NOTICE: The following
article is written by the author itself and not by me, I am not trying to
violate their copyright. I will give some information on them.
PAGE
TITLE:
http://www.columbiamissourian.com
ARTICLE
TITLE:
Opposition to capital punishment is misdirected
DATE: Wednesday 16
February 2011
AUTHOR: J. Karl Miller
AUTHOR
INFORMATION: J. Karl Miller retired as a colonel in the Marine
Corps. He is a Columbia resident and can be reached via e-mail at JKarlUSMC@aol.com.
Columbia
Missourian
J. KARL
MILLER: Opposition to capital punishment is misdirected
February
16, 2011 | 12:01 a.m. CST
Arguably, organizations opposing the death penalty
— Death Penalty Focus, Amnesty International, the American Civil Liberties
Union and the Mid-Missouri Fellowship of Reconciliation — mean well. After all,
it is a tragedy each time someone is put to death by our judicial process.
Nevertheless, inasmuch as a majority of Americans —
65
percent, according to ABC News — continues to support the death penalty,
which is authorized in 37 states, for cases of capital or aggravated murder,
that zeal would appear to be misdirected. The offenses for which death is
authorized include murder by one with prior conviction for first-degree murder,
killing of a peace officer or officer of the court, and murder while engaged in
rape, sodomy, robbery or kidnapping.
Therefore, it should be obvious that capital
punishment is reserved for only the most vicious of crimes, and because all
states with the exception of Florida require a unanimous jury verdict, the
death penalty is neither arbitrarily nor capriciously awarded. In fact, one
must conclude that the death penalty is not only an earned but also a richly
deserved closure for barbaric behavior and wanton disregard for human life.
Take for example the Feb. 9 execution of Martin
Link, convicted of the 1991 rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl kidnapped on
her way to a St. Louis school bus. Link, previously convicted of raping a
13-year-old child and, while awaiting trial, accused of raping and beating a
15-year-old, could be the poster boy for continuation of the death penalty.
The shedding of tears over the likes of Link as an
abused or neglected child is a sham. Much like the 2007 rape and
murder of a 9-year-old Cassville girl by her stepfather or the
monster who shot and killed a mother on Mother's Day in Morristown, Tenn.,
in front of her four children, some crimes are so heinous, so brutally shocking
and senseless, that "the basic right to life for all" theme fails the
test of morally acceptable conduct.
Contrary to the claims of capital punishment
opponents, the death penalty is not a means of exacting revenge, nor does it
debase us as a society. Instead, it is a legal, judicial means of judging
responsibility and an appropriate punishment for particularly atrocious or
hideous crimes.
For example, how can one justify leniency for
someone who abuses and murders a child? Not only is that youngster deprived of
the carefree experience of childhood, but also the family is forever denied the
joy of guiding the child through to maturity and the hope of grandchildren.
There can be no more horrific experience than that of a parent burying a child.
Death penalty adversaries tend to cite sanctity of
life, its failure to deter commission of capital crimes and the risk of
executing the innocent as primary reasons for opposition. The callous antipathy
shown the victim's life by the killer renders it difficult for even the most
compassionate among us to summon the slightest degree of sympathy or regret at
his or her execution.
As to the absence of the death penalty's deterrence
factor in preventing murder, that is not entirely correct — of the 3,000-plus
inmates on death row in 2005, 8.4 percent had previous homicide convictions.
Nonetheless, viewing capital punishment's existence as a homicide deterrent is
not highly relevant as each capital crime must be decided on the evidence.
Finally, the time from sentence to execution,
measured in weeks at the nation's founding, has increased to well over 10
years, with many instances exceeding 20 years. The Supreme Court's suspension
of the death penalty from 1972 until 1976 resulted in mandated reforms, such as
lengthier appeals, automatic sentence reviews and changes in law and
technology, making it highly unlikely that the innocent will be put to death.
Accordingly, though the judicial process is not
infallible, the checks and balances provided by the executive and legislative
branches, the appellate courts and the press work together to insure against
miscarriage of justice. The system could be improved with a faster-track
appellate process for those whose guilt is unquestioned, but there is scant
hope for that.
J. Karl Miller retired as a colonel in the Marine
Corps. He is a Columbia resident and can be reached via e-mail at JKarlUSMC@aol.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment