Over the last few days, both houses of Virginia’s legislature have passed bills that would end the practice of capital punishment in the Commonwealth. Sen. Scott Surovell (D) of Fairfax as well as Sen. Bill Stanley (R) of Franklin sponsored this bipartisan bill. For me, this is a sign of hope on many levels.
There is a love/hate relationship with the death penalty in the United States, and it falls largely upon red and blue party lines. However, I think it would surprise many people to know that there are those who vote blue that strongly believe in capital punishment while there are those of us who vote red that abhor it, myself included. Both sides of the aisle make compelling arguments in support of their position. Proponents suggest some crimes are so heinous that the ultimate form of punishment is the only acceptable recourse to the state. However, during the presentation of the Bill, Surovell pointed out that 1 in 10 people put to death nationally have been wrongly convicted. Furthermore, historically, the death penalty has been “disproportionally applied to racial minorities and people with diminished mental capacity.” These too, are compelling arguments.
What about the Church? What about Christians? What should our feelings be since we are the ambassadors of Christ on earth? Well, would it surprise you that the church is about as divided as politics are? It is! In recent years during my message on the Right to Life Sunday in January, I have also included other examples of persecuted life, including death row inmates. When I started doing it, I also started catching flack from fellow Christians. While it has not caused anyone to leave the church, I have members, including leadership, cite Bible verses to me that supported the use of the death penalty. I know they exist, so let’s take a brief look at places in Scripture that support the use of the death penalty.
-First, let us look at Genesis 9:6: “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans his blood will be shed, for God made humans in his image.” On the surface, it seems as though this says whoever kills must be killed. However, when we make adjustments for language variations, it is better to say “whoever murders…” This is a solid example of how God has permitted the death penalty, Furthermore, this is not a part of the Mosaic law but instead predates Moses.
-Moses’ law has the death penalty for many offenses, some of our laws agree with today and some we scratch our heads and think, “Why?”.
-Many Christian supporters of capital punishment cite Romans 13, particularly verses 4 and 5: “For it is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, because it does not carry the sword for no reason. For it is God’s servant, an avenger that brings wrath on the one who does wrong. Therefore, you must submit, not only because of wrath but also because of your conscience.” Therefore, if our government has the death penalty and chooses to use it, then we as Christians must submit to that authority and accept the use of the death penalty since the government is “God’s servant for good.”
The problem is, these are not sound arguments for the American Judicial System. It isn’t that they do not apply to us, but we must look at them through the context of Scripture as well as the lens of Jesus Christ. Obviously mankind took God’s mandate from Genesis 9 wrong as later, in the Mosaic law, God clarifies that those guilty of manslaughter or accidental killings were not necessarily susceptible to the death penalty. Furthermore, many famous people from the Bible who should have been put to death for murder were not, including Cain, Moses, and David. Each was guilty of murder or conspiracy to murder, each should have been killed according to both the preMosaic laws and the Mosaic law, and each was pardoned. As to Romans 13, Paul was writing about the Roman government. The Empire was beyond the control of the people. We live in a democratic Republic, a completely different style of government. We elect our officials and we have influence over law. Therefore, if we wish to abolish the death penalty, it is in the purview of our power. So why should we abolish the death penalty?
First, most of the death penalty supporting Scripture of the Old Testament applied specifically to Israel as a nation. According to Dan Van Ness, “executing false teachers and those who sacrificed to false gods are examples of provisions that sprang from Israel’s unique position as a nation of God called to be holy. When Israel ceased to exist as a nation, its Law was nullified.” Even the death penalty was an extension of Israel’s unique relationship with God. However, when Israel ceased to exist, so did the laws governing Israel. Second, as stated in the observation of Romans 13, Paul’s words are not meant as a validation of the death penalty. Rather, Paul’s words remind us that the government is a servant of God (13:4). We should be obedient to the government so long as the government does not circumvent God’s authority, who is also the master of the government. In the New Testament era, this was observed by Christians obediently paying taxes and following the rules of the Empire. However, when the Empire infringed upon God’s authority (worshipping pagan images, bowing before the statue of Emperor, etc.), Christians would not only refuse but they would willingly die. We should be obedient to the government, but if we can change the government to more rightly reflect God’s righteous standards, we should do that too!
