural demise. Life without parole is OK by me but I'm particularly sated if the barbarous thug has effectively the same sentence but under added mental strain.
To me the most important point of the NY Times article is the obvious inability of the Appeals system to handle the overwhelming number of cases. You can't feel good about every case getting it's deserved attention when the justices have to pump through 3 reviews per day PER JUSTICE just to keep up! Add districts! Give these cases their just deliberation. Again, if there is one mistaken conviction in the middle of that stack it shouldn't get just a glance over coffee before a smoke break.
- just more donsense
Don, I don't think the important statistic is deathrow inmates per capita, but executions per inmate.
California's deathrow is like 5 times larger [people wise, not square footage ;)] and they've executed something like 7 people in the last 14 years or something--as you hinted at with your 1% statistic.
This may sound trite, but the death penalty more than anything else is a moral issue. After the insane appelate costs and whatnot, I'm sure due process for an execution and a life term are fairly close price wise.
As America is a predominantly Christian country on the moral front we once again see a conflict of Christian doctrines. It's the Eye for an Eye camp vs. the turn the other cheek camp--or if you prefer the judge not lest ye be judged camp.
You're right that prison in general and executions specifically are shitty deterents, but it's even worse as a retributive tool. Revenge is an empty cup, anyone who's ever gone out and gotten revenge can tell you that.
And as we try to set ourselves up as beacons of enlightenment (in the non-17th century sense), leading a charge against religious oppression and murder, we have to ask ourselves if the fact that we're pretty much the only western nation that still has the death penalty makes us a good candidate for leading the charge of righteousness.
The city state of Florence got rid of the death penalty in the early 1700s for christ's sake. France got rid of it shortly after independence so what, the 1880's?
Why the hell do we still have it? Frontier justice and a pesky adherance to Old Testament justice.
/rant
Ahhh, the Death Penalty. Obviously, it is hipocrisy institutionalized, but before I get off on that tangent, I would like to mention that other more "humane" penalties in other countries- you know, the ones that understand that a death penalty is hypocrisy- usually involve a much quicker, more agonizing death than Texas would permit. Texas inmates don't usually crap themselves to death from dyssentery, or wither up from dehydration.
That's a whole 'nother ball of wax.
Oh and by the way, I have an entirely pragmatic spin on the death penalty. I'll make a whole post out of this. In California we will take about 180 years just to get through the existing backlog of death row inmates. 10 executions in 30 years, with 650 to go, is getting nowhere fast. Compared to Texas, we're using an eyedropper to fill the pool while they're doing raindances and diverting the Mississippi.
But here's my point. If we never in fact execute another death row inmate I still think the death penalty has done its job. How so, you ask?
I'll answer with a question: Under what other circumstances could you ever see a convicted criminal BEGGING AND PLEADING for Life in Prison with No Parole?
Well, time's up. None. I'm perfectly thrilled to live in a state where the heinous special-circumstances worst of the worst scum, have to actually HOPE for Life without Parole (LWOP) instead of the alternative.
And, if we didn't have this system in California where LWOP is a BEST ALTERNATIVE for a Special Circumstances defendant we wouldn't have nearly the number of guilty pleas for capital crime as we do, either.
Hey, they're the "worst of the worst". While both pro- and anti-death penalty observers can agree that really only the most appeal-proof of these cases will ever end in actual execution, I personally am thoroughly satisfied that those sentenced to death get to spend the better part of a few decades in rights-free solitary confinement, AND do so with a Helluva Monkey on their backs. Worry away, jerks.
Whatever basic enjoyments the lifers get in terms of reading and writing, exercise, visitors, etc., the deathers don't. And I'm good with that.
I'd never thought of that Don. The death penalty as a way of making crooks cop.
Post a Comment
<< Home