Views on the Death Penalty

Palzang

Yesterday I attended a conference in Phoenix at Arizona State University put on by the Arizona Coalition to end the death penalty. It was quite illum... Continue reading

Simonthepilgrim

Thank you for the report, Palzang-la. You say

It also takes on average 18-19 years from arraignment to execution.

I understand that the US likes to claim that Magna Carta is at the basis of the notion of citizens' rights but, clearly, the great state of Arizona has struck out paragraph 40:

"To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice."

or, as Gladstone is said to have put it, "Justice delayed is justice denied".

As for deterrence, the only person deterred from committing murder by the death penalty is the murderer who is executed. They are unlikely to do it again.

Knitwitch

There was a very interesting programme on British TV a few weeks ago investigating "painless" execution which came to the conclusion that there isn't one. No matter which method is used, the victim suffers physically and emotionally.

Considering that the "punishment" is the taking of that person's life (after, as has been pointed out, an incarceration that would be longer than many sentences for some violent crimes) it seems "cruel and unusual" to also inflict pain and suffering on the person.

Obviously I am against the death penalty - from practical as well as philosophical points of view. I would go further and say that if the death penalty has been voted for in a particular state, the nation must insist that this sentence cannot be carried out if it is going to carry a double punishment (death plus pain) as this is illegal.

I was pretty horrified by some of the opinions aired on the programme - many of the people involved in the penal system held the view that no punishment, however cruel and painful was too bad for "these people".

The sooner the causes of violent crime are addressed and the number of criminals reduced this way, the better.