----------------------
HB 370 will replace the death penalty with life without parole. Facts show the death penalty is not a deterrent and is not cost effective. (The death penalty was not implemented for the purpose of deterrence. It was implemented as a punishment. It does, however deter at least one person - the recipient of the death penalty. I suspect that the death penalty might have more of a deterrent influence if the process of execution didn't result in seemingly endless legal maneuvering, delays, and appeals. If justice is not swift, it is not justice at all, and the deterrent effect lessens.)
The death penalty generates notoriety for the murderer, and the media profits. (This is a strange objection. What does notoriety have to do with justice? What does media profit have to do with how we decide the issue of the death penalty?)
Millions are spent for appeals that drag on for an average of 18 years. (This extended process is the direct result of leftist protests and lawsuits in an effort to de-legitimize the death penalty. So they have achieved the complication of the death penalty process and are now using that complication as a reason to end the death penalty. And why is the expense of any government process suddenly a concern for the left? They are never concerned with any other financial burdens imposed on the people.)
HB 370 will replace the death penalty with life without parole. Facts show the death penalty is not a deterrent and is not cost effective. (The death penalty was not implemented for the purpose of deterrence. It was implemented as a punishment. It does, however deter at least one person - the recipient of the death penalty. I suspect that the death penalty might have more of a deterrent influence if the process of execution didn't result in seemingly endless legal maneuvering, delays, and appeals. If justice is not swift, it is not justice at all, and the deterrent effect lessens.)
The death penalty generates notoriety for the murderer, and the media profits. (This is a strange objection. What does notoriety have to do with justice? What does media profit have to do with how we decide the issue of the death penalty?)
Millions are spent for appeals that drag on for an average of 18 years. (This extended process is the direct result of leftist protests and lawsuits in an effort to de-legitimize the death penalty. So they have achieved the complication of the death penalty process and are now using that complication as a reason to end the death penalty. And why is the expense of any government process suddenly a concern for the left? They are never concerned with any other financial burdens imposed on the people.)
Meanwhile, the victim’s family and loved ones suffer silently in the margins. (Yes, they suffer because the victims seem to have fewer rights than the guilty. This too can be laid at the feet of the Left in their quest to make it so difficult to execute a murderer [generally, it is murderers who are executed] that the family of the victim is forced through a multi-decade process of appeals and hearings.)
Too many mistakes have been made. (Justice is not perfect. Innocent people have been convicted. But that doesn't invalidate the process.)
Nationally, hundreds of men and women convicted of murder and put to death have later been found innocent. In 2011, after 24 years of incarceration in Montana State Prison, Barry Allan Beach, convicted of murder, was released when new information surfaced, allowing him another trial to prove his innocence. (It is unfortunate that justice fails. However, the reason innocent people are being freed is because the state-of-the-art in criminal forensics has improved so much. This means that fewer innocent people will be incarcerated and suffer the death penalty. But let's make note of the fact that Mr. Beach spent 24 unjust years in jail. Should we not send convicted criminals to jail because there's the possibility of innocence?
After all, if it's reprehensible to execute what may turn out to be an innocent man, then it must be reprehensible to send a possibly innocent man to jail for 24 years. By that logic, no one should be sent to jail because of the possibility that they're innocent. Indeed, then what's the point in having a trial? Why bother to arrest them? What's the point of having a police force, if there's even the slightest possibility of the innocence of the person?)
If our society is against murder, then let’s get out of the murder business. By retaining the death penalty, we all become murderers by proxy. (A breathtaking leap of logic. A person convicted of a capital crime and is executed is the recipient of justice, not murder. Even if discovered to be innocent later, justice was still administered. Justice does not require perfection.)
Lynne McLaren Bozeman
If our society is against murder, then let’s get out of the murder business. By retaining the death penalty, we all become murderers by proxy. (A breathtaking leap of logic. A person convicted of a capital crime and is executed is the recipient of justice, not murder. Even if discovered to be innocent later, justice was still administered. Justice does not require perfection.)
Lynne McLaren Bozeman
No comments:
Post a Comment