Where did this pervading belief that a life sentence costs more than a sentence of death come from? Everyone who has heard of one death penalty case knows about the subsequent years of appeals. I find it mind-boggling that so many people believe that keeping someone in one kind of clothing, feeding them the worst food available, providing only emergency-based medical care, and putting them in a privately-built building and providing them with maybe some old tvs, books, weights and balls, and 1-2 teachers for the whole prison is that prohibitively expensive. Know how people complain about the price of lawyers? Imagine hiring a whole team of them with taxpayer dollars to work on a case for multiple years. Math is not hard.
This is fantastic news! I have a new found respect for the state of Nebraska! Senator Chambers is straight up awesome. This whole thing has made me do research on Nebraska and although they are still a conservative state.. its also a state with some pretty progressive ideas. I'm of fan of you're unicameral system. Now you just need to work on getting a new governor.
"It is said to be a deterrent. I cannot agree. There have been murders since the beginning of time, and we shall go on looking for deterrents until the end of time. If death were a deterrent, I might be expected to know. It is I who have faced them last, young men and girls, working men, grandmothers. I have been amazed to see the courage with which they take that walk into the unknown. It did not deter them then, and it had not deterred them when they committed what they were convicted for. All the men and women whom I have faced at that final moment convince me that in what I have done I have not prevented a single murder." - Albert Pierrepoint, British hangman 1932-1956, Confirmed 435 executions
1
In the NY Times Editorial (April 13, 2015), “152 Innocents, Marked for Death”, the Editorial Board concluded:“It has also become clear that prosecutorial misconduct is at the heart of an alarming number of these cases. In the past year alone, nine people who had been sentenced to death were released — and in all but one case, prosecutors’ wrongdoing played a key role.”
Prosecutorial misconduct has long been a severe problem undermining the judicial standards for a constitutionally fair trial. In a New York University Law Review article (May 1999), THE ANATOMY OF AN EXECUTION: FAIRNESS VS. "PROCESS," Judge Stephen Reinhardt tells the story of the case of Thomas Thompson, a man without a prior criminal record who was executed in California in July of 1998 despite substantial doubt about his guilt of capital murder and an unrefuted decision by the en banc court of the Ninth Circuit that his trial was blatantly unconstitutional. The Ninth Circuit's decision was based on egregious conduct of the prosecution and ineffective assistance of Thompson's counsel.
I think that it is time for posthumous justice for Thomas Thompson.
Prosecutorial misconduct has long been a severe problem undermining the judicial standards for a constitutionally fair trial. In a New York University Law Review article (May 1999), THE ANATOMY OF AN EXECUTION: FAIRNESS VS. "PROCESS," Judge Stephen Reinhardt tells the story of the case of Thomas Thompson, a man without a prior criminal record who was executed in California in July of 1998 despite substantial doubt about his guilt of capital murder and an unrefuted decision by the en banc court of the Ninth Circuit that his trial was blatantly unconstitutional. The Ninth Circuit's decision was based on egregious conduct of the prosecution and ineffective assistance of Thompson's counsel.
I think that it is time for posthumous justice for Thomas Thompson.
2
People don't learn or feel remorse and guilt when they are dead, so what is the point of killing them? Is it to make them suffer psychologically before they die knowing they will be killed? Isn't that cruel punishment? It must be torture on their mind in the least.
People don't learn when they are dead.
People don't learn when they are dead.
Bravo! Many thanks for the courage I know it may have taken some of you to stand firm & override the governor's veto. One for our better angels - not every day sees such an action but every one makes us stronger for the next time.
There was a time when I was in favor of capital punishment but as I aged and also learned more, I became convinced that it is wrong. The vast majority of developed nations do not allow capital punishment. There is enormous economic and racial bias in our legal system; individuals unable to afford legal counsel are disproportionately represented among those individuals sentenced to death. I am proud of Nebraska for doing what is right. Now we need to look at who ends up in prison and what alternatives, in particular drug courts, will lead to a decrease in the number of individuals imprisoned in the United States.
The problem with the "small-town, rural Nebraska" communities whose inhabitants don't want their tax dollars paying for life in prison, is that they have an absolute disconnect between the cost of mandatory appeals in capital cases and the vastly more economically affordable life imprisonment option. This is a poor excuse for bloodlust apologists. Be honest. Admit that state sanctioned murder is what you want, Mr. Small-Town Rural Nebraskan.
3
I am not originally from Nebraska, but have lived here for a long time after living in several other places. I am an Independent (voting for candidates from both parties), a veteran and a moderate who goes center to slightly left of center on many social issues. I just don't go that way on this issue. Yes, I want revenge if someone murders one of my family members or commits other heinous acts against them. The murderer of Officer Orozco here should have faced the death penalty if he had survived. Another catergory that, IMHO, justifies execution. I am glad he is dead. I won't try to argue the positions, that has been beaten to death (no pun intended) forerver. IMHO it is perfectly justifiable to extinguish people who commit heinous acts. If a wild animal kills your [insert family member here], you kill that wild animal. You don't put them in a zoo.
2
Here is my version of the death penalty designed to defeat any and all liberal arguments: 1. The death penalty is only applied for Killings in the day time where there are at least two disinterested witnesses (so there is no false conviction argument) 2. everybody goes to trial, no plea bargaining (to defeat the forced to plead guilty argument) 3. streamline the appeals process, they get one appeal for ineffective assistance of counsel claims AND THAT IS IT (to defeat the argument that it costs too much). You do this and I guarantee you each and every gangbanger and wanna be murderer in America would get the general deterrence message instantly. For the liberal who doesn't believe in killing people who killed people, I ask you what choice did the victim get in the transaction that led the guilty to get the newly swift death penalty?
3
I like the two disinterested witness rule, but what does "disinterested" mean? That they knew neither the victim nor the accused? What happens when other witnesses claim say it was someone else or that it looked like self-defense? Do the witnesses in fact have to see the act of murder? Would it also eliminate the felony murder rule so that only the gun man can get the death penalty?
The problem with the death penalty is its use in the small number of cases when the accused is actually innocent.
NY Times Editorial Board: "Lawmakers, recognizing reality, make Nebraska the first predominantly Republican state to ban capital punishment in four decades."
Wow, politicians that can recognize reality! That is almost unheard of.
Wow, politicians that can recognize reality! That is almost unheard of.
Now, throw the governor in prison.
Although one part of me says that capital punishment is a just punishment in some cases, one only needs to look at the list of 150 former death row inmates who were exonerated (many on the basis of mistaken eyewitness identification) to see that justice is very far from being infallible.
Google: "Innocence: List of Those Freed From Death Row"
Google: "Innocence: List of Those Freed From Death Row"
2
This is a joyous day for Christians like myself who see the teaching of Christ as pro-life in every way, from the womb to the tomb. Nebraska is a harbinger of other victories to come, as we wake up to the failure of capital punishment on both moral and practical grounds. Thank you, Nebraska Senators, for standing firm in the face of great pressure.
1
Murder is barred by law in all fifty states and by the United States Government.
Why doesn't someone argue that the death penalty is murder and therefore illegal?
Why doesn't someone argue that the death penalty is murder and therefore illegal?
Murder is the intentional and unlawful taking of a human life with malice.
Capital punishment is lawful.
Therefor, capital punishment is not murder.
Capital punishment is lawful.
Therefor, capital punishment is not murder.
F.N. your first sentence is correct, but you go on to contradict yourself with your socially ingrained idea. Capital punishment IS murder therefore illegal.
I'm glad that there are people who understand that no one deserves to die. The death penalty is inherent in primitive society.
Way to go, Nebraska. So very proud of the Nebraska Legislature.
The convicted murderers on Nebraska's Death Row are celebrating this one.
I'm pretty sure life in a maximum security prison is not a walk in the park.
