Posted on 08/19/2011 7:26:26 PM PDT by WOBBLY BOB
Wells, like many attorneys who plunge into this protracted and rewarding but frustrating legal venture, is morally and philosophically opposed to the death penalty. Although 34 states have it, there are other reasons Minnesota should continue to oppose it.
Several credible national studies conclude, and nearly 90 percent of the nation's top criminologists in a recent survey agree, that the death penalty has very little, if any, effect at all on deterring violent crime. So agrees the law enforcement community. A national poll of police chiefs placed it dead last, pun intended, on ways to reduce violent crime. The chiefs also consider it the least efficient use of taxpayer money.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
I try not to be too cynical about humanity and life, lest I lose faith.
Not all police chiefs. Maybe the big city ones who got the job because they are liberals. Most chief’s I know believe in the death penalty.
The only reason it costs more
to execute than life in prison is because the same people
who are opposed to capital punishment are in favor of unlimited appeals. It’s like saying you can’t cross the ocean because it’s too expensive .(because the ONLY way to
cross it is by building a giant bridge)
Limit appeals to 2 or 3 appeals in 5 or so years or whichever comes 1st-out of time, out of luck.
I believe that, by 2050, the death penalty will be outlawed and gay marriage will be the law of the land - both by federal fiat.
“Limit appeals to 2 or 3 appeals in 5 or so years or whichever comes 1st-out of time, out of luck.”
One of the issues is the time the justice system takes to process criminals. The Constitution guarantees one the right to a speedy trial. 100 years ago a felon would be tried within weeks or even days of his arrest. The time elapse between arrest, conviction, and punishment was short. Appeals were difficult and required the criminal to demonstrate a real error or bias in the proceedings and not a technicality. The jury was also one of his “peers”, people selected from the community and very likely people who knew the defendant or knew of him.
Punishment only deters crime if there is a high likelihood one is going to be convicted if one commits and crime and the time between arrest, conviction, and punishment is brief. It also helps if the punishment is truly punishment. If a potential felon knew that if he knocked off a convenience store there was a 95% plus chance he would be caught, tried, and convicted within 90 days he might truly think twice. If during that same felony he knew if he killed the clerk there was a 99% chance he would be tried and convicted of first degree murder and would be executed within 12 months (the trial and all appeals exhausted) he would think three times.
Today we have flash mobs descending on stores and stripping the shelves bare. Dozens of people commit a felony as a group and there are no negative consequences. The likelihood any will be tried and convicted are slim. These flash mobs are now progressing to groups of “youths” who attack, rob and beat citizens going about their daily business. Again, there is no aggressive action by society to find and punish the perpetrators. How soon will it be before group muggings progress to armed group assaults on houses, banks, and other businesses in which multiple innocent citizens are killed? Even if the some of the criminals are captured, in our legal system it will take years to get a trial, much less a conviction. Every step of the way a phalanx of attorneys will use every possible legal maneuver to get the cases thrown out of court.
Justice in this nation is not swift nor is it fair. It is unevenly applied. The wealthy and powerful frequently escape the power of the law unless they run afoul of the political powers. Members of privileged racial and ethnic groups receive special consideration when it comes to trials for even heinous crimes. It seems only the middle class or those without connections to the powerful elites must truly take their chances in court.
Inadequate. A life sentence without parole IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT is marginally acceptable. If put into the general prison population, the other inmates and guards are still at risk from their actions.
Surgical severance of the spine at the seventh cervical vertebra. Not having use of arms and legs goes a long way to preventing recidivism. Let the other inmates take care of'em.
Ron White said it, but in the Texas legal community "he needed killin'" has been a discussed unofficial but often-applied defense to a charge of murder since . . . well . . . since we've had Texas.
2050? I’d say 2020 at the latest.
If we make it that long.
Re your post 42, yes, I think that I misspoke on part of my post (”The most liberal cry babies on any police force.”); I confine my characterization to the big city police forces.
Great post.
I would add that at some point, given the number of states that allow conceal carry, the citizens being attacked will counterattack and some of these thugs will get justice on the spot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.