The Wide View
Thirteen of us began the demonstration against this remnant from our barbaric past, but we would have an individual spontaneously join us--an 83 year old woman who believed as we do and was willing to go to jail to demonstrate her conviction (she arrived shortly after this photo was taken). This was one of my first photos after relinquishing my place behind the banner for some quick photos. This would be my third arrest for protesting peacefully thus.
Why am I against executions? There are many reasons, but one thing they all have in common is that they ARE based on reason which is something the other side of this argument cannot claim. I'm not putting proponents down (after all, as humans we are all subject to our emotions overriding our reason at times), I'm just stating a fact. As an example of this, one of the primary arguments used by defenders of this arcane measure is that it deters crime. Certainly if one gives a superficial examination of the issue, it would seem to make sense that the threat of capitol punishment would tend to dampen ones enthusiasm for killing another human being. But the question isn't really whether it deters murder, but whether it deters more effectively than the threat of imprisonment. There is no credible evidence that it does, while some of the most sophisticated studies of this question have shown indications that it has a brutalizing effect--i.e., that murders are, statistically, slightly more likely in states where capitol punishment is used when other variables are accounted for. Looked at through the rosiest of death-penalty-friendly glasses, at best the studies are inconclusive--yet this in no way diminishes their enthusiasm for this argument. And so it is with all of their arguments--save one which I will get to later.
So, again--why am I against the death penalty (DP)? One of the often proffered reasons mentioned by those in my camp is that it costs more (another false argument of the pro-death: it saves taxpayer money). This is yet another thing that a casual look at the issue will lead you think one way, but a hard, detailed look will reveal just the opposite. Study after study has shown that when all costs are accounted for, the DP is more expensive then life in prison (when life is the penalty sought from the beginning). There are NO studies that show the opposite. The only variable in those studies is how large the difference is in these two approaches. The range has varied between 1.5 to 4 times more for a capitol case than a case where prison is the option. Why? It's complicated, but most of the difference is the result of the original capitol trial costing many times more than the alternative—because of all of the supposed safeguards built into a DP trial (including the fact that in the case of the DP , there are two trials—one to determine guilt or innocence, and one to determine penalty). So!--you have a system that costs much more and cannot demonstrate any greater effectiveness than the alternative.
Looking no further than these two issues, one would think that conservatives in particular would decide to opt out of the DP as it's a prime example of what they see as the major problem of government: spending huge amounts of money on ineffective policy. But conservatives, in general, are the leading proponents of capitol punishment, though to be sure, there are plenty of liberals who support the measure. To me, however, these aren't even the most powerful arguments in favor of alternatives.
One of the strongest arguments against the practice is the issue of innocence. I believe that most people, if they really looked at this possibility, it would cause the majority to conclude that this was something we could and should live without. Very few have the courage to actually examine this aspect of the penalty closely, however, because to do so would open one up to a degree of horror far in excess of anything ever conveyed by Hitchcock or any other filmmaker. To protect themselves from such an experience, proponents engage in wholesale denial, insisting that the system does an excellent job of insuring that such a grotesque miscarriage of justice does not occur. And if it did?—well, first of all, it would never happen, but if it did, that would be terrible, but everything we do in life entails risk and this is a risk—a risk so minuscule as to be unimportant—that society should accept for the betterment of that society. Okay. First of all, there is nothing to indicate that the DP does anything to better society (in fact, it does the opposite)—but that aside, here's an exercise: Think about the person you love more than any other in this world. Think about all the things you love about this person whatever they might be—their sense of humor, that look they give you when they think you've gone temporarily off the deep end, their laugh, those eyes, the way they cry at the same moment you do in “Casablanca”—whatever it might be. And now imagine them sitting on death row awaiting their fate, minute by minute, hour by hour, day by day, year by year—and you're helpless to do anything to save them. It would be horrible enough—unthinkably horrible—if you knew them to be guilty. But if you knew them to be innocent? If you can imagine—REALLY imagine—your loved one staring at their last meal, unable to take a single bite even though they had lost 30 pounds over the previous two months as they worried about this moment—REALLY imagine the DP team arriving to open his or her cell—REALLY imagine this treasured person being strapped down and asked if he or she had any last words before they were injected with poison . . . any human being with a soul could not imagine this and still support the DP—not if they actually allowed all of the emotions involved in this process to sit with them awhile. Unless, of course, they cloaked themselves in denial and refused to believe an innocent person could ever be executed. But innocent people ARE sentenced to death. There have been 162 individuals who have been released from death row since the DP was reinstated in 1976 based at least in part on evidence of innocence. And many of these demonstrated their innocence not as a result of “The System” but in spite of it—a dogged reporter digging into the evidence or a family member or friend, or perhaps the work of the Innocence Project or the confession of the real killer. I have had occasion to meet several exonerees over the past 25 years and their stories are, to say the least, harrowing. Anyone who thinks that justice was served due to their being released suffers from a lack of imagination. PTSD (and to often substance abuse) dog most these individuals throughout the rest of their lives.
