On California's Novembers ballot, voters will have the chance to reinstate the Death Penalty that has not been in effect in this particular state for many decades. How would you vote?
It has been proven a dozen innocent people have been put to death, and there are many more on death row that are innocent, but the government is unwilling to allow the evidence to come forward so they can get out of jail. Most of the time the death sentence will be tossed out but they they get life in jail. Even if all evidence proves they were completely innocent. I want really bad people to pay for their crimes, but we still need to do the right thing for those wrongly convicted.
I come from a state that has had the death penalty for many years, while there are undoubtedly cases where it was applied in error... the injustice of keeping the worst of the worst alive instead of focusing on helping the victims is a bigger issue in my opinion.
Since 1973 when the Freeman decision put a halt to all death sentences until after states rewrote their death penalty statutes 144 death row inmates have been exonerated, you are right in saying it is a low percentage given the number we kill that is only 1.6%, I imagine if you were one of the 144 you might feel differently. Also keep in mind that is only the ones who could prove their innocence there will be others who are innocent but can't people it, the estimates for that is 4.1 percent, still a low percentage unless you are one of the 4.1%.
I have no idea where you got the idea the death penalty deters crime there is not a single credible study that shows that despite extensive research by criminalogits.
The alternative to the death penalty is not killers on the street it is life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
Where do I get the statistics that violent crime goes down in a state after the death penalty is reinstated? The department of justice, it has shown that several times. The first published under Meese (unsure of spelling), but has been repeated at least twice.
Your argument that life without parole is the answer, it is used in the vast number of cases. And I don't know of a case where it wasn't offered by the prosecution.
I have been the spiritual advisor in the room with a man as the execution was performed. And while it is beyond emotionally gut wrenching, I also can still support it. That one death woke up others who were headed down a similar path. And they didn't end up the same way, and their potential victims didn't end up dead either.
But those people don't fit in the potential 4%, guess they aren't innocent people too.
@curmudgeon1968: I would love to read one of these reports on death penalty reducing crime if you can ever remember what they are. Meanwhile here is an article with links to peer reviewed academic studies that says it does not. http://jewishworldreview.com/jeff/jacoby083016.php3
@MasterLee: there is a reason some states placed a moratorium on the death penalty: too many innocent people got executed. There is no appeal one an execution is carried out.
@OWTFWN: Thanks or the link. It makes sense to do that, since they have not carried out an execution for a decade. My state has Capital punishment as an option, but there has not been an execution for longer than California, and the last execution happened, because the guy insisted that the State carry out his execution, as promised.
Yes but the liberals have tried for decades to eliminate it as an option. Since they failed at that, they put up roadblocks to prolong the appeals process making the cost go way up.
The appeals process is way to long. On average 11 years. The liberals make it this way to make it painful. Reform it to one appeal and the cost goes way way down.
Capital punishment is part of the California legal system. There are hundreds of people on the California death row. Are you sure this is a vote for the death penalty, or a vote to remove it as a legal option?
WOW California taxpayers have spent $4 billion since 1978 to execute just 13 convicts, according to a 2011 study by federal appeals Judge Arthur Alarcon and his law clerk Paula Mitchell, a professor at Loyola Law School. That equates to more than $300 million per execution, a colossal bill for taxpayers struggling with one of the worst state budget crises in the country.
Find a better lawyer? If this isn't an argument for abolishing the death penalty, I don't know what is.
As an aside, the OJ Lawyer, who made all those DNA presentations, used a chunk of the fees OJ paid, to investigate several death row cases, and prove a few, death row inmates, innocent.
They could not afford good attorneys. OJ could. Justice? Deterrent? I don't think so.
We last executed someone in 2006, so it has been reinstated since the 70s. There has been a moratorium since 2014, when it was ruled unconstitutional in the lower courts, but not repealed. Charles Ng and Richard Allen Davis (Polly Klaas' murderer) are among those still on Death Row. Proposition 34 (which would've commuted all death sentences to life imprisonment) was defeated in 2012. I have a feeling that if a repeal's on the ballot it will probably be defeated again, in view of the recent shootings of police and conflict. That tends to be how it goes when people feel unsafe.
I am all for the death penalty but I would vote no. We have made mistakes and have executed innocent people and you can't un-dead anyone after a mistake. I know we get it right almost every single time but that is not good enough.
Sorry, that's incorrect. The death penalty was not abolished in California. One judge ruled it unconstitutional in 2014, and there's been a moratorium on executions since about 2006, but there have been executions in California during the 21st century. This vote will determine if it's actually abolished or not. Clarence Ray Allen was the last person executed here, in 2006. I don't know how I'll vote to be honest, the death penalty is not equitably meted out in the U.S.
I am always amazed when I encounter an answer to a question I posted months ago. Guess when current questions lose interest, others seek more controversial ones? Regardless, your answers actually do deserve to be read twice. Mark is very lucky to have you as a friend.