What a paradox.........the state kills people because they killed people. The law only applies to the public.
1
Perhaps the Governor should do some research on capital punishment, and whether or not it prevents crime. It is expensive, often applied unfairly, and unmoral. One bad act should not be followed by another....it's a form of retribution, not justice.
Unmoral? Clearly you mean immoral.
WONDERFUL.
Killing is barbaric.
Killing is barbaric.
1
This is excellent. Congratulations, Nebraska, welcome to the gate of the 21st century.
1
The killers on Death Row are in agreement
I don't oppose the death penalty on moral grounds. If someone killed one of my children I wouldn't oppose the killer's execution. BUT the administration of the death penalty is bad. There must be a wealthy person who was executed for murder, but I never heard of it. Remember the Gov of Illinois who said he wouldn't approve any more executions because DNA evidence kept showing that the state had killed the wrong person? Dudley Clendinen, a journalist who spent much time on death row researching a book, told me that no one ends up on death row who has resources or a personality capable of self preservation. My community college students usually supported death penalty but I always said, "if all of you killed someone this weekend, not all of you would be executed. If your family could afford a good lawyer, if you were white or female. you would not be executed.
1
"he did not want his tax dollars used to pay for murderers to stay in prison for their entire lives."
It saddens me to realize how effective propaganda TV disguises as news media has distorted public views. Why, despite all the information readily available, do people still not know that keeping someone in jail for life is less expensive than sentencing them to death and paying, usually for both sides, for all the mandated appeals that follow a death sentence?
It saddens me to realize how effective propaganda TV disguises as news media has distorted public views. Why, despite all the information readily available, do people still not know that keeping someone in jail for life is less expensive than sentencing them to death and paying, usually for both sides, for all the mandated appeals that follow a death sentence?
1
A federal jury in Boston just imposed the death penalty on Mr. Tsarnaev, the bomber of the Boston Marathon, for his heinous actions that killed 3 young people, one a child and others permanently wounded and maimed. The bloody, monstrous crime of this young bomber was very, very worthy of the death penalty. While Nebraska may have eliminated the death penalty a crime that falls under federal jurisdiction within Nebraska could still lead to the death penalty when deemed appropriate by Judge or jury. This is just one small victory against the death penalty. It will take a nation to end it.
Still, while I oppose this penalty of ultimate finality, I often wonder what would we have done with captured mass murderer who slaughtered of 26 children at Sandy Hook? Are there some crimes for which we should reserve the death penalty? Will we be satisfied to lock up a monster for life? Maybe there are times when the death penalty is warranted.
Still, while I oppose this penalty of ultimate finality, I often wonder what would we have done with captured mass murderer who slaughtered of 26 children at Sandy Hook? Are there some crimes for which we should reserve the death penalty? Will we be satisfied to lock up a monster for life? Maybe there are times when the death penalty is warranted.
1
This is, indeed, a huge win for Sen. Ernie Chambers. The last time the issue came before the Unicameral, Brenda Council was in the seat Chambers now holds. (Chambers was sitting out due to term limits). Council attempted to get a bill thru the Unicameral that would assess the cost to the state of carrying out the death penalty v.s. a life in prison sentence. She couldn't even get this passed. So for complete repeal to happen a couple years later is huge! For once I'm actually proud of something our Unicameral has done.
2
Don't be fooled by those who give great meaning to the Death Penalty. It is the state gratifying the hatred and revenge of it's citizens.
We Americans are still a lynch mob.
We Americans are still a lynch mob.
2
No civilized nation should use the death penalty to carry out justice. Period. It is a black smudge on this country’s social fabric. The dialogue about its abolition needs to be brought to the 63 % who seem to think that one barbaric deed needs to be answered with another one. I tip my head to Nebraska, one of the more unlikely places to start a movement towards a more compassionate and enlightened society. Many worthy and successful transformations started out in seemingly inconsequential places. This might very well be a clarion call that may be heard in the most conservative states where the support of the death penalty is often driven by allegiance to political correctness. I dare say that a significant part of the adherents of capital punishment does not want to be seen as soft on crime, to be looked upon as renegades from a hard line.
2
God empowered man with the gift of profound intelligence. It is right that we should obey his commandments. Thank you Nebraska.
1
I have to say - the great thing about the unicameral system in Nebraska is that it allows the legislators to represent their constituents and not just toe the party line.
1
- Evidence shows the death penalty does NOT deter crime.
- Executing someone is more expensive than life imprisonment.
- There is no humane way to execute someone. Execution is most definitely cruel and unusual punishment.
- The US is the only Western country that still has the death penalty.
- If we as a society execute people, how are we any different to the murderers who kill?
- Executing someone is more expensive than life imprisonment.
- There is no humane way to execute someone. Execution is most definitely cruel and unusual punishment.
- The US is the only Western country that still has the death penalty.
- If we as a society execute people, how are we any different to the murderers who kill?
2
I think I'd much rather die than spend my life in prison.
1
Your comment gets to the heart of this whole debate. I think a lot of people feel the way you do. We don't want to think about prisons even as we fill them up with unprecedented numbers, whereas a public execution gives us the comforting illusion of justice served. We are a freedom-loving people and we like finality.
But justice shouldn't be about these things. It should be about protecting the public from danger and demonstrating the seriousness with which the government takes its laws enacted for the common good. And prison needs to be a place that models the values of our society, so that when the prisoner emerges he is prepared to live by them. The lack of freedom is the punishment, with physical restraint used only when necessary to prevent violence.
But of course, who am I kidding. Prisons today are a living hell. And anyone a cop doesn't like the look of is considered guilty and deserving of that hell, then railroaded through the gauntlet of hungry prosecutors and conservative judges for whom no one is innocent.
Given this reality, it's no wonder we have the death penalty. It's the ultimate symptom of a horribly diseased criminal justice system that has forgotten its role in society. That's why the death penalty keeps disappearing and reappearing in this country; it will never completely go away until we reform the criminal justice system so that it doesn't feel like every encounter with it is worse than death.
But justice shouldn't be about these things. It should be about protecting the public from danger and demonstrating the seriousness with which the government takes its laws enacted for the common good. And prison needs to be a place that models the values of our society, so that when the prisoner emerges he is prepared to live by them. The lack of freedom is the punishment, with physical restraint used only when necessary to prevent violence.
But of course, who am I kidding. Prisons today are a living hell. And anyone a cop doesn't like the look of is considered guilty and deserving of that hell, then railroaded through the gauntlet of hungry prosecutors and conservative judges for whom no one is innocent.
Given this reality, it's no wonder we have the death penalty. It's the ultimate symptom of a horribly diseased criminal justice system that has forgotten its role in society. That's why the death penalty keeps disappearing and reappearing in this country; it will never completely go away until we reform the criminal justice system so that it doesn't feel like every encounter with it is worse than death.
1
Exactly!
So far, at least 100 people have been released from death row because DNA evidence proved their innocence.
There isn't a single white person on death row for killing a black person, yet when the races are reversed, black killers are quickly given the death penalty.
The death penalty is a racist tool and exorbitantly expensive for any state to apply.
There isn't a single white person on death row for killing a black person, yet when the races are reversed, black killers are quickly given the death penalty.
The death penalty is a racist tool and exorbitantly expensive for any state to apply.
4
I am against capital punishment for one big reason above the dangers of miscarriages of justice:
If someone does something really bad to you, you want them to live and suffer a long time, not kill them off so they get to leave the earth while you remain suffering for their deeds.
If someone does something really bad to you, you want them to live and suffer a long time, not kill them off so they get to leave the earth while you remain suffering for their deeds.
I get frustrated when articles such as this focus on the conservative/liberal angle. There is so much else that can be written about it (some of it buried in the article, some of it unwritten). Supposed entrenched partisanship definitely doesn't need to be the headline or the lede.
