Death Penalty Support Falling in U.S.
As U.S. support for the death penalty slowly fades, states are taking a renewed look at capital punishment in 2009, which is an extraordinarily expensive proposition in this era of catastrophic state revenues.
ABC News reported on October 22, 2009:
"In the latest ABCNEWS.com poll, just more than six in 10 Americans favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder, unchanged from January. Still, support for the death penalty is at its lowest level in 20 years, down from a high of 77 percent in 1996."An ABCNEWS poll in January found that support for the death penalty slips further, to just under half of the public, when life in prison without parole is offered as an alternative."
Personally, I abhor that the United States is the only western industrialized country, with or without democracy, to still believe that it's morally acceptable to engage in the pre-meditated taking of a human life, ironically usually in punishment for the taking of a human life.
To illustrate how heinously out-of-step with our allies the U.S. is on the death penalty, take a gander at the list of 2008 executions worldwide, by country:
- Executions in 2008, by Country
- China - 1,718
- Iran - 346
- Saudi Arabia - 102
- United States - 37
- Pakistan - 36
- Iraq - 34
- Vietnam - 19
- Afghanistan - 17
- North Korea - 15
- All others - 66
Two-thirds of all countries worldwide, have abolished the death penalty on moral grounds, while the U.S. continues, instead, to fall on the side of countries we hypocritically revile as having no respect for freedom or human life.
But if states choose to repeal the death penalty for understandable economic reasons, so be it. At least they're doing the right thing, even if not for the morally best motives.
In fact, two states recently repealed death penalty laws: New Jersey in late 2008 and New Mexico in March 2009. As of October 2009, 26 states have no statutes permitting capital punishment.
However, 34 states officially sanction the death penalty, as does the federal government. And each has widely, and unfairly, differing laws regarding its methods, age limits and crimes which qualify.
The death penalty is extremely controversial, especially among the eye-for-an-eye crowd. For a quick-reading summary, read my Pros & Cons of the Death Penalty.
As for the eye-for-an-eye crowd, I fervently wish they would meditate on Gandhi's wise words: "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind."
- Essential Reading
- Stanley "Tookie" Williams & the Death Penalty - What Is the Purpose of the Death Penalty?
- Readers Respond: Why Should, or Shouldn't, the U.S. Abolish the Death Penalty?
- Readers Respond: Should Stanley "Tookie" Williams have been executed by the state of California?
(Photo taken on June 29, 2009 in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Comments
The death penalty should be abolished: It is NOT A DETERRENT AT ALL (over 400 executions in Texas PROVE it!!!), INNOCENT EXECUTED PEOPLE CANNOT BE BROUGHT BACK TO LIFE.
It is mostly used for POOR and MINORITY people who cannot afford a good defense (and HOW NEUTRAL, OBJECTIVE, and COMPETENT is a jury of average citizens?)
It is INCOMPATIBLE WITH MODERN INDUSTRIALIZED DEMOCRACIES (only the USA, Singapore, Japan [KEIKO CHIBA, the new Justice Minister, wants discussion/moratorium/abolition],and–with a JUST PROLONGED moratorium–South Korea still have it).
This year, about 10 US States have wanted to abolish the death penalty, and it is a shame that so far ONLY ONE, NEW MEXICO, has really done so.
In Connecticut, people WANTED to abolish it, but Governor RELL did NOT sign the bill.
The ILLINOIS moratorium is a step in the right direction, but a full abolishment would be better.
Kansas and New Hampshire have had no executions since the reintroduction of the death penalty, but they have no official moratorium either, so the future is unclear. (In New Hampshire, they are now discussing the death penalty at least.)
I hope many US States and other countries will follow New Mexico’s example.
Many greetings,
ABOLITIONIST
FWIW here is a link to one of my posts about capital punishment that still gets hit every week (although my old blog remains in Google purgatory and I haven’t had any contact with it since June…)
http://bit.ly/2KYnXp
The death penalty is a truly barbaric practice.
Our national conscience has been blunted by too much entertainment making death and dying something for screen and stage. I don’t think HD television is helping either. Just this past week I surfed past parts of Platoon and Apocalypto, neither of which I have had the stomach to watch entirely, despite the achingly beautiful music of Barber. I didn’t know until I saw the credits that the other one was a Mel Gibson production. It made sense to me since his famous movie of the Passion struck me as a disgusting snuff film.
Don’t get me started…
Capital punishment is barbaric. War is barbaric. Many of the crimes committed by people on death row are also barbaric. But that doesnt mean the final repercussion for our most evil citizens is free room and board for the rest of their lives.
On the same token, the death penalty should be reserved only for murderers with a mountain of forensic evidence against them.
Also, why should we the taxpayers flip the bill to take care of our most evil citizens for the remainder of their lives. It’s a pure mismanagement of resources. Our world has limited resources and I would rather allocate those resources towards better causes such as feeding the poor, curing the sick, and providing shelter for the homeless.
Maybe a better solutions would be to let the victim’s families not the courts decide whether a person guilty of murder should live or die. The victims families are the ones who suffer the most, so maybe they should have the final say.
Indeed, capital punishment is barbaric, as is war. WWeiss, thank you for all your wise and enlightened comments here! I appreciate “meeting” and hearing from you.
John, I never watch “corpse” TV programs. Too macabre. And like you, I’ve never watched Mel Gibson’s disgusting “Passion” film or any of his works since that one.
Abolitinist writes, “It is mostly used for POOR and MINORITY people who cannot afford a good defense.” Exactly! Rare is the wealthy white person who is sentenced to death in the U.S.
Abolitionist you are totally correct that poor and minorities are put to death more often than the affluent. Our country is full of people treated unfairly by the criminal system. In my humble opinion it is based first and foremost on economic status.
There is clearly a divide between legal representation for the rich and the poor. I do understand that more minorities are put to death, but I don’t think its because of their race, rather a result of the disparity in economic status between whites and minorities.
Had O.J. Simpson not been affluent he would have probably been convicted of murder. But he had a legal team referred to as “the dream team”. What average American could afford to shell out millions of dollars for their legal defense?