I strongly believe that Christians should be opposed to the death penalty and do whatever we can to fight to see it abolished. While I see Scripture that seems to support its use, I also serve a Savior who I feel would be horrified by the fact that His children have an opportunity to change it and instead advocate for it. Without quoting dozens of Scripture references, the core of Jesus’ teaching is on the concept of forgiveness: God’s forgiveness to us and our forgiveness of others. In Jesus’ model prayer, we read: “forgive us as we forgive those who trespass against us” (Matt. 6:12). Jesus specifically talked about forgiving one another. In Luke 17, He told His followers that if you rebuke a brother or sister for sinning against you, and they repent, you must forgive. In Matt.18, Jesus told Peter that we must forgive until it becomes our nature (70×7). Forgiveness and the death penalty are not compatible. Lest we forget, Jesus also forgave those who condemned and crucified Him, even as He hung from the cross.
I present the argument to all Christians that the death penalty is antithetical to the work of Christ. First, Christ came to save and redeem. By condemning someone to death and then carrying out the sentence, you harden their hearts to the possibility of God’s forgiveness as well as limit the time you have to reach the person for Christ. Second, the death penalty is directly opposed to the concept of forgiveness. The core concept of salvation rests on forgiveness, both God’s forgiveness to us and our forgiveness of one another. Condemning someone to death, even by a government, represents the opposite of forgiveness. The final point I would make is on the New Testament’s advocation, acceptance, or prohibition of the death penalty. As already observed, both those in favor of and opposed to the death penalty can cite Romans 13. However, there are no other Scriptures in the New Testament that seem to directly advocate and support the death penalty. Yet, there seems to be a passage of Scripture in the Gospel of John where Jesus directly condemns the use of the death penalty. In John 8, a woman is accused of adultery. In Leviticus 20, the punishment for adultery is death. So in Jesus’ story, the woman accused should justifiably be put to death. As a test against Him from the Pharisees, the decision was put into Jesus’ hands. A woman, caught in the act of adultery, deserving death, stood before the Son of God. Jesus, in His way, lingered on the question. When pressured, He said, “The one without sin among you should be the first to throw a stone at her.” They all dropped their stones and left. Jesus, as the sinless Son of God, was the only one who was qualified to carry out the punishment. Jesus nullified her death sentence with His mercy. Who amongst us are qualified to condemn and carry out such a punishment? Is there anyone alive today who has never been guilty of sin?
In order to make a true, Biblically justified argument on why Christians should oppose the death penalty, I am going to use a technique called The Interpretive Journey from Scott Duvall and Daniel Hays book, Grasping God’s Word. To learn more about the steps in the process, visit the Zondervan Academic website here. Genesis 9:6 is one of the strongest Biblical sources in support of the death penalty. “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans his blood will be shed, for God made humans in his image.” So let us first ask, what did this mean to the original audience. Whether we are thinking about those who Noah passed this down to or more likely Israel in the wilderness after Moses wrote Genesis, the message is clear. If you kill, it is not only permissible but possibly even divinely mandated that you be killed. Now we must ask ourselves what are the differences between those readers and ourselves. They are vast. First, we live under a completely different concept of government and law. They were, at best, a tribal confederation under the leadership of a divinely appointed representative from God. We live in a Democratic Republic with duly elected representatives that can be easily removed from office as well. Our law code is vastly different. Spiritually, we are not a chosen people or nation divinely picked from all the people of the earth. These are only a few of the many differences between us and them. The third question to consider is the theological meaning in the text. Again, that seems to be clear. If you take human life, you can expect humans to take your life. It is a theological mandate for the death penalty. Here is where we throw a monkey wrench into the pro-death penalty argument. How does this theological concept match up to other Scripture, particularly the New Testament? Now, look back up at the end of the last paragraph. Jesus, the Son of God, stands in direct opposition to the death penalty. In scientific terms, our hypothesis did not work out. We must rethink the question. Our spiritual answer, or Duvall and Hays point number five, the death penalty is not theologically compatible to the Christian life. So how can Christians continue to fight to put people to death?
When I was young, WWJD was once again becoming a popular phrase, especially among true Christians. “What Would Jesus Do?” In our Youth Group, we were often told to ask ourselves that question when faced with a situation that presented a moral dilemma. Whether sex or drugs, when presented with the opportunity to engage, what would Jesus do? The point was that if the answer was no, Jesus wouldn’t do something, then we shouldn’t do it either. So here is a simple question: What would Jesus do if presented with the question, “Should we have the death penalty?” The only Biblically sound answer is no. He would say, “Let Him who is without sin throw the switch.” Who amongst us is sinless in this life? If any of you answered, “I believe Jesus would support it,” I think you need to go back and reread the Gospels again…and again and again until you see a different answer.