And if an innocent person can be sentenced to death—then an innocent person can be put to death. It's happened. It will happen again. It won't be YOUR loved one, but it most certainly will be someone else's. I can say with absolute certainty, that no one would support the DP if it meant their husband or mother would be executed for a crime they did not commit. What kind of morality says it's okay as long as it's someone else's loved one?
But even this isn't the main reason I oppose the DP. I oppose it less for what it does to the perpetrator (or even the innocent convicted of being that perpetrator), then for what it does to us—to society. Even for the majority who never are touched by this remnant of our barbaric past and rarely even think about it, its effect penetrates their lives like an invisible miasma. Just having this “tool” on the books demonstrates clearly that we as a society do not ultimately value such supposed ideals as mercy, compassion and nonviolence and that at our core, vengeance, hatred and violence are the “attributes” we truly extol. If we ever hope to advance as a species, then we will have to turn away from hatred and revenge and give up the tool of violence. If we do not, we will not survive.
So the question for me is, what kind of society do we want? If you want a society dedicated to fueling the cycle of violence and hatred, than you'll opt for capitol punishment. If your aim is higher, if you listen to the “better angels of our nature” you'll opt out.
The Wide View
Thirteen of us began the demonstration against this remnant from our barbaric past, but we would have an individual spontaneously join us--an 83 year old woman who believed as we do and was willing to go to jail to demonstrate her conviction (she arrived shortly after this photo was taken). This was one of my first photos after relinquishing my place behind the banner for some quick photos. This would be my third arrest for protesting peacefully thus.
Why am I against executions? There are many reasons, but one thing they all have in common is that they ARE based on reason which is something the other side of this argument cannot claim. I'm not putting proponents down (after all, as humans we are all subject to our emotions overriding our reason at times), I'm just stating a fact. As an example of this, one of the primary arguments used by defenders of this arcane measure is that it deters crime. Certainly if one gives a superficial examination of the issue, it would seem to make sense that the threat of capitol punishment would tend to dampen ones enthusiasm for killing another human being. But the question isn't really whether it deters murder, but whether it deters more effectively than the threat of imprisonment. There is no credible evidence that it does, while some of the most sophisticated studies of this question have shown indications that it has a brutalizing effect--i.e., that murders are, statistically, slightly more likely in states where capitol punishment is used when other variables are accounted for. Looked at through the rosiest of death-penalty-friendly glasses, at best the studies are inconclusive--yet this in no way diminishes their enthusiasm for this argument. And so it is with all of their arguments--save one which I will get to later.
So, again--why am I against the death penalty (DP)? One of the often proffered reasons mentioned by those in my camp is that it costs more (another false argument of the pro-death: it saves taxpayer money). This is yet another thing that a casual look at the issue will lead you think one way, but a hard, detailed look will reveal just the opposite. Study after study has shown that when all costs are accounted for, the DP is more expensive then life in prison (when life is the penalty sought from the beginning). There are NO studies that show the opposite. The only variable in those studies is how large the difference is in these two approaches. The range has varied between 1.5 to 4 times more for a capitol case than a case where prison is the option. Why? It's complicated, but most of the difference is the result of the original capitol trial costing many times more than the alternative—because of all of the supposed safeguards built into a DP trial (including the fact that in the case of the DP , there are two trials—one to determine guilt or innocence, and one to determine penalty). So!--you have a system that costs much more and cannot demonstrate any greater effectiveness than the alternative.