There desperately needs to be a movement toward moderation and cooperation in American politics, but since it doesn't sell newspapers or ads (and yes, much of the fault is in the news consumer as much as the news), there is rarely help for it in the media.
There desperately needs to be a movement toward moderation and cooperation in American politics, but since it doesn't sell newspapers or ads (and yes, much of the fault is in the news consumer as much as the news), there is rarely help for it in the media.
1
To dismiss the conservative nature of Nebraska politics and divorce it from this particular issue is to misunderstand the issue. It is, indeed, a seismic shift in Nebraska to not only abolish the death penalty, but have enough votes to override a veto - and it has everything to do with the conservative nature of our politics. This couldn't, in fact didn't, happen a mere two years ago, but because of changing attitudes on this issue, particularly on the right side of the political spectrum, it was able to happen today. It is an issue that has been brought up in our Unicameral at every convening over the past 40 years and only today did it happen.
1
Fair enough. I don't mean to dismiss it, I only feel it should not be the focus.
The way that articles like this are written, there is an implicit message that conservatives have "backed down" or "lost the culture war" instead of simply recognized the state of the populace. In my opinion, the way this article frames the event encourages entrenchment.
The way that articles like this are written, there is an implicit message that conservatives have "backed down" or "lost the culture war" instead of simply recognized the state of the populace. In my opinion, the way this article frames the event encourages entrenchment.
Capital Punishment has become an economic issue. If you have money for a vigorous defense your chances are less. That is morally wrong
All things considered, kinda surprised the Republican controlled legislatures across the nation haven't been banning their death penalty with the same fervor and speed as they've been closing abortion clinics, disenfranchising voters and lifting consumer protection regulations.
1
Well, congratulations, Nebraska! I never was a supporter of death penalty, because this method of punishment has a big disadvantage: due to mistake of a justice system (which are happening quite often) innocent person may die. As I know one mistake already has happened... and it's enough. So good job, Nebraska, keep it up!
1
"Wayne Ambrosias, owner of the Sweet Pea Market, said he did not want his tax dollars used to pay for murderers to stay in prison for their entire lives."
It has been known for decades that it is more expensive to execute someone than it is to imprison him for life. This fact is so incontrovertible that even Republican politicians can't deny it any more. And yet there are millions of people like Mr. Ambrosias who either don't know that or refuse to believe it.
It's true that this fact seems counterintuitive, because we can all think of ways of killing someone that are far cheaper than the cost of housing and feeding him for 70 years. But one would think that a business owner like Mr. Ambrosias is capable of the nuanced thought necessary to understand concepts like hidden costs.
So I'm not convinced he's really complaining about the high cost of imprisonment. There's something else going on here, which may get to the heart of why so many people support the death penalty despite its cost and demonstrated ineffectiveness.
Most people who have never spent time in or around prisons are in denial about them. Whereas capital punishment is an emotionally satisfying exercise of public justice, which is why Bill Clinton oversaw an execution while running for president.
This is nothing new. Many European countries would still have the death penalty if it were put up for a vote. This is an issue in which politicians of all stripes have to lead the way. Thank you Nebraska.
It has been known for decades that it is more expensive to execute someone than it is to imprison him for life. This fact is so incontrovertible that even Republican politicians can't deny it any more. And yet there are millions of people like Mr. Ambrosias who either don't know that or refuse to believe it.
It's true that this fact seems counterintuitive, because we can all think of ways of killing someone that are far cheaper than the cost of housing and feeding him for 70 years. But one would think that a business owner like Mr. Ambrosias is capable of the nuanced thought necessary to understand concepts like hidden costs.
So I'm not convinced he's really complaining about the high cost of imprisonment. There's something else going on here, which may get to the heart of why so many people support the death penalty despite its cost and demonstrated ineffectiveness.
Most people who have never spent time in or around prisons are in denial about them. Whereas capital punishment is an emotionally satisfying exercise of public justice, which is why Bill Clinton oversaw an execution while running for president.
This is nothing new. Many European countries would still have the death penalty if it were put up for a vote. This is an issue in which politicians of all stripes have to lead the way. Thank you Nebraska.
2
DNA testing has freed so many wrongly jailed persons. If you execute somebody and find out later that he/ she was innocent , there is no going back. Killing somebody puts the state on the same level as the felon. Believe me, God will deal with criminals.
2
Let's be clear and honest here. The death penalty is slowly being abolished in this country but not for reasons suggested by DP opponents. Americans support the DP just as they have since this country was created. What Americans do not support are the endless appeals of DP cases that result in inmates on death row more likely to die of old age than the sentence a jury imposed.
And why do appeals stretch out for ten, fifteen, even THIRTY years? Because DP opponents have embedded themselves on appellate courts across the country and have managed to hijack the criminal justice system. And the media has assisted in this hijacking by creating an illusion that the system is unfair to the murderers given the DP.
This issue has less to do with political parties than with the arrogance of DP opponents who speak of democracy and fairness but respect neither when it comes to the citizens who have chosen to retain the DP option only to have this undermined by a minority of DP opponents.
And why do appeals stretch out for ten, fifteen, even THIRTY years? Because DP opponents have embedded themselves on appellate courts across the country and have managed to hijack the criminal justice system. And the media has assisted in this hijacking by creating an illusion that the system is unfair to the murderers given the DP.
This issue has less to do with political parties than with the arrogance of DP opponents who speak of democracy and fairness but respect neither when it comes to the citizens who have chosen to retain the DP option only to have this undermined by a minority of DP opponents.
It is good that Nebraska has banned capital punishment. Empirical studies have shown that the death penalty does not deter crime and is a waste of state funds. Disproportionately, capital punishment is used against Blacks and Latinos. Thus, it is a genocidal tool. This state sanctioned method of penalty is financially expensive and morally repulsive. The botched death of Missouri inmate, Mr. Lockett, is a shocking example of "correction" gone awry. If Texas and Florida accept these indisputable facts and stop killing people, the United States would have a chance of joining the Western world.
2
Wednesday was a good day for three groups.
First, for Sen. Ernie Chambers, who shows us that perseverance pays in politics. When I was a young newspaper reporter covering the Nebraska Legislature in the early 1970s, young Sen. Chambers was pointing out that the death penalty was an issue as much about the juries and the hearts of all Nebraskans as it was about the defendant in the docket. He never gave up -- never.
Second, for the 49 members of the Unicameral, who stepped up and assumed their legal non-partisan roles to study, analyze, and ultimately decide on a course of action. The members of the Unicameral showed us once again that politics truly is a noble profession of work done through shifting coalitions and compromise.
Finally, and most of all, a good day for the citizens of Nebraska, who created and have sustained the most functional legislature in our country. The Unicameral is a place of courage, accountability, and deliberation based upon relationships. One can only imagine how functional other state governments would be with such a legislature.
I am blessed to have lived a few years in such a fine state.
Joanne Roberts.
First, for Sen. Ernie Chambers, who shows us that perseverance pays in politics. When I was a young newspaper reporter covering the Nebraska Legislature in the early 1970s, young Sen. Chambers was pointing out that the death penalty was an issue as much about the juries and the hearts of all Nebraskans as it was about the defendant in the docket. He never gave up -- never.
Second, for the 49 members of the Unicameral, who stepped up and assumed their legal non-partisan roles to study, analyze, and ultimately decide on a course of action. The members of the Unicameral showed us once again that politics truly is a noble profession of work done through shifting coalitions and compromise.
Finally, and most of all, a good day for the citizens of Nebraska, who created and have sustained the most functional legislature in our country. The Unicameral is a place of courage, accountability, and deliberation based upon relationships. One can only imagine how functional other state governments would be with such a legislature.
I am blessed to have lived a few years in such a fine state.
Joanne Roberts.
