Death Penalty Abolition Passes Committee

The question is, does the Governor?

---

by: Libertad @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 09:49:17 AM CST

Get ready for the resurection of Willy Horton

I fear the power of a state that claims the right to kill its own citizens.

"There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area"
Congressman John Murtha, PA 12th CD, 1932-2010
Medical care by the best health care system in the world.

---

by: allyncooper @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 10:02:00 AM CST

Not so fast. Not giving that up.

The state has always claimed, and uncontroversially claims (without opposition even from the vast majority of death penalty opponents), the authority to kill its own citizens when extingencies on the ground require law enforcement to do so.

This is despite the fact that far less due process is involved.  More people are killed under state authority this way than by all executions in the U.S. combined (on the order of three hundred people a year).

Many people wish police were more judicious in doing so (e.g. the man shot while already handcuffed by BART police not long ago), but even those people don't dispute that at some times and places, states should kill their own citizens.

---

by: ohwilleke @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 16:34:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not a problem

My comment was directed toward state sanctioned executions carrying out the death penalty. I have no problem with law enforcement or private citizens using lethal force when absolutely justified in self defense or to defend the lives of others. In fact I have had a concealed weapons permit for years for just that purpose.


"There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area"
Congressman John Murtha, PA 12th CD, 1932-2010
Medical care by the best health care system in the world.

---

by: allyncooper @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 19:00:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Moral considerations aside

it does make more sense to allocate resources to solving murders than to lengthy expensive pursuits of the death penalty.

Chandra Levy's father made an interesting observation.  He doesn't want the death penalty for his child's killer but not because of any turn the other cheek, forgive your enemy, the meek shall inherit the earth sort of reasons. That's more a New Testament attitude.  He just doesn't think the guy would suffer long enough and prefers to see him suffer much longer and to the end of his days with life in prison.

However you look at it, no matter how much sense it makes from a purely practical point of view, western pols are very hesitant to appear soft on crime by opposing the death penalty and I also have trouble seeing Ritter signing it.

---

by: BlueCat @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 11:23:10 AM CST

I am really torn on this

-The death penalty is a deterrent.
-Some crimes are so heinous that we just want the ultimate punishment. cf. Nathan Dunlap.
-I am concerned that if Ritter does sign an abolition bill, that we will have Constitutional Amendment on the ballot in 2010.

+We never carry it out anyway. cf. Nathan Dunlap.
+Horribly expensive relative to life without parole.
+One of these days it will be outlawed by the courts because it is Cruel and Unusual.
+Abolition gives us the high moral ground against the Saudi and Chinese governments.

---

by: davebarnes @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 11:25:30 AM CST

I haven't seen any evidence that

the death penalty is a deterrent. On the other hand there is every reason to believe that many innocent people have been sent to their deaths over the years considering the number of death row prisoners who have been exonerated by modern access to DNA evidence.

It would be nice to be on the same page as the rest of the civilized world. Too bad we have to look to countries like Saudi Arabia and China to find fellowship concerning the death penalty.

We have already forfeited the credibility to pressure any other country on human rights since we are now just another nation that throws people into secret prisons with no access to due process and tortures confessions out of the innocent as well as the guilty with little concern for and no apologies to the former. The climb back to any moral high ground will be a long one.  

---

by: BlueCat @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 12:52:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Many?

"every reason to believe that many [emphasis added] innocent people have been sent to their deaths..."

Really? In Colorado?
We have only executed one person in the last 42 years and I am pretty sure he was guilty.
We have only executed 105 people since 1859. Source: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.or...

I am not saying that some innocent men were executed, but I am saying that Colorado is not Illinois nor Texas.

---

by: davebarnes @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 13:45:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I agree that in Colorado that there have been very few

executions in recent history where there was any question of guilt.  Colorado's existing, you can count them on your fingers, death row, all involve cases where the case for guilt of the crime of murder is very solid, and where the crimes involved would have qualified for the death penalty under the statutes of any jurisdiction that still retains the death penalty.  Dunlap was a multiple murderer.  Another was in prison for murder and killed a guard (in part for the purpose of getting the death penalty) and confessed on the spot.  Sir Mario Owen killed a witness to a crime and an innnocent to prevent them from testifying in another criminal case.

