Georgia executed a convicted murderer on Tuesday, the first person to be put to death in the United States since the Supreme Court ended a de facto moratorium on capital punishment last month.
William Earl Lynd died by lethal injection at a prison in Jackson, central Georgia, at 7:51 p.m. Lynd, 53, was convicted of shooting his girlfriend to death in December 1988…
Lynd’s execution is the first since the same court on April 16 rejected a challenge to the cocktail of three drugs used in most U.S. executions, which opponents had argued inflicted unnecessary pain…
A nationwide pause in executions had been in effect since shortly after the court said on September 25 it would hear an appeal by two death row inmates in Kentucky against the use of the lethal drugs.
And it only took 20 years to execute William Earl Lynd.
On balance, I’d prefer, in a civilized society, to see the death penalty abolished.
No criminal justice system is infallible, which means that innocent people will, inevitably, be killed by the State. Furthermore. it is far more costly than LWOP (Life w/o the possibility of parole) because of the extended appeals process.
Can the US grow up and follow the lead of Europe in this regard?
>>Can the US grow up and follow the lead of
>>Europe in this regard?
Not until we have a grownup as president. For now, we have an overgrown bully, who used to be governor of the Execution Capital of the Free World (Tejas).
I’m all for the idea of capital punishment, but the United States of Lawyers, it is both impossible to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and impossible to carry out an execution without a long drawnout process. Therefore, it is infinitely more expensive to attempt an execution than it is LWOP.
LWOP is the way to go. And, even more, it’s time to return to the old school system of making the prison system more self sufficient. I say bring back the prison farms and shops of old, and give the inmates something to do other than workout, watch tv, and stew in a cell waiting to get out.
sometimes, it is amazing how big the cultural difference is between the US and the rest of the western world.
The death penalty is generally regarded to be non compatible with the human rights.
pj
Indeed, on a list of “all” the hot topics on the political and pop culture menu, the USA is, and is viewed as, quite retarded.
Our legal system protects freedom of speech fairly well, but the society hates it.
Hot topics?
Guns, drugs, sex, religion, social services, healthcare, criminal justice–on and on. As I started to do, the list we are doing well on is quite short.
#4 “The death penalty is generally regarded to be non compatible with the human rights.”
So is shooting your girlfriend to death or raping and torturing someone to death.
LWOP is not justice. Some guy kills his girlfriend and now he gets 3-squares, cable-tv and a free education? That’s just?
Why are people so obsessed with how the rest of the world views us? Why should we care? Shouldn’t we do the right thing instead of taking a poll when there is a question of right and wrong?
The main problem with the death penalty is that it isn’t used nearly enough. And even when it’s used, it still take 20+ years to kill the vermin. I agree that the standard to decided on using it should be high, but not astronomical.
The problem with LWOP is that most prisons are like club med to the people that are in it. Workout facilities, 3 square meals a day, cable TV, internet, a library, a FREE university education, etc. Prisons should be barren, unfriendly places where prisoners sit and look at four walls while every day they spend there seems like a year. Then maybe these criminals will go straight to avoid being bored to death. Do that and we can shorten the sentences and make prison the place it has always been intended.
You’d think ‘One Nation Under God’ would pay far closer attention to ‘The Ten Commandments’.
Perhaps it should be, ‘One Nation Under Lawyers’, who can somehow twist any simple, declarative sentence like ‘Thou Shalt Not Kill’ into a wild frenzy of fully justified, widespread self-slaughter.
Cinaedh,
You need to go read the the 10 commandments again cuz properly read, it is “THOU SHALL NOT MURDER” not “THOU SHALL NOT KILL”. There is a difference. Unfortunately, some have used the chance to replace murder with kill. And the bible does allow for killing under certain circumstances.
And if you opt to point to the 10 commandments, a religious proclamation, are you saying we should live in a society dictated by religious morality put forth by the Torah/Bible?
>>And the bible does allow for killing
>>under certain circumstances.
I don’t think state-santioned execution is one of those circumstances.
All you have to do is watch the prosecutors squawk against bringing in potentially exonerating DNA evidence to know that something is seriously fucked up.
#6 I don’t get the part about “my girlfriend”. Are you saying you can take the life of the person who killed her and make her live again?
If someone kills my g/f or child or mother or whatever, they’ll be dead. Nothing I can do about it. Why would this be a good argument for the death penalty?
pj
First, only allow the death penalty in cases with confirming DNA evidence, yes I know that identical twins have the same DNA, but differrent fingerprints.
Second, allow one appeal which must happen within six months.
Third, the execution must happen within 9 months of conviction.
Apply these rules, and the death penalty becomes as deterent. If you have a good deterent the crimes punishable by that deternet will drop. A penalty which is applied in far less than one percent of elliglable crimes, and even then only after twenty years, is no deterrent at all.
#11 said “I don’t get the part about “my girlfriend”. Are you saying you can take the life of the person who killed her and make her live again?”
#11, don’t be silly. This has nothing to do with “making her live again”. This is about punishment, and preventing the person from commiting another crime. If someone robs a bank, then returns the money, should they not be punished? After all, they returned what they took from the bank.
#1
“I’d prefer, in a civilized society..”
So, in “civilized societies”, it is acceptable to punish people for life just not give them a quick death? Grow up indeed. You should investigate the true nature of the alternatives with which you seem comfortable.
#3
Agreed! Arguing that LWOP is more cost effective is IMO the only valid reason to abandon capital punishment but it is a good one.