3
You forgot one other group-the animalistic murderers who get to live our their lives instead of getting the punishment they deserve
For those states that continue to impose a death penalty, I've long since thought that they should shift to a "Particicution" system as hypothesized by Margaret Atwood in "The Handmaid's Tale". That way, all these blood-thirsty citizens can participate in the vengeance they so obviously long for.
(One need only read an unmoderated comments section on any news site to see the highly-creative ways that our citizens would propose to execute those they deem guilty; some of the methods would make ISIS blush.)
Heck, the state could probably even auction off the tickets to raise revenue!
(One need only read an unmoderated comments section on any news site to see the highly-creative ways that our citizens would propose to execute those they deem guilty; some of the methods would make ISIS blush.)
Heck, the state could probably even auction off the tickets to raise revenue!
2
Juries provide an opinion based on the facts put before them. It is the best method available, but it is, of course, far from foolproof. Executing an occassional innocent person should not be acceptable to anyone. What do we say later? Oops?
What has allowed juries an option, is the "life without parole" sentence. In the past a jury would recommend the death penalty to assure that a killer would not be put back on the streets 35 years later by a parole board. Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan have constant parole hearings. Lesser known killers are often freed. But this option eliminates that possibility.
Problem with this is that it is likely unconstitutional to bypass parole bboards and not allow eventual rehibilitation. If this ever goes to a top court, the "without the possibility of parole" may be removed from thousands of sentences. When this occurs, if available juries will again use the death option with more frequency.
What has allowed juries an option, is the "life without parole" sentence. In the past a jury would recommend the death penalty to assure that a killer would not be put back on the streets 35 years later by a parole board. Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan have constant parole hearings. Lesser known killers are often freed. But this option eliminates that possibility.
Problem with this is that it is likely unconstitutional to bypass parole bboards and not allow eventual rehibilitation. If this ever goes to a top court, the "without the possibility of parole" may be removed from thousands of sentences. When this occurs, if available juries will again use the death option with more frequency.
Mr. Ricketts, the legislature did not lose touch with the citizens of Nebraska - it is YOU who have lost touch with humanity. The death penalty is not a "tool" to protect law enforcement. How does killing someone already in prison protect law enforcement? The death penalty allows soulless people like YOU to take the life of another human being.
Only God can judge, Mr. Ricketts. God gives us life and He takes it away when He says it is time - not a judge, not a jury, and certainly not YOU.
I will pray for you.
Only God can judge, Mr. Ricketts. God gives us life and He takes it away when He says it is time - not a judge, not a jury, and certainly not YOU.
I will pray for you.
2
I oppose the death penalty and am very happy with this turn of events in Nebraska. However, some supporters of the death penalty make the point that not having that option available does endanger the lives of those who deal with inmates serving life sentences, since there is nothing further of any real significance that can be done to them if they kill a guard or a law enforcement officer.
I have never understood how executing a relatively small number of people has any impact whatsoever on the crime rate.
2
I'm an east coast liberal whose thinking about the death penalty has "evolved." I have supported the death penalty in a very limited number of instances. I know there are many problems with how it's currently implemented, and without question, should be completely abandoned rather than continue as is.
My feeling has been, in cases of premeditated multiple murder, truly horrendous crimes, where there is absolutely no doubt who is responsible, then the death penalty is warranted. Timothy McVeigh and the Washington D.C. sniper come to mind.
I think of the absolute terror, torture, scope and brutality of these crimes, and feel people who commit them deserve to die.
But since we will never get to a point where the death penalty is used in such cases, and where it can actually be implemented in a way that causes "cruel and unusual punishment," then a complete ban is better.
But let the criminals rot in jail, as they so richly deserve.
My feeling has been, in cases of premeditated multiple murder, truly horrendous crimes, where there is absolutely no doubt who is responsible, then the death penalty is warranted. Timothy McVeigh and the Washington D.C. sniper come to mind.
I think of the absolute terror, torture, scope and brutality of these crimes, and feel people who commit them deserve to die.
But since we will never get to a point where the death penalty is used in such cases, and where it can actually be implemented in a way that causes "cruel and unusual punishment," then a complete ban is better.
But let the criminals rot in jail, as they so richly deserve.
Yes. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Now one to reforming the prisons themselves.
There are no easy answers and there will always be some who cannot be reformed. But those will not be able to thrive in a culture of fairness, forgiveness and love.
There are no easy answers and there will always be some who cannot be reformed. But those will not be able to thrive in a culture of fairness, forgiveness and love.
1
Two extraordinary measures of our capacity to evolve: Ireland's support of marriage equality, and now Nebraska's vote on the death penalty. Perhaps there is hope for us all.
"Thou shalt not kill, you know," says Don Johnson, retired fisherman and evangelical Christian. That's right. As persons, we can not sanction our government to commit acts we would not commit ourselves.
"Thou shalt not kill, you know," says Don Johnson, retired fisherman and evangelical Christian. That's right. As persons, we can not sanction our government to commit acts we would not commit ourselves.
17
Not all are Christians or religious. Not all Christians abide by everything in the Bible. Christians have interpreted the Bible, just like every other religion interprets their holy books, as providing justifiable exceptions to the literal word. If someone killed one of my family members yes I would want to kill the murderer. I am more than happy to "sanction" our government to do what I would do.
A first...the people and pols. triumph over a idea bankrupt, demagogic Gov.....pretty rare in this country...
7
If you have a loved one who was killed for no reason. as my brother was on 9/11 , perhaps views on closure for the real victims of such heinous crimes would become more enlightened.
6
On the other hand how would you feel if an innocent loved one were unfairly convicted and executed.
If there were a magic wand that could determine with absolute certainty guilt or innocence I could support a death penalty.
But no such wand exists.
There is no clear dividing line between cases with absolute certainty and cases with some small amount of doubt.
The only way to prevent executing an innocent person is not to execute anyone.
That risk is much more important than the desire for revenge by relatives of murdered persons.
If there were a magic wand that could determine with absolute certainty guilt or innocence I could support a death penalty.
But no such wand exists.
There is no clear dividing line between cases with absolute certainty and cases with some small amount of doubt.
The only way to prevent executing an innocent person is not to execute anyone.
That risk is much more important than the desire for revenge by relatives of murdered persons.
6
Your view is legitimate, understandable and consistent with ancient Babylonian law in Hammurabi's Code providing for, among other things, that the eye of the offender who blinds another shall be taken. As Gandhi noted, "an eye for an eye" leaves the whole world blind. Not all relatives of the victims of violent crime share your view, and our system of justice places primary focus on the societal, not individual effect, of punishment. In other words, we do not let victims of crime determine the appropriate punishment.
1
If only the death penalty gave closure. That is one of our biggest myths. The death penalty brings no one back, does not deter anyone else from murdering, and equates vengeance with justice. I am sorry for your loss but can in no way agree that the death penalty would give you true closure.
I find a real difference between some human gut emotion that says "I want to kill that person for what they did to me" and what it would do to me if I actually killed that person. Depending on who you are and what was done to you, the urge might be normal, but that doesn't also mean that you should follow through with that urge. And for those who don't hold with my view here, there is the matter of all those people out there who were innocent but executed anyway. It might not mean much to some people, but let me assure you, it means an awful lot to the person being wrongly executed. And it means a lot to who we are if we believe such injustices are just the unfortunate cost of being about this business. We should be better than that.
22
Just curious. If a neo-Nazi and a terrorist joined forces and dropped enough nuclear weapons on New York to kill the entire population, what would be their proper sentence upon conviction?
Yes - a life sentence without parole.
1
Ignoring your ridiculous hypothetical for a moment, life imprisonment without possibility of parole, of course. Do you suppose executing them would teach them and their ilk a lesson? Would it restore the lives taken? Of what use then is state sponsored execution? It serves no purpose other than assuage some people of the need for revenge but most of us know what is said of revenge and whose provenance it is.
