|
Post by mindy on Feb 20, 2009 2:41:24 GMT
Developments in Montana and New Mexico May Lead to Abolition of Death Penalty Posted: February 17, 2009 Recent developments in Montana and New Mexico may affect the outcome of legislative efforts to abolish the death penalty. In Montana, the Senate voted 27-23 to end the death penalty in favor of life in prison without parole. It is the second session in a row that such a proposal has cleared the Senate. New Mexico’s House passed a bill replacing capital punishment with life in prison without parole and the bill is pending in a Senate committee. Legislatures in both states cited the risk of executing innocent people and the excessive costs of capital punishment as reasons for abolishing the death penalty. New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson said while he would have vetoed such a bill a few years ago, he may sign a repeal bill if it reaches his desk now. "I'm struggling with my position, but I definitely have softened my view on the death penalty.” He has found the alternative of life in prison without parole “to be a strong punishment” and called the cost of the death penalty “a valid reason in this era of austerity and tight budgets.” While votes in Montana were mostly along party lines, one crossover vote was that of Republican Senator Roy Brown. He said that his pro-life views would be at odds with supporting capital punishment. To the argument made by some that opposing abortion protects innocent life while capital punishment takes the life of a guilty person, Brown responded, "That is pretty simple, pretty concise and easy to understand - but is it always? Is it always a guilty life?" He added. "Yes, mistakes do happen." (D. Baker, "NM Gov Reconsiders Death Penalty," Associated Press, February 16, 2009; M. Guoras, "Senate endorses death penalty ban," Associate Press, February 16, 2009). See Recent Legislative Activity and New Voices. www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/developments-montana-and-new-mexico-may-lead-abolition-death-penalty
|
|
|
Post by drewsmom595 on Feb 20, 2009 4:40:54 GMT
I wonder if we'll ever see the day when the death penalty will be abolished for all crimes in America as most European countries have done.
I am a very weak supporter of the death penalty...only for the most horrendous of crimes and only when there is rock solid physical evidence. Definitely not for circumstantial cases no matter how "clearly" the circumstantial evidence may point to a guilty verdict.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Feb 20, 2009 6:15:19 GMT
Just a thumbs-up, Karen.
I totally agree with your entire post.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Feb 20, 2009 19:59:38 GMT
I am opposed to the death penalty. For all the usual reasons that we need not further rehearse here.
But this week I had the first shadow of doubt in my mind that I've had for a long, long time.
The death penalty was abolished in my jurisdiction the year that I was born (1965.)
Before 1965 there were a handful - literally a handful - of murders every year recorded in Scotland.
Last year there were 114.
Now:
1 - The murder rate would have gone up because 40 years ago people went missing and were never found far more; there was less state monitoring of the population, less forensic science that could find and identify small parts of murder victims, etc.
2 - The population has not increased in my jurisdiction.
3 - There is increasing evidence (which I am involved in researching at the moment - and it's pretty scandalous stuff) that murder charges are being plea bargained down to culpable homicide (Closest English legal equivalent is manslaughter) by the prosecutors. This seems to happen in particular in cases where the victim was working class, perhaps a drug addict or alcoholic or otherwise marginalised. But even then . . we have one case we're looking into where 2 guys set off to murder the guy, knocked his door and stabbed him to death when he answered. Yet it was reduced to culp hom on the basis of provocation . . I mean, wtf???
How bad was the provocation in the Michelle Reid case, where she was stabbed 30 times (I think). But Michelle was a young, working class woman, who was living on the margins.
Anyway . . that's another rant for another day.
4 - Faster ambulance response times and better medicine means that cases that would have ended in a death 40 years ago are now ending with charges of serious assault.
To cut a long story short, I've been weighing up in my mind all the possible reasons why our murder rate has gone up so dramatically. There are arguments on both sides which can explain it, but the evidence is not equally balanced.
And the doubt in my mind is that - is it possible - possible - that the abolition of the death penalty might - might - be a contributory factor?
This does not negate any of my reasons for opposing the death penalty, but, as i say, this week I had a sliver of doubt about my stance for the first time.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Feb 20, 2009 20:58:33 GMT
I am a former anti and now an extremely reluctant pro.
I am well aware of all the arguments on both sides and my own position is pretty much the same as Karen's.
|
|