Now
Partly Cloudy
80.0°
High
88°
Low
66°
Full Forecast

Coupon

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > News > Local
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Anti-death-penalty forum targets new senators

Comments 20 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By CLARENCE MABIN / Lincoln Journal Star

Friday, Jan 12, 2007 - 12:18:17 am CST

Capital punishment’s many flaws are obvious and well known, opponents said at a panel discussion at the Nebraska Capitol on Thursday.

The death penalty feeds disproportionately on racial minorities and the poor, leaves no room for error, does not deter crime and is often fueled by revenge, they said.

Yet, this method of retribution remains an entrenched part of the American criminal justice system.

“The facts are out there,” said Jose Soto, one of the panelists at the forum, organized by Nebraskans Against the Death Penalty and other opponents of capital punishment. “If we know all these things, the question is, why do we continue” to execute people?

For Soto and others at the forum, the answer is a complex one, but it includes race and racism.

“It’s not just about the death penalty,” said Soto, vice president for affirmative action, equity and diversity at Southeast Community College.

“It’s (about) a society that made a decision that some individuals are more valuable than others. ... Execution is an extreme example.”

Frank LaMere, another panelist, agreed. He said society perpetrates capital punishment on individuals with less value as a stark warning to others of the serious consequences of crime.

“I think they use us as something a little less than human,” said LaMere, a Winnebago Indian activist. “They can tell their children, ‘This is what (could) happen to you’” if you break the law.

Fran Kaye, a panel moderator, said the country’s contentious racial history explains much of death penalty’s staying power. The United States is the only western democracy with the death penalty, she said.

“Why in the world does the U.S. have the death penalty?” she said. “There are lots of reasons; one of them is race.”

Organizers had hoped to draw Nebraska legislators to the event. Three attended, though briefly.

Kaye, a professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, was not disappointed by the number of lawmakers at the forum.

“We knew it would be a three-ring circus (at the Capitol) today,” she said.

Kaye said the group hopes to offer legislators regular lectures on the death penalty this session and plans to do thorough lobbying at the Capitol.

“Now that we’ve got all these new senators, it’s really a wonderful opportunity,” she said. “We want to give them (a) ‘Death Penalty 101’,” education.

In addition to race and the death penalty, other panelists discussed the human costs of the death penalty, lethal injection and religious views of capital punishment.

About 35 people attended the forum.

Thirty-eight states, including Nebraska, and the federal government have a death penalty law, according to information provided by Nebraskans Against the Death Penalty. Some 1,057 men and women have been executed in the United States since 1976, 34 percent of whom were black.

Nebraska, the only death penalty state to rely exclusively on the electric chair, has nine men on its death row. The last person executed by the state was Robert Williams in 1997.

 Eric Aspengren, executive director of Nebraskans Against the Death Penalty, said he anticipated the introduction of legislation for lethal injection and, from Sen. Ernie Chambers, legislation to abolish the death penalty.

Reach Clarence Mabin at cmabin@journalstar.com or 473-7234 .


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Local > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
Hollis wrote on January 12, 2007 6:06 am:
" Why should someone who takes a life in a violent matter be allowed to live? The death penalty is not about revenge. It is about an absolute, final punishment. And it does deter crime. Once a murderer is executed he cant kill again. Simple fact. "
Jan wrote on January 12, 2007 7:52 am:
" Go for it and I hope you succeed but somehow I doubt it in Nebraska. For the most part they prefer to look back rather than forward. "
Ben Thar wrote on January 12, 2007 7:53 am:
" Sorry group, but if the minorities would stop killing one another they would not be the largest group on death row. If their parents would get married, and raise their offspring to be law abiding citizens they would not be on death row. If they quite siering childern in large numbers out side of marriage, and became caring fathers their offspring would not be in prison. The problem is not the legal system, the problem is when people live out side the norms of society. Your arguments are like saying drug dealers are the largest group in prison. Whose fault is that? "
Ryan wrote on January 12, 2007 8:39 am:
" What a great idea. We need to stop the death penalty as soon as possible. It does no good whatsoever and simply makes us hypocrites as people. "We should kill people in order to teach people that killing people is wrong." What a horrible idea. "
Eric wrote on January 12, 2007 8:42 am:
" I can't believe that such a pro-life state still uses the death penalty. It is time for it to go. "
Dawg wrote on January 12, 2007 9:39 am:
" We need an express lane put into the electric chair to make room for more murders. How can it be a deterrent if we take 15 to 20 years to use it. You do the crime the you should be punished accordingly. You kill someone with intent then you should forfeit your life. "
Brian wrote on January 12, 2007 9:42 am:
" If someone is in jail for the rest of their life they can not kill again. It's a simple fact. Not only that, but with the appeals process it's actually more expensive to kill a criminal than it is to give them life with no parole. And in prison, they are certain to not harm society again, and it'll cost us a lot less as well. Look it up. "
Don wrote on January 12, 2007 10:14 am:
" I am disheartened to hear that a group is using the terms "race and racism" in the same breath as the death penalty. In my mind, they are two separate and distinct concepts. The Nebraska legislature (i.e., the majoirty of the voters) have passed the law that if you commit a murder of the first degree and the acts of the crime fall under a short list of reasons or additional horrible act (aggravating circumstances) you have made yourself eligible for the death penalty. The death penalty in NE is determined by a 3-judge panel and only after a separate hearing from the guilt phase/trial. In Nebrasaka, the majority of the citizens have said if you commmit a crime that warrants itself of the death penalty, we are ridding ourselves of your place on this earth. Society has said or at least a majority of society has said, this type of behavior will not be tolerated in any fashion and the ultimate punishment is death. What does race have to do with the death penalty? Minorites are not the only people who commit murders. The death penaly in my opnion says to those person who either contemplate committing murders or to those who have already committed murders, that you are personally responsible for your behavior that falls outside the norms (laws) set by society. The death penalty in my view draws a line in the sand between law abiding citizens and non-law abiding citizens (those who commit murders). I am a minority and have never once believed or thought the death penalty was racist. It's about the ultimate punishment for committing an act society has no tolerance with. Racism is bad, but I don't think this groups energy is being served well in this endeavor. All the victims of murder and the perpetrators on death row are from the same race, the human race. So where is the racism? "
wrong wrote on January 12, 2007 10:26 am:
" A. Inmate on Inmate murders is very common.