1
Anyone who needs someone else to die in order to "achieve closure" is sick. Closure must come from within, and should not depend on another violent act.
24
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
Praise the Lord for this glorious blessing, in Jesus' Name!
Hallelujah!
Sincerely yours,
Caleb Boone.
Praise the Lord for this glorious blessing, in Jesus' Name!
Hallelujah!
Sincerely yours,
Caleb Boone.
4
The difficulty with lethal injection is a sorry excuse and simply means we should abandon that method.. Go back to a good old fashiond hanging.
1
How about a good old fashioned lynch mob. Why wait for a trial before exacting vengeance?
Couple of wraps around the ears with primacord...bit messy and a tad noisy perhaps, but very quick and no lingering questions about the condemned suffering, however fleeting the instant, pain...
The death "penalty" is premeditated killing AKA murder.
Let's abolish it at the federal level.
Let's abolish it at the federal level.
9
Congratulations Nebraska.
14
Many who favor the death penalty believe those opposed to be lily livered doves. Untrue. I favor death for cold bloodied murders and devils island for many killers. But most homicides are committed by infirm, unstable and/or hapless people. Simply dispatching with them makes us look like the Nazi or, worse, stupid. As it has proven impossible to fairly apply the death penalty; e.g., distinguishing a mafia hit man from a mental deficient, I must bite the bullet and oppose the death penalty; however it may be warranted in certain cases.
2
Bravo Nebraska! I hope you lead a tide of states abolishing the death penalty, and in time the death penalty will be dead throughout these United States. Only then can we stand with other modern countries that have already abolished this cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty has never been about the crime or the criminal. It has been about us as a nation, and some who have the mistaken belief that by taking a life--strapping a human down and intentionally killing--we can feel better about ourselves. It's not true--everyone is less through the experience. Bravo Nebraska for saying no more killing in the name of justice.
12
Well, I guess Pete Ricketts is building his bona fides to run in the Republican Presidential Primary in 2020.
"I tried to keep Nebraska in the "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" club. But the Legislature was swayed by bleeding hearts.
Pete for President. He'll pull the switch himself!
"I tried to keep Nebraska in the "Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" club. But the Legislature was swayed by bleeding hearts.
Pete for President. He'll pull the switch himself!
3
So killing someone is a "tool"? Language like that reminds me that evil is often banal.
5
I love the death penalty, who wouldn't want to use it for certain heinous crimes. But my revengeful feelings are not the point are they. I firmly believe in "Thou shalt not kill." Thus I would never vote "for" the death penalty if given the choice. And yes, the death penalty is quite simply state sponsored killing. It is murder.
1
The death penalty is the ultimate in Conservative either or thinking. Don't confuse me with new facts or reality. I want to believe the death penalty is a deterrent, I want to believe the "eye for an eye" stuff, I want to believe that vengeance and justice are the same.
Perhaps we should have "execution duty" like we have jury duty. Then we would see the true support for the death penalty.
Perhaps we should have "execution duty" like we have jury duty. Then we would see the true support for the death penalty.
20
"… vengeance and justice are the same thing." Nice line. I'm stealing that one.
And how about prison guard duty? And if people decline to volunteer we can abolish prisons.
"...Perhaps we should have 'execution duty' like we have jury duty. Then we would see the true support for the death penalty..."
___
In Houston/Harris County capital murder DP cases, when the jury is out less than an hour in the innocent/guilty phase and then comes back for sentencing with the option of LWOP or DP, let them roll the gurney into the court if the DP is the vote.
___
In Houston/Harris County capital murder DP cases, when the jury is out less than an hour in the innocent/guilty phase and then comes back for sentencing with the option of LWOP or DP, let them roll the gurney into the court if the DP is the vote.
I am very glad to see the death penalty abolished in another state. I am also glad to see that the right thing can be accomplished across party lines. There's still hope for democracy in this victory.
17
In Boston we were just reminded not just how emotionally charged this issue is on all sides, but the cost to the taxpayers when a prisoner is on death row. Though the Marathon Bomber was sentenced by the Federal Government, the people of Massachusetts, and the families of the victims are faced with years of appeals and 10 million dollars paid by the United States Taxpayers.
8
I am amazed that Nebraska, a state which I thought was hopelessly bogged down in Bible belt attitudes towards - well - everything, has taken such a brave step forward. I can now only hope that the people of Massachusetts will file suit against the federal government for the death penalty decision there.
6
Nebraska did it because they are conservative, and saw the costs of killings escalate to an unimaginable number, morally and fiscally.
3
It is cheering to see that conservatives, liberals and moderates can still reach the same conclusion, even though their premises, reasoning and logic differ. In a polarized political world, hat's a glimmer of hope that transcends this particular issue.
5
After reading the article and a bunch of comments, I'm still looking for one that mentions the danger of executing the wrong person, which I'm sure happens from time-to-time, and despite recent advances in medical science, is still an irreversible error.
24
Gorgeous picture. Congrats to Nebraska!
2
About time. Maybe many other individual states will follow suit. The Supreme Court won't help, for sure.
6
The Supreme Court is determined to turn back the wheel of progress not only on the death penalty but on health care, the environment, voting rights, and gay marriage. But watchj them get their hackles up if anyone tries to question that corporations are people, that the devil is roaming the earth, or that the end times are near and we should help it along by polluting as much as possible.
5
In the TS Elliot play, "Murder in the Cathedral", Thomas Becket, anticipating his demise, states: “The last temptation is the greatest treason, to do the right thing for the wrong reason.” While I might find the economic reasons as objectionable excuses for eliminating the death penalty, I nevertheless applaud the result.
10
Make no mistake about it; capital punishment is an act of violence. That a conservative state was able to ban it is yet another validation of Steven Pinker's thesis that violence is being reduced significantly throughout history. See his: "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined".
4
I'm happy that the only one that got the death penalty was the Death Penalty Law itself.
4
Nebraska steps into the 21st century; Ricketts remains in the dark ages.
14
Next door to Nebraska, Iowa does not have the death penalty. Murder by the state is one of the worst form of governmental crimes against humanity. Conservatives should abhor such practices. The fact that state supported murder is still tolerated is testimony to our continuing barbarism as a species.
19
Wondering how families of victims feel about this.
7
Retribution should never be a motive for killing, especially when the victim is one who is close. Killing in retribution is tantamount to suicide. When one goes this far, they lose the love they were born to share with even their worst enemies.
1
If you use the families of the victims in Boston as a reference point, their feelings are probably "mixed". A surprising number of the victims and victims' families in Boston would have preferred life without parole to death.
1
If they are upset that a killer was not executed they can take solace in knowing his carcass will rot behind bars forever. Every day may feel like a death sentence for the killer. Day after day after day after day after day until he finally dies. That doesn't sound like a pleasant way to "live" now does it?
1
"In downtown Ceresco, Neb., about 18 miles north of Lincoln, Wayne Ambrosias, owner of the Sweet Pea Market, said he did not want his tax dollars used to pay for murderers to stay in prison for their entire lives."
Reality check...
It costs more to have someone executed than to put them in prison for life.
Reality check...
It costs more to have someone executed than to put them in prison for life.
28
Congratulations, Nebraska! Perhaps there is some common sense still in existence in our state legislative bodies. The punishments will now be punishment and not revenge, and will save the taxpayers gobs of money.
12
And while at it lets repeal the badly mangled and misinterpreted so called second amendment about the well regulated militia and their right to carry arms.
In the twenty first century America with out awesome military no need anymore for well regulated militia. Now that would be a huge and measurable deterrent against murders of passion.
In the twenty first century America with out awesome military no need anymore for well regulated militia. Now that would be a huge and measurable deterrent against murders of passion.