To the Virginia Assembly, I commend you for taking this giant step in securing life. When the day comes that your governor, Ralph Northam, signs this into law, then I will commend him too.
And then, without missing a beat, I will ask “And now, when will you extend the same courtesy to the unborn.”
For the full, unabridged version, visit www.berkeleybaptistchurch.com.
Joseph “Joey” Giles is pastor of Berkeley Baptist Church in Berkeley Springs, WV.
Joey,
Here are a couple of thoughts for you. You listed three objections to the use of the death penalty. I will address them.
On a more personal note, I don’t know if you have children, but as a father of four I daily forgive my children while handing out discipline as a consequence for their actions.
3) There is so much more to the woman caught in adultery. It would have been impossible for her to have been caught in the act without the Pharisees having laid a trap for her. Also, the context seems to imply that the “those without sin” really means “those without this particular sin.”
Lastly, I would suggest that the command given in Genesis is not tied to a nation’s laws but rather to the image of God that is within every person born. Also, Christ cannot stand in direct opposition to the death penalty. He wrote the command.
Lastly, I think you are advocating a dangerous view of Christ. The only record we have of Him writing anything was in the sand and lost to the wind. So should we only write in the sand? He would never marry or have kids. So can we? He never rode in a car, He never baptized anyone, He never pastored a church, and so many more things that we do. You may respond that my questions are ridiculous. They may be, but when ever you get on the theological train you have to ride it to the station and its natural conclusion.
Re your number 1 above. It’s a short step from your soteriology to accepting that it doesn’t really matter spiritually whom the state executes. God will have already sorted it out. Genocide, the Holocaust come to mind. I recognize that this is not likely what you would accept.
Just a thought here, and I’m not necessarily agreeing with the author, but he didn’t say forgiveness means no consequences. One can be punished and not be put to death.
A good and timely word here, Joseph. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and convictions. I commend to you as well Shane Claiborne’s book Executing Grace: How the Death Penalty Killed Jesus and Why It’s Killing Us.
Pro-life in everything.
No one is saying there are not consequences for sin. However, the possibility that 10% of those convicted and then given the death penalty are innocent is10% too high. Even one in a million is too high.
I am on the side of no death penalty.
I would strongly disagree that pro life requires being anti-death penalty.
Abortion on demand is by intent the indiscriminate taking of human life without regard, while the death penalty is by intent discriminate punishment that at least purposes to be based on a set of demonstrable facts that call for it.
One of the ironies of taking a “no death penalty” approach is that the murderers have a free pass to murder again. You’re in prison, you don’t like your cell-mate; Kill him. What can they do to you.
I have struggled with this. I think there are probably good arguments on both sides, but I personally wouldn’t use the bible as justification for executing people. If you are going to use the OT as support for capital punishment, then you have to support executions for a whole lot more than just murder. But here is another thing: Can you name even 1 murderer tried and executed in the bible? Not Cain, not Lamech, not Moses, not Samson, not David. Not Simeon and Levi.
I think CP is OK in theory, but I have grave doubts about the real-life efficacy of our justice system in deciding who lives and who dies. I shudder to think of whom we have killed unjustly.
If “forgiveness and the death penalty are not compatible,” then is forgiveness and prison time compatible? Is forgiveness and paying a traffic violation fine compatible? I could go on and on with these illustrations, but the point is the writer seems to imply that forgiveness removes any consequence of sin or at least any consequence he disagrees with. Under grace the Bible says “you reap what you sow” (Gal 6:7). Paul under grace recognizes there are actions that deserve death, “For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die” (Acts 25:11).
I agree that forgiveness is a bad argument against the death penalty, just as the OT is a bad argument for it. This is a secular argument, in my opinion. I’m not comfortable trying to decide who Jesus wants us to kill. (WWJK?)
My objection to the death penalty is secular & easily verified. Money equals mercy No rich person in USA gets death penalty. Money is the factor more than race, in our present age. Rich people never get death penalty. Name one. That is the way our legal system works, money buys legal results not justice. Death penalty is rarely enforced and people should accept reality, to many appeals and safeguards. However, life sentence should be that and no exceptions.
Good points.
The civil government about which Paul was writing in Romans 13 executed most of the apostles, including the author of that passage, shortly after it was written. No human system of justice is perfect, and ours still carries with it many of the biases, prejudices and bigotry that was characteristic of it during the formative years of the republic. And since American justice is not characterized by an acknowledgement of Biblical principles, due to its own constitutional provision of “religious neutrality”, it would be difficult to justify the death penalty based on Biblical grounds. It should be self-defined and given that our governing documents mention “cruel and unusual punishment,” I think it can be defined, and thus prohibited, based on that argument alone.
