Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Dennis Prager :: Townhall.com Columnist
Capital punishment -- another argument for it
by Dennis Prager
Forward Print Share Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


And now I have an additional argument. Regarding murder, it is not only those of us who support capital punishment who support a policy that can lead to the killing of innocents. So do almost all those opposed to capital punishment. Nearly all opponents of capital punishment (and many supporters of capital punishment) believe that if the police obtained evidence illegally, the conviction of a murderer should be overturned.

Take this Illinois story.

In 1982, James Ealy was convicted of the strangulation murders of a family -- including a mother and her two children. It took the jury just four hours to render the guilty verdict, and Ealy was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. However, his lawyers argued that the police had improperly obtained evidence, and an Illinois Appellate Court, whose justices acknowledged Ealy was guilty of the murders, vacated the ruling. But without that improperly obtained evidence, Ealy could not be retried successfully, and he was released from prison.

On Nov. 27, 2006, Ealy strangled to death Mary Hutchison, a 45-year-old manager of a Burger King in Lindenhurst, Ill.

That woman was killed because many Americans believe that it is better to let a murderer go free than to convict one with evidence improperly obtained.

Whether that position is right or wrong is not relevant here. What is relevant is this: The people who believe in this policy do so knowing that it will lead to the murder of innocent people like Mary Hutchison, just as I believe in capital punishment knowing that it might lead to the killing of an innocent person. So those who still wish to argue for keeping all murderers alive will need to argue something other than "an innocent may be killed." They already support a policy that ensures innocents will be killed.
1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Forward Print Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of 4 books including Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Dennis Prager's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Join The Debate!

Post Your Comment
(182 comments so Far)
View in ascending order     View in descending order
Reply # 1
Date: Dec 22, 2006 - 4:54 AM EST
Justifiable
2. Killing to express revulsion at killing is an inherent self-contradiction."

So is imprisoning a kidnapper. Would also be against this?

" 3. Punishment is not an effective deterrent for crime, even if it could be applied immediately and unerringly and universally, which is impossible."

(leaving aside the obvious that by putting a murderer to death you have deterred him from doing it again) Common sense & everyday experience says you're wrong. A given punishent obviously is not going to deter every single person, but to say that it does not deter anyone, or cannot deter significantly is just stupid. Watch how many people would speed if it meant losing all their personal possessions.

" 4. The argument put forth by “great thinker” van den Haag is poorly conceived and unconvincing.

I find it very convincing. He's not known as a great thinker for nothing. Read Wikipedia's account of him before you write off his arguments as "poorly conceived & unconvincing". Besides I think he would know something about punishment based on his experiences alone. Check them out.


" 5. Since 1992...Carozo School of Law in New York has used DNA evidence to exonerate 123 death row inmates who had been wrongfully convicted."

Since you would exonerate someone where DNA proved their innocence (who wouldn't), you'd agree that where DNA proved guilt & if the death penalty was only used in these cases, that would render the wrongful death argument null & void?

"I’m not at all in favor of liberating people who are demonstrably guilty of violent crimes."

Good. So what would you do with them? What's your better solution? And which of the 4 aims of punishment (deterrence, protection of community, retribution, rehabilitation) would that achieve, in your opinion?

"Like most proponents of capital punishment, Prager ignores the facts, relies on appeals to ugly human motives like hatred, revenge, and cruelty, and ironically seems quite proud of himself. A true self parody."

Rubbish.

Finally, Gallup polls** in the US consistently indicate in the region of 70% in favour of CP, 25% against, 5% undecided. So only 1 in 4 against. You're the 1 in 4.

Only about 20% of people believe the death penalty is applied too often in the US. You're now 1 in 5. If you were a politician, your chances of being elected are slipping fast.

They also consistently show about 95% of people want either death penalty or "life with absolutely no chance of parole" for murder. Almost everyone else has "no opinion". So either you are in favour of "life with absolutely no chance of parole" (is this not ugly? vengeful? cruel? when the offender knows they may never see freedom again? what's the point in living?) or are you in that statisticallt insignificant group of the population, the < 1% category?

Easier to be critical of CP than to be supportive of CP (which as you know, comes across as "ugly") But coming up with something better/workable is not so easy, is it?

** stats are very similar to ABC NEWS / WASHINGTON POST & FOX NEWS / OPINION DYNAMICS POLLs.
(http://www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/death/opinion.htm)
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 2
Date: Dec 21, 2006 - 3:47 AM EST
Unjustifiable ...
1. “Cosmic injustice?” This is meaningless nonsense.

2. Killing to express revulsion at killing is an inherent self-contradiction.

3. Punishment is not an effective deterrent for crime, even if it could be applied immediately and unerringly and universally, which is impossible. Furthermore animal studies show conclusively that negative reinforcement (punishment) is the most easily extinguished form of conditioning.

4. The argument put forth by “great thinker” van den Haag is poorly conceived and unconvincing. To cite just one of its many flaws, deciding to commit a murder on one day rather than another is not at all tantamount to deciding not to commit the murder at all.

5. Prager’s cavalier dismissal of the possibility of executing innocent people illustrates his ignorance, as well as his moral depravity. Since its founding in 1992 the Innocence Project at the Benjamin N. Carozo School of Law in New York has used DNA evidence to exonerate 123 death row inmates who had been wrongfully convicted. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=110
Had the group not taken up these cases, many of these people would have been killed. To claim that this kind of travesty hasn’t happened even once in the past fifty years is ludicrous.

6. Prager’s newest reason for capital punishment is as worthless as the rest. Not all opponents of capital punishment support vacating convictions on the basis of evidence obtained improperly. I certainly don’t. I believe that there are other ways to deter unlawful police procedures and I’m not at all in favor of liberating people who are demonstrably guilty of violent crimes.

Like most proponents of capital punishment, Prager ignores the facts, relies on appeals to ugly human motives like hatred, revenge, and cruelty, and ironically seems quite proud of himself. A true self parody.
Flag as Offensive
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
 *
State:
 *
Zip:
 *
Phone:
       
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.