8
Amazingly, the Republicans were able to pass a sensible and progressive piece of reform legislation and did they end up ruining the achievement for themselves? Of course they did and how? They claim they were motivated, not by any sense of respect for life or human decency but rather by FISCAL REASONS to abolish this heinous punishment. I despise the argument that MONEY can in any way equal the sanctity of LIFE but leave it to the Republicans, many of whom claim to be "good Christians", to disregard the MORAL for the MONEY.
16
ricketts certainly nailed it as a way to keep crime down and protect police and families. the proof is in the pudding. the usa has the lowest homicide rate of the western democracies because it retains the death penalty. well, except for the fact the other countries don't have the death penalty and their homicide rates are much much much lower than America's. it's a nice theory to cling to though.
12
Congratulations to the State of Nebraska!
8
Governor Ricketts should be appalled--at himself. It is just offensive (and wrong headed) for the Governor to state that the death penalty "protects law enforcement". How? What is the evidence and where is the evidence? My bet is that Governor Ricketts cannot point to one single piece of evidence to support his emotional plea that the death penalty "protects law enforcement."
These politicians who make statements based more on rhetoric than fact do serious damage to their own causes. After a while, no one believes anything they assert as fact--sort of how people now view Dick Cheney.
These politicians who make statements based more on rhetoric than fact do serious damage to their own causes. After a while, no one believes anything they assert as fact--sort of how people now view Dick Cheney.
15
Nebraskans should feel very proud. Not only have numerous studies proven that the death penalty does not deter crime, but it inevitably degrades all of those involved - prison officials, doctors, witnesses, law enforcement personnel, lawyers, politicians, technicians - in the process of carrying it out. Any truly civilized country no longer countenances it.
18
Can we begin on a tangent and acknowledge that America's treatment of black people has a long and shameful history: slavery, Jim Crow segregation, peonage, lynchings, absent voting rights, unequal treatment before the law, and, as part of the latter, disproportionate sentencing of blacks to capital punishment.
Whatever one's views on the merits of the death penalty, our justice system has executed a disproportionate number of black defendants--some of whom, we now know, were almost certainly wrongfully convicted.
The administration of the death penalty is another manifestation of the perversion of the ideals of our judicial system. It is another face of a broken system of unequal treatment before the law.
The role of racism in the history of the death penalty is, sadly, inescapable. Preserving the death penalty is an insult to the minority groups who have been victimized by its unequal administration. It belongs in the junk pile of the many faces of racism in America.
Whatever one's views on the merits of the death penalty, our justice system has executed a disproportionate number of black defendants--some of whom, we now know, were almost certainly wrongfully convicted.
The administration of the death penalty is another manifestation of the perversion of the ideals of our judicial system. It is another face of a broken system of unequal treatment before the law.
The role of racism in the history of the death penalty is, sadly, inescapable. Preserving the death penalty is an insult to the minority groups who have been victimized by its unequal administration. It belongs in the junk pile of the many faces of racism in America.
8
A hearty congratulations to Nebraska for taking this step. I never thought this die-hard old-school liberal would say this to a conservative state.
Bravo!
Bravo!
8
Yet another social-moral issue on which the US is one or more decades behind most of the rest of the developed world, with Europe — and my former home country, the Netherlands in particular — leading the pack.
10
Yes!! Good God Ya'all; finally no more innocent people have to die. And it saves a lot of money, too.
3
I love when common sense overrides a governor's veto.
6
So Republican legislators said they believed capital punishment was inefficient and expensive, while others cited religious or moral reasons to repeal it. Out of both sides not one mentioned the single most compelling reason why the death penalty is outright wrong and indefensible. And that is that executing an innocent person is close to murder.
And after we have seen time and again how so many innocent people have been sentenced to death based on a standard of evidence of beyond a reasonable doubt, that standard of evidence is clearly not sufficient enough to use for purposes of putting people to death, as using that standard is sure to put innocent people to death.
If there is a to be a death penalty for those crimes where it is called for the standard of evidence must be nothing short of certainty. This is the only way to ensure that only the guilty are put to death.
And after we have seen time and again how so many innocent people have been sentenced to death based on a standard of evidence of beyond a reasonable doubt, that standard of evidence is clearly not sufficient enough to use for purposes of putting people to death, as using that standard is sure to put innocent people to death.
If there is a to be a death penalty for those crimes where it is called for the standard of evidence must be nothing short of certainty. This is the only way to ensure that only the guilty are put to death.
1
We reject the death penalty not because of what it does to the condemned. They deserve it and more. Rather we reject capital punishment for what it does to us as individuals, as families,and as a society. It cheapens life, it makes a false virtue out of barbarism and it demands that we all participate in a repellent criminal act. Well done Nebraska!
7
Personally, I think the prospect of spending 20, 30, 40, 50 years behind bars with no possibility of ever getting out is a punishment far worse than death. The death penalty serves no one well and has been shown to have little to no deterrent value
7
If the Nebraska Legislature is a little out in front of the majority of the citizens of Nebraska, then good for the Legislature. That is what is called "leadership," and we see far too little of it from politicians in the US.
7
The article discusses alignment of religious and moral qualms among the political right and left concerning the death penalty in Nebraska but fails to discuss science. Objectively known for some time via innovations in forensic science, most specifically genetic testing, is that the death penalty is unconstitutional as applied. (It's also immoral). 2000 was a watershed; the governor of Illinois declared a moratorium on executions after 13 Illinois death row inmates were released from prison due to wrongful conviction (in the same period 12 individuals were executed). The moratorium lasted 11 years with the death penalty law repealed this year.
I began my legal career as a prosecutor. The misadministration of justice I witnessed led me to leave and take the appeal of a death row inmate in Alabama. A review of the trial transcript and evidence convinced me of the defendant's innocence. The trial attorney, who had gone on to become the county prosecutor, was similarly convinced. Conviction was based on the testimony of a single, highly violent, individual who had stabbed 2 people. However, being 16 at the time, his record was sealed. There was no direct evidence connecting the defendant, a very sad drug addict with no history of violence, to the crime. It was evident that the state's witness had committed the crime, but we couldn't introduce his record and no reliable genetic testing existed at the time. The innocent defendant was ultimately executed. The murderer walked free.
I began my legal career as a prosecutor. The misadministration of justice I witnessed led me to leave and take the appeal of a death row inmate in Alabama. A review of the trial transcript and evidence convinced me of the defendant's innocence. The trial attorney, who had gone on to become the county prosecutor, was similarly convinced. Conviction was based on the testimony of a single, highly violent, individual who had stabbed 2 people. However, being 16 at the time, his record was sealed. There was no direct evidence connecting the defendant, a very sad drug addict with no history of violence, to the crime. It was evident that the state's witness had committed the crime, but we couldn't introduce his record and no reliable genetic testing existed at the time. The innocent defendant was ultimately executed. The murderer walked free.
14
Question to the lawyer: How is it Constitutional to stack a jury with pro-death-penalty "peers"? I don't get it. I oppose the death penalty. How much do I oppose it? Probably to the exclusion of all other options, but I guess I might change my mind if something horrible happened to one of my loved ones. [Of course, I'm not generally in favor of basing a legal system on personal revenge, but rather on the society's need for rule by law.] But how and why does this opposition to the death penalty disqualify me from participating in our legal system. It seems blatantly rigged against the defendant if the jury is made up exclusively of eye-for-an-eye types.
I'm honestly asking these questions. Please reply if you have any thoughts.
I'm honestly asking these questions. Please reply if you have any thoughts.
