During television and radio talk shows I have been told many times that more poor people are executed than rich people, so in fairness, society should not execute people. I tell them that more poor people are executed for murder because they do more murders! After all, there are more poor people out there than rich people. It is also a fact, that really does not need to be expressed, that rich people don’t usually have the motives to kill as often. They have money, friends, homes, cars so they usually only kill during very emotional times.

Of course, when a rich person kills another, he or she should get the death penalty as poor people do. Yes, rich people can afford better lawyers than poor people, but that is a fact of life that must be accepted.
We are also told that more Blacks get executed than whites; however the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty does not discriminate against Blacks. Furthermore, a Stanford University study revealed that killers of Whites (whether the killers are black or white) are more likely to get sentenced to death than killers of black people (whether the killers are black or white). But Blacks who kill Whites were less likely to receive death sentences than were Whites who killed Whites. Doesn’t sound like discrimination to me unless maybe it is reverse discrimination!
It is also interesting that women commit about 13% of the murders in the U.S. yet less than 1% are executed. Maybe we can expect the screaming ladies at NOW to do something about this glaring inequality and injustice. Unless you look good in blue, don’t hold your breath until the feminists carry signs demanding, “Execute more women,” “More Women to the Chair,” or “Put more women on death row.”

We had better demand that all people be treated like people whatever their color, gender or social status. The answer is to mete out punishment equally, not drop it altogether. A study by the National Center for Policy Analysis found that a killer could expect only 1.8 years for murder in 1990. That’s not justice.

“But if we execute all the killers on death row in the various states, that would be a blood bath,” says the innocent one. What do you think we have today? If there is going to be a blood bath, let it be the blood of convicted killers. If all 50 states were to execute all 3000 killers tomorrow morning at 6:00, it would sure send a message to other potential killers, wouldn’t it?

Authorities should also get the message that felons should be in prison, not on the streets. Streets are for people who obey and respect the law. Rebels belong in prison. But at least 30% of those arrested for violent crimes were on probation, parole or on bail when the crimes were committed. We must send officials a message: Keep violent criminals in prison!

The US Justice Department’s annual report revealed that two-thirds of those on death row had prior felony convictions and a full 10% of those killers had killed before! That 10% should not have been permitted to prey on innocent people because they should have been executed. You’ve heard of three strikes and you’re out, but it should be one strike and you’re dead. No second chance for killers.

Scores of people have told me on talk shows that an innocent person may be executed so we should do away with the death penalty. Well, since we live in an imperfect world, I’ll concede the possibility that an innocent person may be executed. But without the death penalty, there will be the certainty of  many more innocent killings. 

I have also heard  the  old  canard  that  it is better to let a hundred guilty men go free than to execute one innocent man. Now, I’m not advocating executing innocent people, and the thought is horrifying, but it is a silly statement. We are comparing one Innocent man to  hundreds of other innocent people who would be killed if the hun-dred killers went free. The other side of this issue doesn’t think.

Often the opponents of the death penalty affirm that many innocent people have been executed, so it should be done away with, but as usual, they are wrong. They usually quote the Stanford Law Review to prove their contention, but they didn’t read the complete article! Professors Bedan and Radelet looked at 2300 capital crime convictions since 1900 and said they thought 25 men were wrongly executed. The professors “believed” the men were innocent, but they did not prove their case. They even listed such notorious cases such as Sacco and Vanzetti, Hauptmann, the Rosenbergs, etc., all cold-blooded killers and traitors whose cases were reviewed by various courts. The professors ended up admitting, “…in none of the cases…can we point to any state action indicating the belief that the person executed was innocent.” Evidently my opponents never read the full article.

Yes, it could happen. It may have already happened, but it is unlikely with all the restrictions placed on the police, the emphasis on the rights of the accused, the jury trial, numerous appeals, DNA and usually a long period on death row. Add to that the fact that most governors hand out pardons like campaign literature and are gutless “cry babies” who are super-sensitive to the bellowing and whining from leftist groups who have never seen a guilty killer they didn’t like.

We are told that it is state-sanctioned murder to carry out the death penalty, but if that is true is it state-sanctioned kidnapping to keep a person in prison?

Are fines state thievery? It is amazing that intelligent people can’t see the difference in the actions of an individual person and the legal actions of government.

Tags: death penalty