Death of death penalty overdue

Rwanda, Kazakhstan and Haiti have all abolished the death penalty, but in the year 2008, the… Rwanda, Kazakhstan and Haiti have all abolished the death penalty, but in the year 2008, the United States of America continues to execute its own citizens.

In fact, the United States doesn’t just kill its own citizens in some boring, “semi-humane” manner like lethal injection. No, people are still hanged, shot before firing squads and killed in gas chambers in “the land of the free and home of the brave.”

Absurd as the situation is, I wouldn’t be writing about this topic except for the fact that last December New Jersey became the first state in more than 40 years to abolish the death penalty. And though I never thought I’d say it, I’d actually be proud to live in New Jersey right now.

Why?

Because the State Legislature and the governor acted in opposition to popular opinion in order to do what’s right and end the state-sanctioned murder of its own citizens.

See, this is my problem with the death penalty: It’s not that I feel a deep sympathy for serial killers but instead that I don’t believe that a democracy founded on the principles of the Enlightenment should execute its people for criminal behavior.

In short, I believe that we’re better than this.

I expect nations such as Iran, Saudi Arabia and China to engage in practices like the death penalty because they are run by barbarous dictatorships. But as a supposed Beacon of Liberty, you’d think we might have a better human rights record than Iran.

One thing I won’t do in this column is make arguments about the cost of keeping an inmate on death row or whether the death penalty actually serves as a deterrent to potential criminals. Such arguments cheapen our society. To decide whether or not a government should execute its citizens or not based on the financials involved is disgusting.

What I like about the New Jersey situation is that the decision to abolish the death penalty was made because it was judged “inconsistent with evolving standards of decency.”

Of course, I would say that the execution of citizens by their elected government has always been inconsistent with “standards of decency” – “evolving” or not – but better late than never, I suppose.

Anyway, I do consider my position on the subject of execution to be significantly different from the typical bleeding heart liberal in a few important areas.

For one, I completely disagree with groups such as Amnesty International who condemned the execution of Saddam Hussein. I entirely support the execution of dictators by their people.

Mussolini, Charles I and Saddam Hussein were threats to the liberty of the people they governed and were justly executed for their crimes. The only flaw I see in these executions is that they took too long to come about.

Perhaps the only other area in which I support the death penalty would be in relation to war crimes and acts of genocide. I believe that the Nuremburg trials, although not a perfect model, do represent a precedent that should be followed in modern international courts.

In the same way as dictators, the world is better off without those capable of the crime of genocide or mass murder.

While these two positions are important in differentiating myself from the anti-death penalty movement in general, I find it encouraging when steps are taken at the state level to suspend or abolish the death penalty domestically.

Regrettably, while states such as New Jersey are acting to end the death penalty, our own state of Pennsylvania has failed to move forward on the issue. According to The Philadelphia Inquirer, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has just recently reaffirmed the existence of the death penalty in our state by approving the death sentences of four individuals.

This is not an encouraging decision, but I am also confident that it will not stand for long. If Kazakhstan is capable of reaching the conclusion that the death penalty is immoral and New Jersey believes it to be indecent, then I believe that Pennsylvania soon must follow.

Either way, the death penalty will eventually be abolished in this state and this country as a practice morally incompatible with our democratic system.

E-mail Giles at gbh4@pitt.edu.