The argument that LWOP is somehow more moral or more “civilized” is complete nonsense. People that would have warranted the death penalty but get LWOP go to places that are on par or worse than Guantanamo Bay. Do some research on supermax prisons. As I have said, if you agree that imprisonment is punishment, then you are accepting that punishing someone for life is moral. No, LWOP is just as amoral or moral as capital punishment.
The only reason we have life without parole is so defense lawyers can argue to juries don’t kill him, he’ll get life without parole.
Of course life without parole doesn’t mean life without pardon or life without escape and of course life without the victim knowing you are alive.
Of course if we abolished the death penalty, the liberals would start to say that life without parole is cruel.
There are undoubtedly innocent people serving in jail right now. Shouldn’t that justify eliminating imprisonment, or at least long prison sentences?
Let’s switch to a firing squad with the shooters pulled like jury duty.
In my youth I was a big supporter. As I studied the issue it was clear that the DP is not deterrent, never has been.
That said, I think those convicted should do life while being required to work in order to compensate the victims family plus the cost of their incarceration. If they refuse they go down to one meal a day. In any event, no TV’s, free education beyond basic 3 Rs, gym equip. Only basic health care, etc.
# 9 – The Warden
“You need to go read the the 10 commandments again cuz properly read, it is “THOU SHALL NOT MURDER” not “THOU SHALL NOT KILL”. There is a difference. Unfortunately, some have used the chance to replace murder with kill. And the bible does allow for killing under certain circumstances.”
I know the bible is just an old book by a lot of scumbag, self-serving human authors. Don’t you?
By the way, the difference between ‘murder’ and ‘kill’ is only perspective and semantics, not gospel.
“And if you opt to point to the 10 commandments, a religious proclamation, are you saying we should live in a society dictated by religious morality put forth by the Torah/Bible?”
No. That would be a insanely horrific thing to do. I intuit you realize that and you realize I realize it – but you asked me anyway, so apparently there’s no way I can adequately answer your very ‘insightful’ question.
#13, I was not being silly, I just don’t understand how the death penalty would do any good in that situation.
What it does, it appeals to our lowest desire: the desire to take revenge, to do to you what you did to me. However, revenge has no place in a post-rennaissance society. Revenge is dark medieval or biblical. Most of the world has moved on by now.
pj
I hope this ruling allows states to bring back “Old Sparky”. Some great movies were made showing the prison lights flickering at the appointed time. Those were the good old days.
When this debate comes up, I remember seeing the man who was the pastor for over 40 years to the death row inmates at (I believe) Sing Sing.
This man was against the death penalty because it wasn’t harsh enough. He thought it was “taking the easy way out” and didn’t give the murderer enough time to “think about what he had done” and “prepare to meet his maker”.
His solution was to stick these guys in a 5’X7′ cell for the rest of their lives, 23 hours a day 7 days a week until the day they die.
He also had an immense disdain for those think that this is “cruel and unusual”.
He emphasized that living in a box in isolation for the rest of their lives was less expensive (due to litigation) than the death penalty, and a much better deterrent because these guys didn’t care about dying, but they sure as hell cared about rotting in isolation.
Once again, justice and revenge are being confused.
And since most of you will never get any closer to a prison than watching an episode of OZ, prison is not a cushy little club where bloodthirsty animals lounge around all day watching free cable TV and getting a free education…
…and it it were, I’d be trying to find a crime that had a 4 year penalty just so I could further my own education and enjoy the sci/fi channel at the same time.
#23 – So, they don’t have TV, work out equipment, free education & free health care?
#20,
although revenge may have something to do with it, I think there is a basic need for punishment commensurate to the crime commited for civilized society to exist.
If there is no punishment for crime, then there is no civilization. It would be nice if all people were “civilized” and no crime happened at all, but that is not reality.
In some “perfect” world, anyone commiting murder would immediatly be killed by a bolt of lightning from the sky. There would be no way you could get away with the crime. Punishment would be immediate and fatal.
In another “civilized” world, the gentle and proper people would never punish a criminal, because that would make them as bad as the criminal.
Which world would have fewer murders do you suppose?
In reality, the death penalty is not a deterent, because it is applied infrequently and lethargicly.
My wife was the intended victem of a murderer in 1984, she was able to escape and he killed another woman 2 hours later, returning to rape her corpse several times over the next few days. The murderer was caught driving the victims car. This fine gentelman was found “Not guilty by reason of insanity” and placed in the state mental hospital. For 25 years my wife feared the day this man might escape or be released. Last Christmas, we read in the paper that he had been released several months earlier, and had died in a trafic accident.
So yes, victims, victims families and others have good reason to fear the killer as long as he lives, even if he is in jail. I am glad to know that you and society have “moved on by now”, but it is not for you and gentle society, we are talking about people who live outside of normal society, and these people deserve to die.
Eye for an eye is madness.
There is more profit in prison work than taking up room in a grave or adding to air pollution from burning.
Cursor_
#22, actually, that’s not a bad idea at all. I’m not interested in rehabilitating murderers or child molesters, and would be more than happy to see them confined to a small cell, with only their thoughts, for the rest of their lives.
#26,
I agree, Eye for an eye is madness. Most bank robbers would much prefer having a gun pointed at them and giving up their money instead of going to prison for 20 years.
>>Shouldn’t that justify eliminating
>>imprisonment, or at least long prison
>>sentences?
When someone is imprisoned and later found to be not guilty, they can always say “woops, sorry!”. That’s not an option after the government kills them.
#29
>When someone is imprisoned and later found to be
>not guilty, they can always say “woops, sorry!”.
>That’s not an option after the government kills
>them.
Thats why I would only allow capitol punishment in cases with DNA evidence. I think most of the “mistakes” to which you refer were convicted on circumstancial evidence.