Maryland nears death penalty abolition

NY Times piece today says it should happen over the next few weeks.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/06/us/exonerated-inmate-seeks-end-to-maryland-death-penalty.html?ref=us&_r=0

Perhaps I'm optimistic, but I think we can begin wondering aloud when the last execution in America will take place. When abolition finally occurs, it will be an enormous step for humanity. An epic day. And I think it's on the horizon.

 

Won't happen, unless there's a federal law banning it. You still have states such as Texas who take pride in their executions. And if there's a federal law, they'll scream that they're losing their soverignity.

 

I'm not sure there could be a federal law, though there may be a court decision.

Texas will be shamed into abolition. It's already been shamed into decreasing it's rate. It won't stand on this island. Not worth it.

 

As I've stated before, I've come around on this. Too great a chance of killing an innocent person, which we already know has happened. But those convicted should get mandatory life without possibility of parole. Don't even think about it. They also should be put in Super Max prisons. You killed someone. We're not going to kill you. But you damn sure won't have the means or opportunity to kill again.

Now, if the libs would simply trade not killing innocent unborn children for not killing guilty murderers ....

 

We've won hondo over. Who can stand against us?

 

... and an Islamist terrorist to be named later

 

We don't negotiate with terrorists and fetuses.

 

I actually think that the conservative argument for abolition is stronger than any liberal one. It's a bedrock conservative tenet in 2013 that government should stay out of individuals' lives, right? That government should only impede to the degree necessary to achieve a particular social end.

Capital punishment is a clear example of government impeding beyond what is necessary to achieve a social end, i.e. crime deterrence.

 

Not so sure how clear it is, as the evidence is mixed. Further, not so sure that a workable argument against the death penalty can be fashioned out of the conservative ideal of limited government. If we stipulate that the death penalty is a deterrent, then the government's imposing it would be entirely consistent with the conservative ideal of government only entering those realms in which it has a natural obligation to do so.

On the other hand, the 8th Amendment issue, as expressed in Brennan's and Marshall's reasoning in Furman v. Georgia, would suggest that it should be on the way out.

 

Yeah, how about that, huh? Raise your hand if you thought, in 2008, that the Republican objection to the Obama administration would that it's too tough on terror.

 

It's a deterrent, but not much of one, if at all, at the rate it's imposed right now. The problem is that if it's imposed with any greater frequency, then the number of mistakes go up, and that's an indefensible trade-off.

 

At least people on death row have gone through due process as opposed to death by John Brennen Power Point.