Also, one of the men currently on Colorado's death row, and the only other person Colorado has executed in the last 42 years were basically "death penalty volunteers."  They were/are engaging in a form of state assisted suicide.

One can quibble over whether those executed from 1859 to 1875, i.e. under territorial government, really count as Colorado executions, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were innocent people (and certainly people who aren't death penalty culpable) sent to their deaths in Colorado among the 105.  Justice was rough in the old days.  For example, one of the men executed in Colorado had the IQ of an early elementary school kid and spent much of his last days playing with little toy trains almost oblivious to his fate.

Also, while not precisely executions, Colorado has had a surprisingly large number of lynchings for a non-Southern state in its history.

---

by: ohwilleke @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 16:51:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

There were 175 lynchings in Colorado from 1859-1919.

Per the book by Stephen Leonard.  

---

by: ohwilleke @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 16:56:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Andrew, you know better than

to conflate legal state-sanctioned executions and illegal lynchings.
I would a lawyer to be more precise even if you do oppose the death penalty.

---

by: davebarnes @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 18:18:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

of course, there is debate about whether the executions are legal

...some Justices of the Supreme Court have thought not.  You know, cuz of that pesky Constitution and all.

---

by: Jambalaya @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 18:20:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Sorry

I didn't mean many in Colorado but many in general across the nation down through the years.  It was a comment on the death penalty in general, not here in Colorado.   You are quite right about Colorado.  Texas would probably be another story. Wouldn't be surprised if Bush, while Governor, didn't cheerfully fry an innocent or two.

---

by: BlueCat @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 17:34:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Lynchings are another subject

---

by: BlueCat @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 17:35:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'd like specifics on how it's a deterrent.

With the shootings, knifings etc. that maim and kill people every day in Colorado, it's not likely that much crime is being deterred by our death penalty.

---

by: The realist @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 13:41:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Some people argue that it does deter

http://www.dpinfo.com/death_pe...

---

by: davebarnes @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 13:50:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It's a deterrent like this:

"Hey, Billy Bob, let's go kill us some nigger or fags or cops. After you finish that case of beer, ole buddy."

"I dunno Boogers.  We do that shit and we'll get exa...exa..exa...fuck, hanged or some shit."

Booger slapping forehead: "Holy Budweiser, Billy Bob!  Glad you thought of that. Man, we coulda done gone and done it.  I'da never been able to drive my jacked up 1970 Blazer again!"

"Yeah, old buddy.  What say we just go shoot some tin cans instead?  I got some new ammo for my Uzi."

Dave, do you REALLY think criminal minds think more that a few minutes into the future?  Reality Alert:  They don't.  

The states and the nations w/o the DP suffer no greater murder rates that those that do.  

"Collective fear stimulates herd instinct and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd." -Bertrand Russell

---

by: parsingreality @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 17:21:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Deterrence

Deterrence is not a legitimate argument if you believe that punishment should be proportional to the crime. Suppose that A robs B and the sentence is 5 years. If you put A to death, then many people may be deterred from robbing other people. The deterrence argument is that: We should punish A more severely than normal in order to prevent C from possibly robbing D at some time in the future. Not a legitimate argument in my opinion in most cases. So in what exceptional cases would deterrence be legit? I can't think of any except maybe some extreme national security situation. However, if you believe that death is an appropriate sentence for a given crime, then that is a legit argument (debatable, but legit).

---

by: Hepster @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 13:52:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This is quite true

and entirely separate from the fact that deterrence as an argument for the death penalty has been completely eliminated as a possible justification by the simply overwhelming preponderance of objective studies and analysis that show that it has no statistically observable effect on crime rates.  Generally, informed people who argue for the death penalty try to  avoid the word "deterrence", because it only draws attention to the fact that their one argument that the death penalty has a positive impact on crime rates is utterly and completely wrong.

The more common argument these days is a thinly veiled emotional appeal; essentially the more polite equivalent of "I want to see that fucker hang!"  This, as much as anything, puts me squarely on the side of those who oppose the death penalty.

"... politics has been divided between two types of people: those who want more people to vote, and those who want fewer people to vote."
- Sen. Kerry

---

by: cdsmith @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 17:49:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not making an ethical or moral argument

But from a apolitical point of view, I think Ritter would be crazy to sign it until after his re-election.  