I am totally unconvinced here from the article. Thankful to the writer for the article though. I have included a link to prison fellowship on this that references Dan Van Ness and shows the predominant three sides in Christian life.
https://www.prisonfellowship.org/resources/advocacy/sentencing/the-death-penalty/
I think the third option in that article is clearly the correct one. That’s why I think this is best as a secular argument.
I believe in capital punishment and believe it should be expedient and it’s scope broader.
There are people who commit terrible crimes against humanity; rape, murder, they harm children, and those that sale substances that destroy lives, people that trade in humans etc…..
I believe that God can use men as an arm of justice. I see capital punishment as just that.
I believe it makes the world a better place when the punishment fits the crime and some crimes merit death.
The problem is a lot of men see themselves as God’s arm of justice without ever hearing from God. How do we determine who God spoke to? I’d rather 100 guilty men go free than 1 innocent person be put to death unjustly. I think that’s the main problem with using the death penalty today. As Steve said earlier, if you have money, you can basically run the system. We’re seeing that in our political system currently!
The OT doesn’t begin w/Genesis 1, but with Exodus 20. In Genesis 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. That’s STILL VALID, regardless of personal opinion. This was AFTER THE FLOOD, and God spoke to Noah. Even when the Law of Moses is replaced by the NT, it doesn’t negate Genesis 9:6 He also discussed ANIMALS for food for the first time with Noah, as well. Under the OT, the Jews can’t eat ham sandwiches. But Noah and YOU could. Genesis 9:3
Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat (Food) for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. In Genesis 1:29, fruit was the only food. In regards to King David…under the law, there must be a minimum of 2 WITNESSES (other than God).
And it is Murder, not Kill. Murder requires killing, but with one added caveat. Malice. Dissect the Hebrew word. You’ll see that it’s not a sin to kill, but it is to murder. While we are discussing the Law of Moses…Before the Law, there was Abraham: Lev 18:9
The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover. and Lev 20:17 And if a man shall take his sister, his father‘s daughter, or his mother’s daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister’s nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity…continued…
Deu 27:22 Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, Amen.
And now…Abraham:
Gen 20:12
And yet indeed sheismysister; sheis the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.
My point in mentioning this is due to Cain being mentioned in the article, in that he murdered his brother. What was the punishment that Abraham got for sleeping with his sister? Isaac, the promised seed? According to the Law of Moses, Abraham is cursed, because he did a wicked thing, and should bear his iniquity. But he was blessed, instead.
Ed: I don’t think you are right about this. I agree that there is a distinction between killing and murder, but malice isn’t that distinction. Hired killers can certainly kill without malice and soldiers can certainly kill the enemy with malice. Sociopaths can kill without malice. I think the distinction is justifiable defense.
As to war, I think Christians can and do serve and if necessary, kill in war without sin. But I also believe that Christians can refuse to kill without sin. I don’t believe the injunction to obey our rulers is greater than the person’s conscience in this case.
You’ll need to dissect the Hebrew word from the Ten Commandments. The KJV uses the word “kill”. That is not the complete definition of the original Hebrew word. There is a different Hebrew word for “kill”. But we agree that murder involves killing. A hitman would be guilty of malice, based on the definition of malice. Defence is another topic. Jesus told disciples to get swords.
Imagine George Washington informing his Christian soldiers that they can refuse to kill the enemy. That don’t sit well with me. Imagine if David did not kill Goliath. Or, did David murder Goliath?
Well, I would hope voluntary soldiers would know they are expected to kill if necessary, but draftees are a different story. Plus imagine what a loss if there were no Desmond Doss.
Are soldiers who kill with malice guilty of murder?
I’m not opposed to defense, even killing in defense, but I don’t think Jesus telling his disciples to bring swords was for the purpose of defense. The further narrative proves that.
Yes,soldiers that kill in malice are guilty of murder. That’s what murder is. Killing with malice is murder, hence, the wrong English word in “Thou shalt not kill”. Kill is the wrong word. The Hebrew word definition goes beyond kill. And that needs to be acknowledged. And yes, the soldiers will face a court martial for it. And have.