You shouldn't be excluded. Exclusion denies defendants a fair trial via impartial jury; but tell that to the Supreme Court. Current law turns the 6th Amendment on its head; "impartiality" ensuring only that the government gets the jury it wants. All jurors must be "Death-Qualified" in death penalty cases. See: Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412 (1985); Darden v. Wainwright, 447 U.S. 168 (1986). Courts "dismiss for cause" all potential jurors who oppose the death penalty, but also "dismiss for cause" a person who favors the death penalty but who says it should be reserved for "severe situations." See: Uttecht v. Brown, 551 U.S. 1 (2007). Numerous studies over the last 35 years show that death-qualified jurors are not representative of the general population: they are far more biased towards the prosecution as compared to the juries in non-capital murder trials and are "conviction prone." Studies show that death-qualified juries deliberate less thoroughly and less accurately than representative juries, place far more emphasis on aggravating factors, and overlook mitigating factors. Finally, death-qualified jurors do not represent society in a most objective way. Studies show that women, minorities, Catholics, Jews, and individuals with a college education, have more reservations about applying the death penalty, are often not death-qualified, and are routinely excluded. Therefore, death penalty juries are disproportionality composed of less educated white Protestant males.
2
Thank you for the thoughtful reply and the selection of relevant court cases.
It costs about the same to sentence a person to death and go through all the steps to the execution as it does to take the person to a non-death penalty trial and imprison them for life. So the argument that the taxpayer is being cheated when the death penalty is abolished is not true.
No innocent person is executed if executions do not take place.
The evidence that the death penalty deters murder is matched or exceeded by data that indicates it does not deter murder. For example, the states that do not impose the death penalty have a lower murder rate than they did prior to the change, and a lower rate than states that retain the death penalty. Perhaps the existence of the death penalty is a good reason for a criminal to silence a potential witness permanently.
First degree cold blooded murder by the state makes no financial, moral, or security sense.
No innocent person is executed if executions do not take place.
The evidence that the death penalty deters murder is matched or exceeded by data that indicates it does not deter murder. For example, the states that do not impose the death penalty have a lower murder rate than they did prior to the change, and a lower rate than states that retain the death penalty. Perhaps the existence of the death penalty is a good reason for a criminal to silence a potential witness permanently.
First degree cold blooded murder by the state makes no financial, moral, or security sense.
4
Not sure where you heard/read/learned that costs are about the same whether a person is sentenced to death or imprisoned for life, but that statement is factually and demonstrably wrong. Capital cases cost many times more to prosecute and go through all the appeals available to defendants than keeping a person in prison for life. And here in Ohio, capitally convicted individuals have fewer appeals available than someone who steals a DVD at WalMart. Unlike the WalMart thief, however, death-sentenced inmates are highly motivated to pursue every avenue of appeal available to them. And remember that in nearly all capital cases, the taxpayers are paying for the prosecutors, the defense attorneys, the judge, and the judicial support staff all along the way. Short of death penalty cases, most if not all states do not provide defense counsel for a defendant beyond the trial and the first appeal as of right. That defendant may pursue his (or her) appeals with zeal, but s/he does so without counsel, and the lack of sophistication in the law makes disposition of those cases easier and quicker for the judiciary. (I'm not saying that's right, just observing that that's the way it is.) Estimates I've read indicate that a capital trial and appeals can cost anywhere from four to ten times as much as a non-capital trial that results in a life sentence.
1
Morality? No not at all,
It's costly and that does appall,
If that's why, let's do it
We never will rue it,
Let's heed the economy call!
It's costly and that does appall,
If that's why, let's do it
We never will rue it,
Let's heed the economy call!
2
I have the real pleasure of being a Nebraskan and the complete joy of having lived in the London, UK most of my life. I am deeply fond of my home State but this is the very first time in more than 50 years that I have ever heard anything positive said about it by anyone who is not a Nebraskan. I am so proud today. And gobsmacked. Well done everyone. Now for Colorado surely ??
32
Dear Gobsmacked:
I am a lifelong Kansan.
I visited Omaha for the second time in my life last year.
I was amazed at how modern and fancy the downtown First National Bank building was.
I was Gobsmacked.
Gobsmacked is an excellent word.
I am thrilled Nebraska has repealed its death penalty.
I am extremely interested to learn the reasons the legislators gave.
As a Christian I can only agree and praise the Lord for this glorious blessing, in Jesus' Name!
Sincerely yours,
Caleb Boone.
I am a lifelong Kansan.
I visited Omaha for the second time in my life last year.
I was amazed at how modern and fancy the downtown First National Bank building was.
I was Gobsmacked.
Gobsmacked is an excellent word.
I am thrilled Nebraska has repealed its death penalty.
I am extremely interested to learn the reasons the legislators gave.
As a Christian I can only agree and praise the Lord for this glorious blessing, in Jesus' Name!
Sincerely yours,
Caleb Boone.
1
The fact that the majority of States still permit this immoral , disgusting and useless practice is staggeringly shameful.
10
May this help ignite a trend. Murder by the state as practiced with Mr. Tsarnaev shows our cruelty and willingness to adopt the tactics of those who murder, purely out of spite.
17
Hats off to a solid mid-Western state that recognizes an error and has the courage to change.
43
Totally disagree with this decision. Face it. There are some people in this world who are so evil, psychopathic, and barbaric that they are beyond the point of redemption and deserve to die. All the Jeffery Dahmers and Charlie Mansons of the world deserve to die. It doesn't matter if it deters them or not. They deserve it. There's no point in keeping them around at the expense of the tax payer.
2
Understood but by the same token what of all the expense incurred by the endless appeals process?
Sentencing a person to death costs tax payers more than life in prison.
10
What if it's cheaper to keep them alive?
11
Firing squads - seriously, FIRING SQUADS? What is this, a 1930's movie? Does the condemned get a blind fold and a last cigarette? And who is doing the "firing?" Do they get "execution pay?" Do they practice on live targets? Are they volunteers eager to commit legal murder? Sounds like a great job for a psychopath.
Congratulations, Utah, for dragging your state back to the 19th century. How revolting.
And genuine thanks to the Nebraska legislature for denouncing the practice of state-sanctioned murder. The threat of the death penalty has never once prevented an individual from committing murder. Murderers never contemplate the consequences of their actions. They either act on uncontrolled impulse or they think they'll never be caught. And state sanctioned murder as revenge is reprehensible in a democracy. Revenge has no place in an enlightened legal system.
Congratulations, Utah, for dragging your state back to the 19th century. How revolting.
And genuine thanks to the Nebraska legislature for denouncing the practice of state-sanctioned murder. The threat of the death penalty has never once prevented an individual from committing murder. Murderers never contemplate the consequences of their actions. They either act on uncontrolled impulse or they think they'll never be caught. And state sanctioned murder as revenge is reprehensible in a democracy. Revenge has no place in an enlightened legal system.
31
Quote from J Tony Serra:
"The reason why the death penalty specifically is noxious to a developed society is that it's the coldest and most premeditated form of first-degree murder. You see, people kill in the heat of passion. People kill because they're intoxicated,they're confronted with dangerous situations, they're temporarily insane. People kill due to jealousy and greed. There are all sorts of reasons why people kill and you can look into the backgrounds of the people and locate the causative factors. But when societies allegedly wise representatives of the legislature, judiciary, and prosecutors sit down and hammer out a death penalty law, and prosecutors ask for the death penalty, and jurrors mete out the death penalty, and judges impose the death penalty, when all that occurs, it's tantamount to deliberation, the ultimate intent in cold abstract legalese. It's a societal decree of first-degree premeditated murder! Therefore, it should be the most of obnoxious form of killing."
Lust for justice, The radical life and a law of J Tony Serra p. 107.
"The reason why the death penalty specifically is noxious to a developed society is that it's the coldest and most premeditated form of first-degree murder. You see, people kill in the heat of passion. People kill because they're intoxicated,they're confronted with dangerous situations, they're temporarily insane. People kill due to jealousy and greed. There are all sorts of reasons why people kill and you can look into the backgrounds of the people and locate the causative factors. But when societies allegedly wise representatives of the legislature, judiciary, and prosecutors sit down and hammer out a death penalty law, and prosecutors ask for the death penalty, and jurrors mete out the death penalty, and judges impose the death penalty, when all that occurs, it's tantamount to deliberation, the ultimate intent in cold abstract legalese. It's a societal decree of first-degree premeditated murder! Therefore, it should be the most of obnoxious form of killing."