I have no data just instinct that many Colorado voters would prefer to leave it as is.  The cost savings argument is a winner, but only for those who really care enough about the numbers in the budget to know what those numbers are.

---

by: MADCO @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 14:00:10 PM CST

I'm in favor of the death penalty for pedophiles and murderers

The state has the power to shoot people anyway. The Denver area gets 2-3 cases of death by cop with questonable circumstances every year, and the officers always go free.

Maybe that's not so bad..I don't know. I don't know all the facts.

The difference between suburban life and life in West, North, East Denver and central Aurora, maybe parts of Montbello.. and the points  is very large.

John Edwards said there are 2 societies.
The manifold diversity of street life and professional politicians amazes me.

My 19 year old nephew (actually my cousin's boy....Cousin died at 32 from barbituate induced brain hemorrage) was murdered for just being loud and stupid while high on cocaine.

The ADA wanted to do just manslaughter......but Gov Ritter (DA Ritter) pushed murder 2. He got 30 years.

The guy will be out in about 10 more years with good time. He'll be a  felonious murderer with no job opportunites who graduated from criminal college and will have networked with La EME, or MS13, or the Texas Syndicate (he's from Trinidad).

Maybe he'll have changed. He'll have to answer to G-d for his deeds.

Bill Winter does a great job in the DA's office.

How about a 5 trillion tax cut for the upper 1% that's borrowed from China  and then invested in China? The Republican platform has legs.

---

by: Ray Springfield @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 14:53:17 PM CST

is this bill a gift to Ritter?

...by vetoing it, he'll help himself.  Won't he?

---

by: Jambalaya @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 18:11:28 PM CST

Ritter should veto it.

---

by: MiddleRoadDem @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 18:20:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Because...?

Political expediency?  Or to keep us as essentially the only Western democracy that has it on the books?  Or so we can all git us a big 'ol helpin of that steamin vengeance?

---

by: CJ @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 21:47:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Fine with me

if the state executes Sir Mario Owens and Robert Ray and then does away with the death penalty.  

---

by: RedGreen @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 23:29:53 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This Paper, Published in the Standard Law Review

Looks at most death penalty studies and statistics over a long range of time.  They found that most of the "robust" statistical findings of death penalty effectiveness are not valid, and can find no evidence of the death penalty's effectiveness.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa...

---

by: Justin.Henceroth@gmail.com @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 18:30:40 PM CST

Steven Levitt, author of Freakonomics

has this to say on the subject.  

On top of that, as we wrote in Freakonomics, if you do back-of-the-envelope calculations, it becomes clear that no rational criminal should be deterred by the death penalty, since the punishment is too distant and too unlikely to merit much attention. As such, economists who argue that the death penalty works are put in the uncomfortable position of having to argue that criminals are irrationally overreacting when they are deterred by it.

http://freakonomics.blogs.nyti...

---

by: Justin.Henceroth@gmail.com @ Tue Feb 24, 2009 at 18:38:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Savings estimate flawed

If you read the fiscal note and the estimates of cost savings you will see that those dollar amounts are based on Alternative Defense Counsel (ADC) trying 2 death penalty cases a year in addition to 2 cases by the public defenders.  The flaw is, Colorado doesn't average 4 death penalty cases a year.  The savings are over stated!  

Bottom line for me, if you kill a cop, a judge, a prosecutor, a public defender, a witness in a case, or any other public servant for doing their duty, then you deserve the needle!  We can argue deterence all day long, but how do you measure a negative.  If it deters somebody from killing someone, how do you measure that, how do you document it?  We are guessing, nothing more.

This became personal for me on August 27, 2008.  When the Denver police solve the murder of my friend and neighbor Chief Deputy DA, Sean May, I want the person(s) responsible to face the possibility of death for their crime.  We cannot stand for our society and our justice system to be intimidated or in any way influenced by this type of insidious conduct.  Period!  

---

by: du945 @ Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 01:10:01 AM CST

Arapahoe County is trying a lot of death penalty cases

these days (largely due to DA Carol Chambers), and the number of death penalty cases tried far exceeds the number were a death sentence is imposed.

---

by: ohwilleke @ Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 11:29:07 AM CST

[ Parent ]