What narrative are you discussing? Those who live by the Sword shall die by the sword? Peter had just cut off the ear of a soldier. The destination of Jesus was that cross. That cross was his mission. The context of disciples getting swords was for after Jesus ascended. There was a list of other things, too. So what is the narrative that you discuss? Not self defense?
2 swords for 11 men? I have never heard that passage interpreted to suggest that the disciples would kill people with swords, even in defense.
What do you think the swords were for? They were JEWS, who would be preaching to JEWS. Paul was for Gentiles. Jews were HOSTILE to the Gospel towards other Jews. Jews DON’T CARE what Gentiles believe, they only care what Jews believe.
Luke 22:35-38
And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing. Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.
Bill, I implore you to do a word study on the ENGLISH word Kill in the Hebrew. There are several different Hebrew words, having differing meanings. The word Kill occurs 126 times in 119 verses in the KJV. There are 11 different Hebrew words for the English word Kill. The one for Exodus 20:13: râtsach, raw-tsakh’; a primitive root; properly, to dash in pieces, i.e. kill (a human being), especially to murder. But in Exodus 2:14, the word kill is: hârag, haw-rag’; a primitive root; to smite with deadly intent. And that is NOT against Exodus 20:13, due to a different Hebrew word. One is for MURDER, another is for KILL. It’s just that most of our Bible translations have the WRONG English word in Exodus 20:13, and due to that, people think it’s a sin to join the military to kill people.
OK, I think you are arguing against something I’m not saying. I’m not saying the bible forbids capital punishment. But neither do I believe it mandates it and that we are sinning if we aren’t executing people.
Bill,
Gen 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. That order was in place before the law of Moses.Take away the Law of Moses, Gen 9:6 still stands.It is still binding.The Hebrew word here for SHED is shâphak, shaw-fak’; a primitive root; to spill forth (blood, a libation, liquid metal; or even a solid, i.e. to mound up); also (figuratively) to expend (life, soul, complaint, money, etc.); intensively, to sprawl out. Num 35:33 explains Gen 9:6: “So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.” AMERICA IS POLUTED due to no Capital Punishment.
Yeah, once one joined the military, he/she is voluntarily relinquishing/submitting thier consciences regarding war and ithe actions required to accomplish it to the lawful orders of thier superiors.
I think in the case of a wholly volunteer military such as we have now in America – that anyone who chooses not to fulfill their duties as a soldier (who volunteered to be a part of a warmaking team so to speak) is in fact sinning.
Coming from the perspective of a US Army Veteran, what are the thoughts about war?
As a US Navy Vet myself, it is not a sin to kill. It is a sin to murder, as murder is killing with malice. Also, it is a war crime to murder, as well. Also, when Jesus discusses following him, he mentions “counting the cost”, and gives this example: Luke 14:31 Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?
One thing about forgiveness. Only the victim can forgive. And if the victim is dead…but look at Stephen being murdered. He asked God before his death for God not to lay that charge against them. He was the victim. We are not Catholics, where they believe that a priest can forgive sins, unless the priest is the victim. I see no bible evidence of corporate forgiving unless the corporate is victimized.
There are lots of issues to unravel in this one.
I’ll start by saying that IMO neither the OT nor the NT mandate that a country have the death penalty.
But a fundamental question is what should Christians advocate in the public square for what is legal/illegal? Historically Christians advocated for the use of OT and NT teaching. We are not Israel. It’s true we don’t just take the OT law in whole and apply it today.
But without God’s revelation, we don’t know what is good or bad. Therefore, just saying “The US is not Israel” doesn’t help us here.
I’m also not impressed with the argument that because Jesus forgives and the Christian message is about forgiveness, that we shouldn’t apply the death penalty.
That is an argument for forgiving all who commit crimes. I had a client who was the longest serving inmate in the state prison system. He died of kidney disease but was actually sentenced to 398 years.
He should have been forgiven according to this author.
But a society that forgives people for the commission of crimes will have more crime.
I believe the verse from Genesis about the taking of a human life means forfeiting one’s own is a general principle about God’s character and the importance of protecting human life.
I am opposed to the death penalty in cases where the facts are truly in dispute about whether the accused committed the crime. Cases where there are multiple defendants and it is unknown as to who pulled the trigger, possible faulty identifications and other cases.
But there are cases where there is no doubt. Ted Bundy, John Gacey, Timothy McVey, Jeffrey Dahmer, and there are numerous others where there’s no way we are going to find out later that there’s a mistake. The death penalty is appropriate in these cases.
I’ll also address the issue of unequal application.
That exists in every area of the law. It applies in lots of contexts.
