On the Death Penalty

NRO ^ | September 28, 2011 | Jonah Goldberg

[Sherman Logan]

One of the best discussions I've seen about the common theory that we cannot have a death penalty if there is any chance at all of executing an innocent person.

[GotMojo]

Therefore, I must not go on a diet because I might eat a twinkie.

[MeganC]

Thnak you for posting this.

[Cicero]

It’s kind of like saying that the first time there is a fatal traffic accident, we should close down all the roads and junk all the cars.

Roads kill.

[jazusamo]

Bump! Good post.

[Raycpa]

We are no longer following the bible on the death penalty. If we did we would have fewer problems and avoid errors. Note the requirement of the witnesses to do the stoning. This should give pause to most witnesses about the importance and responsibility of their testimony:

http://www.dianedew.com/dthpnlty.htm

I. The death penalty is a deterrent against crime.

Deuteronomy 21:21 “All the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.”

II. Under the Mosaic Law, the death penalty was not only permissible but required.

Genesis 9:5-6 “And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.”

Numbers 35:31 “Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. He must surely be put to death.”

III. Two witnesses were required, that there be no error.

Numbers 35:30
Deuteronomy 17:6; 19:15

IV. Biblically, by whom should the penalty be executed?

A. By the witnesses.

Deuteronomy 13:9; 17:7
Acts 7:58

B. By the congregation.

Numbers 15:35,36
Deuteronomy 13:9

[Vigilanteman]

But why is it that the death penalty is the only government function that must be abolished after a single error?

Yep. And why is it that libtards are so anxious to not only make, but celebrate exceptions if the human being put to death is an unwanted baby or a handicapped woman in a coma?

[Jim Scott]

I don't always agree with Jonah Goldberg (he doesn't know I exist so its a moot point) but on this death penalty issue, I think he nails it when he states that just because one person may be executed unjustly that should not preclude anyone from ever being executed. Some murders are caught on surveillance film, some murderers are convicted with indisputable DNA evidence and many confess - with details - to their crime(s). These deserve the death penalty if state law so allows. The cases where evidence may be logically disputed can be kept in prison for life with no chance of parole, to be executed at a later date if indisputable evidence can be produced.

That some atheist death penalty opponents try to use Christian tenets to argue against capital punishment is annoying and ultimately unsuccessful. Attempting to equate opposition to abortion to capital punishment is absurd when one considers that abortion is the violent (for the baby) killing of an innocent, defenseless unborn infant done at the mothers whim while capital punishment is the killing of a convicted, adult murderer - usually after multiple trials and appeals - and is accomplished with much effort to avoid the criminal being executed to experience any pain. There is simply no comparison.

[Sans-Culotte]

Good column bump.

[thackney]

Acts 7:58

This is not a section of the bible about commanding how to execute.

This is talking about how the non-believers stoned Steven.

Do you really think this section is an instruction from God about how executions should be carried out?

[Jonty30]

I’m pro-death penalty for crimes that warrant it.

But I do think that there should be a way to better ensure that the evidence that is given in a death penalty case is solid.

I don’t want to see people given the penalty because of lazy defence or a prosecutor who wants to make his case so he can run for office.

I don’t support endless appeals, but maybe something like a three judge panel that goes over the case to best ensure that the evidence is solid.

[thackney]

I believe in all states, a death sentances also carries an automatic appeal for the case to get reviewed by a higher court.

[chesley]

I understand that under Christianity vengeance is the Lord’s.

OK, but who is the Lord's appointed agent for the execution of justice in this world?

[Jonty30]

Unless you can afford Johnny Cochrane, you are likely just as screwed in a state sponsored justice system. :)

I think you need something more neutral than that.

[thackney]

Did you expect your judges in your panel to be private hires?

[Jonty30]

No and I recognize the flaw on that point.:)

But I do think that you’d end up with better death penalty judgements, if a case that results in a conviction, were sent to a panel of three judges that were willing to ask tough questions about the evidence.

You’d probably end up with a lot less appeals and quicker executions to boot.

[IronJack]

The argument also falls apart if you consider that ALL justice is fallible. It is not much less of a tragedy to convict someone in error and take away 30 years of their life. Or 20. Or 10. So if we’re going to refuse to apply the ultimate sentence because we may err, how can we rightfully apply any sentence at all?

We administer justice not convinced of our own infallibility but with a faith that Due Process works. In the case of the death penalty, that Due Process is as rigorous as any Man can devise. And it works.

[Amberdawn]

Raycpa, You may also be interested in the various injunctions in the Bible and Torah which can be found at prodeathpenalty.com.

[Jonty30]

Justice must ultimately prevail, I agree.

But should also be seeking to improve the due process to ensure that when it is rendered, it is the most reasonable judgement rendered.

[Raycpa]

I think the author was demonstrating the requirement that the witnesses were required to do the death penalty.