B. Inmates still use the legal process to harass the families of the victims with endless and frivolous lawsuits and appeals, all of which is wasting MORE money.

C. The problem with the death penalty is it is not used enough and this is why it is not a deterrent. IF you get caught, IF you get convicted (real conviction not a plea bargain), and IF you are sentenced to death, THE ONLY ONES that far are the Worst of the Worst of the Worst… YOU still are more likely do die of “Natural Causes” or another medical reason than being executed. "
John wrote on January 12, 2007 10:50 am:
" Is there a problem? Let's see, 1,057 since 1976. Whoa, that's what % of the entire inmate population in the US? %34 were black. What does that say? Duh. Absolutely nothing. The statistics don't support one way or another but somehow they are painting some "genocide" picture. Get over it you do gooders. Same people that are "pro-lifers", NE'ans for Peace and want any big business coming to town to walk away with their tail between their legs. Wake up. It's not gonna happen. What we need is an express lane for Death Row. "
Dlm wrote on January 12, 2007 10:51 am:
" If you put a murderer in jail for life he can, and they do kill again. When your sentence to life what do you have to lose. Gaurds get killed, other inmates get killed, escapes happen and more innocent people get hurt and killed. The death penalty is final and is justice served... "
Ben Thar wrote on January 12, 2007 10:51 am:
" Don, elequently and thoughtfuly spoken. I appluad your insight and moral compass. You and others in America like you are the guiding light that keeps us on course against the fringe elements. Heart felt thanks for your response. "
Adam wrote on January 12, 2007 11:17 am:
" I see, an "eye for an eye" only goes for murder. This is the most hypocritical argument I have ever heard because I'm sure that none of you have ever stolen anything before.....wait, I guarantee you have and I bet you are all still walking around with both hands attached to your body. There is no legitimate reason for a government to condone something in the same breath they are condemning it (killing someone). The death penalty is an emotionally based, barbaric law. "
Matt Poulsen wrote on January 12, 2007 1:42 pm:
" All you who think inmate murdering inmates is a common practice then I would like to see your statistics on that. It probably happens in the Nebraska State Pen once about every 5 years!! Plus, they would be murdering other murderers!! Don't you think its ironic that you are using the sanctity of a murderer's life to argue in favor of executing a murderer??!!! Simply put, your stats don't argue your position. Execution costs more and does nothing more to deter murder. One could make an argument about an "eye for an eye" as the only justice that fits the crime, but don't give me this bull about it protecting innocent people. Once they are locked up for life WITHOUT parole they will not be hurting anybody. Plus, it is enacted on such rare occasion it would seem to me we could dispense with the whole thing and society would not be down the tubes! Also, let's not forget the hundreds of murder cases that have been overturned because of new evidence and new developments in DNA processing. If these convicts would have been executed in the "express execution" as you request the state would have killed many many innocent people! A life sentence is reversible...a death sentence is not! Err on the side of humanity! "
Steven C. wrote on January 12, 2007 2:05 pm:
" If we kill more people faster to show that killing is wrong, people will stop killing because it will have been made quite clear to them that killing is wrong by the killing of the killers. Can't these people see that human life is so valuable to society that two people should die instead of one to show how valuable it is? "
Nate wrote on January 12, 2007 4:27 pm:
" An 'eye for an eye' mentality simply leaves a room full of toothless blind men. "
Geepers wrote on January 12, 2007 5:28 pm:
" This notion that we need to execute more prisoners and faster to show that we are serious about crime is ludicrous. Look at the countries that still have the death penalty. Many of them execute the condemned within a very short time after conviction. Has that deterred murder in those countries? NO! The death penalty has never been shown to be a deterrent to crime. How many innocent people have been put to death in a rush for closure? If it was one, it is one too many. Maybe if you or a loved one were wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to death, you would change your mind. Think about that and then tell me you still would push for a qick execution. "
Agent Orange wrote on January 13, 2007 1:24 am:
" House a convicted murderer for a year - or approximately the median income for one Nebraskan - $33,000. Last meal - $12. 2000 Volts of Electricity provided by NPPD - $20. To put them to death for their heinous crime they chose to commit and closure for the victim's family - priceless. "
Joe wrote on January 13, 2007 10:12 am:
" Yeah right, Nebraska has never executed a white guy, gimme a break! I agree with Don. "
Cynthia Hruby wrote on January 13, 2007 12:24 pm:
" "The Death of Innocents" by Sister Helen Prejean was my reading during the past four weeks. Morbid for a Christmas to New Year holiday time? I anticipate Lent and Holy Week as a deepening experienc (p. 233-234). I believe Prejean's eyewitness account of wrongful executions is a MUST read for anyone weighing the pros-cons of the death penalty. I'm grateful to Creighton University for bringing Prejean on November 13, 2006, and for making available the new book. "

Ads by Yahoo!