The unfair application of the law is something we should oppose. That’s why I favor strict sentencing application and not judicial discretion.
But we should not do away with laws. We should adopt new procedures to increase fairness.
That’s hard to do, and we will always have to strive for that.
At the risk of speaking for the author, I think the idea of bringing forgiveness into a capital punishment argument is not that murderers should not face punishment, but that capital punishment ends the offender’s chance to repent and be forgiven. I don’t necessarily hold that view, but I don’t think the author intends to suggest criminals of any type should not face punishment.
My objection to capital punishment is fairly straightforward: I don’t believe in our government’s ability or desire to accurately and fairly apply it.
As the author, Bill is correct. I’m not saying waive punishment, just the Capital Punishment is not the answer!
I’m not going to wade into this good discussion, but when i first glanced at the headline I thought it said “A right to kill a pastor” and it made think this was about a church business meeting. I was relieved it wasn’t.
Ha! Shew. Thats a relief!
Strange that our government wants to do away with capital punishment for the guilty, but promotes and finances the murder of millions of innocent babies, up to the time of birth. Where are those who will preach against this spilling of innocent blood on America’s soil? I wonder if the turmoil we are now experiencing is not the outcome of this callous attitude toward life. (Ezekiel 33:6) “But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, so that the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any one of them, that person is taken away in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at the watchman’s hand.”
The original article, found at http://www.berkeleybaptistchurch.com, does include a parallel with abortion. At the suggestion of an SBCV editor, I removed it to cut down and length and keep focus on Capital Punishment. I assure you, all of this flows from a prolife position that is absolutely opposed to abortion!
? legnth???? A voices editor concerned about legnth? I have seen much longer articles here!
That couldn’t possibly have been Miller. 😉
Kidding, Dave – sorta. You gotta know yo articles be loooooooooonnnng sometimes.
I am just messin’
I would like to see a verified statistic showing that one in 10 people who are *executed* or falsely convicted…..sure in the days before long and thorough mandated appeals processes and forensic development i could see the number being higher than that – but modern cases? Not saying its not accurate – just curious as to the data.
Personally, I advocate for the limited use of the death penalty in the cases of the most severe murderers. *Only for murder is my view* – and more specifically for heinous murders where a jury applies the sentence – i.e. serial killers, torture/execution style murders, murders for hire (both the “hitman” and the one(s) who hired them).
I would like to see actual life without parole used more often for other serious crines as well.
First, the quote came from an article. The true number that I found is more like 1 in 11. That is still a staggering number. Here is a link for validation: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence
Again I may be wrong and if you can point me to where I am I would be happy because you’re right that number is staggering…
You said in your article that it is one and 10 (which you now said is actually 1 in 11j that have been executed and have later than exonerated… The link you just posted says that that percentage of people on death row have been exonerated… I would be interested to see how many people have been actually executed and then later have been found to be guilty… Especially under the current system of forensic development – let’s say the last 25 – 30 years?
*not guilty
While it is terrible that someone has sit on death row for many years and was not guilty of the crime they had been accused of… That is nowhere near as bad as having been executed for a crime they did not commit It’s completely different.
Certainly our entire judicial system outside od capital cases has people in prison for short term and long term for crimes they did not commit… probably around the same percentage maybe, 10/11%… (of course certainly we are speaking of those who are actually not guilty not just those wko proclaim their innocence…).
There were 18 capital executions in the united Staes in 2020, the highest number in decades. Eighteen. In 2018, the last year for which I could find data, there were 620,000 abortions. It’s hard to get your mind around that last number. Most of the last 15 years have been higher.
Exactly, it is quite, quite rare. As it ought to be. The exhaustive and automatic appeals take a long time. I also tend to think that the appeals process virtually eliminates uncertainty before a a sentence of capital punishment is actually carried out. Nowadays this often includes the use of forensic technology that may have not been available or advanced enough at the time of conviction.
With respect toward Joey, there is absolutely no contradiction in ones opposition/objection to subjective, indiscriminate and capricious abortion (being pro-life) and that same person making arguments allowing for objective and discriminate capital punishment for the most extreme criminal offenders.
It’s apples and rocketships to stretch such a philosophical linkage.
This is exactly what capital punishment is for.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/la-district-attorney-gascon-drops-death-penalty-man-charged-killing-police-officer
Mejia Shot and killed his own cousin as well as shooting 2 officers killing one.
Mejia he’s “proud” of what he did and that he should have “smoked” the other cop sooner.