Looking no further than these two issues, one would think that conservatives in particular would decide to opt out of the DP as it's a prime example of what they see as the major problem of government: spending huge amounts of money on ineffective policy. But conservatives, in general, are the leading proponents of capitol punishment, though to be sure, there are plenty of liberals who support the measure. To me, however, these aren't even the most powerful arguments in favor of alternatives.
One of the strongest arguments against the practice is the issue of innocence. I believe that most people, if they really looked at this possibility, it would cause the majority to conclude that this was something we could and should live without. Very few have the courage to actually examine this aspect of the penalty closely, however, because to do so would open one up to a degree of horror far in excess of anything ever conveyed by Hitchcock or any other filmmaker. To protect themselves from such an experience, proponents engage in wholesale denial, insisting that the system does an excellent job of insuring that such a grotesque miscarriage of justice does not occur. And if it did?—well, first of all, it would never happen, but if it did, that would be terrible, but everything we do in life entails risk and this is a risk—a risk so minuscule as to be unimportant—that society should accept for the betterment of that society. Okay. First of all, there is nothing to indicate that the DP does anything to better society (in fact, it does the opposite)—but that aside, here's an exercise: Think about the person you love more than any other in this world. Think about all the things you love about this person whatever they might be—their sense of humor, that look they give you when they think you've gone temporarily off the deep end, their laugh, those eyes, the way they cry at the same moment you do in “Casablanca”—whatever it might be. And now imagine them sitting on death row awaiting their fate, minute by minute, hour by hour, day by day, year by year—and you're helpless to do anything to save them. It would be horrible enough—unthinkably horrible—if you knew them to be guilty. But if you knew them to be innocent? If you can imagine—REALLY imagine—your loved one staring at their last meal, unable to take a single bite even though they had lost 30 pounds over the previous two months as they worried about this moment—REALLY imagine the DP team arriving to open his or her cell—REALLY imagine this treasured person being strapped down and asked if he or she had any last words before they were injected with poison . . . any human being with a soul could not imagine this and still support the DP—not if they actually allowed all of the emotions involved in this process to sit with them awhile. Unless, of course, they cloaked themselves in denial and refused to believe an innocent person could ever be executed. But innocent people ARE sentenced to death. There have been 162 individuals who have been released from death row since the DP was reinstated in 1976 based at least in part on evidence of innocence. And many of these demonstrated their innocence not as a result of “The System” but in spite of it—a dogged reporter digging into the evidence or a family member or friend, or perhaps the work of the Innocence Project or the confession of the real killer. I have had occasion to meet several exonerees over the past 25 years and their stories are, to say the least, harrowing. Anyone who thinks that justice was served due to their being released suffers from a lack of imagination. PTSD (and to often substance abuse) dog most these individuals throughout the rest of their lives.
And if an innocent person can be sentenced to death—then an innocent person can be put to death. It's happened. It will happen again. It won't be YOUR loved one, but it most certainly will be someone else's. I can say with absolute certainty, that no one would support the DP if it meant their husband or mother would be executed for a crime they did not commit. What kind of morality says it's okay as long as it's someone else's loved one?
But even this isn't the main reason I oppose the DP. I oppose it less for what it does to the perpetrator (or even the innocent convicted of being that perpetrator), then for what it does to us—to society. Even for the majority who never are touched by this remnant of our barbaric past and rarely even think about it, its effect penetrates their lives like an invisible miasma. Just having this “tool” on the books demonstrates clearly that we as a society do not ultimately value such supposed ideals as mercy, compassion and nonviolence and that at our core, vengeance, hatred and violence are the “attributes” we truly extol. If we ever hope to advance as a species, then we will have to turn away from hatred and revenge and give up the tool of violence. If we do not, we will not survive.
So the question for me is, what kind of society do we want? If you want a society dedicated to fueling the cycle of violence and hatred, than you'll opt for capitol punishment. If your aim is higher, if you listen to the “better angels of our nature” you'll opt out.