Lust for justice, The radical life and a law of J Tony Serra p. 107.
13
Thank you, members of the Nebraska Unicameral for showing such great courage and doing the right thing! I am so very proud to be a Nebraskan today. Now let's continue to move forward to bring the population of our prisons and jails down to a realistic level.
18
Bravo, Nebraska!
When capital punishment is abolished in all 50 states, I will feel proud to be a citizen of a humane country.
When capital punishment is abolished in all 50 states, I will feel proud to be a citizen of a humane country.
17
You know, I've never had a good reason to hate Nebraska but today for the first time in my life I have a really really good reason to LIKE Nebraska!
Thank you Nebraska legislators for ending the barbaric practice of killing prisoners. When a gaggle of 3rd world countries won't sell American states drugs to kill people you just know America has slipped a cog. Having watched Bloody Mary Fallin try to kill men on death row as cruelly & grizzly as anything I've seen on the Game of Thrones, I'm now anti-death penalty. And I can really see Oklahoma from my porch!
I formerly supported the death penalty but I finally grew up & realized the little boy in me want to kill kill kill the bad guys like the games I played with other boys in my neighborhood when we played Cowboys & Indians. I figured out we got that wrong too!
You'd think with the Oligarchs buying up our prisons, they'd love it that people weren't put to death.......prisoners for life equals decades of big profits for the private prisons, they're probably making sure the prisoners take vitamins & run laps so they might live longer because a day without Profits is a day without sunshine!!!!
The previous governor of my state, Gov. Mike Beebe just kinda drug his heels & no one was executed during his 8 years in office. Mike (He's a crook) Huckabee executed 16 people cause Jesus loves a good execution. Huckabee also pardoned 2 men who went on to kill again and again and again...so his judgement sucks! Kisses Neb!
Thank you Nebraska legislators for ending the barbaric practice of killing prisoners. When a gaggle of 3rd world countries won't sell American states drugs to kill people you just know America has slipped a cog. Having watched Bloody Mary Fallin try to kill men on death row as cruelly & grizzly as anything I've seen on the Game of Thrones, I'm now anti-death penalty. And I can really see Oklahoma from my porch!
I formerly supported the death penalty but I finally grew up & realized the little boy in me want to kill kill kill the bad guys like the games I played with other boys in my neighborhood when we played Cowboys & Indians. I figured out we got that wrong too!
You'd think with the Oligarchs buying up our prisons, they'd love it that people weren't put to death.......prisoners for life equals decades of big profits for the private prisons, they're probably making sure the prisoners take vitamins & run laps so they might live longer because a day without Profits is a day without sunshine!!!!
The previous governor of my state, Gov. Mike Beebe just kinda drug his heels & no one was executed during his 8 years in office. Mike (He's a crook) Huckabee executed 16 people cause Jesus loves a good execution. Huckabee also pardoned 2 men who went on to kill again and again and again...so his judgement sucks! Kisses Neb!
13
The thinking in support of the death penalty is completely flawed: A) it is not a deterrent to criminals, as has been born out by those who have studied the matter carefully; B) the desire for vengeance on the part of family members of victims who were murdered is non-Christian, not compassionate, not anything worthy of a civilized society; C) the will of the people, in this case the state of Nebraska, is also vengeful and flawed. The state legislature is to be congratulated precisely for ignoring the will of an ill-informed populace. I'm proud of the place in which I grew up for the first time in years.
6
This is the BEST news I’ve read in a long time! For a governor to run on bloodlust is just horrific.
And the two senators who switched over to the governor at the last minute? Wimps!
Killing another human being is simply one of the worst things that we do here in the USA. It’s WHY we give people the death penalty because taking someone’s life is the worst crime there is. We don’t give a death penalty to someone who defrauds stock holders or for larceny or even robbing $150 million in diamonds. We give the death penalty to those who murder.. homicide.
It’s time we stopped government sanctioned homicide.
Hooray for Nebraska! Time to enter the 21st century Americans!
And the two senators who switched over to the governor at the last minute? Wimps!
Killing another human being is simply one of the worst things that we do here in the USA. It’s WHY we give people the death penalty because taking someone’s life is the worst crime there is. We don’t give a death penalty to someone who defrauds stock holders or for larceny or even robbing $150 million in diamonds. We give the death penalty to those who murder.. homicide.
It’s time we stopped government sanctioned homicide.
Hooray for Nebraska! Time to enter the 21st century Americans!
11
Supporters of the death penalty [DP] argue that in order to execute all vicious
criminals we must accept the risk of executing innocent people.
Opponents of DP [I am one.] believe the non- zero risk of executing an innocent person, means that the DP must be abolished even if some vicious criminals escape DP.
Criminals escaping DP does NOT mean they are set free just that instead of being executed they are imprisoned for life without parole.
How large is this risk of executing an innocent person..
In her book, “Orange is the new Black” author, Piper Kerman quotes Innocence Project statistics.
She writes “ Since 1992 more than 250 innocent people have been exonerated thru DNA testing (which is available in only a small fraction of cases) including 17 who were at one time sentenced to death.”
*****
My comments:
Since DNA is available in a small number of cases the number falsely convicted and sentenced to death is considerably higher than the numbers Kerman cites.
criminals we must accept the risk of executing innocent people.
Opponents of DP [I am one.] believe the non- zero risk of executing an innocent person, means that the DP must be abolished even if some vicious criminals escape DP.
Criminals escaping DP does NOT mean they are set free just that instead of being executed they are imprisoned for life without parole.
How large is this risk of executing an innocent person..
In her book, “Orange is the new Black” author, Piper Kerman quotes Innocence Project statistics.
She writes “ Since 1992 more than 250 innocent people have been exonerated thru DNA testing (which is available in only a small fraction of cases) including 17 who were at one time sentenced to death.”
*****
My comments:
Since DNA is available in a small number of cases the number falsely convicted and sentenced to death is considerably higher than the numbers Kerman cites.
12
Capital punishment mainly serves a political purpose. It is not a deterrent. It does not save money. It does not bring about 'closure' to the family and friends of the victim. Its main purpose is to burnish the 'tough-on-crime' credentials of the elected and appointed officials who pursue the conviction and the legislators who vote to maintain the option as a punishment. Support for capital punishment has a lot to do with whether someone intends to continue to seek elected office.
53
The US federal government and the rest of the states that still have the death penalty are in league with countries like Bellarus, a dictatorship hold-over from the Soviet Union and the only European country that still has the death penalty.
Yet we also have the largest number of people in prison of any country in the world, including Russia and China, here in the "Land of the Free":
International Centre for Prison Studies, U. of London
http://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison-population-total?f...
Yet we also have the largest number of people in prison of any country in the world, including Russia and China, here in the "Land of the Free":
International Centre for Prison Studies, U. of London
http://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison-population-total?f...
10
Bill Clinton was responsible for the "three strikes" law that so very quickly filled the prisons. We then had to build many more owing to, in his words "the wide net the bill cast." Basically people who really didn't belong in prison were being rounded up in insane numbers for petty crimes. Also, to house that number of inmates was expensive. Therefore, there was no money left for education and rehabilitation or drug programs for those incarcerated. He now says that the Bill he pushed for was a mistake. Hillary is promising to undo the unnecessary incarcerations. With a lot less people in prisons, we can keep those who committed serious crimes in for life and actually afford to keep them in For LIFE.
1
Very impressive!
Happy to hear that the people's voices were heard.
And that they can be heard.
Happy to hear that the people's voices were heard.
And that they can be heard.
10
The people's voices would be heard if Nebraskans had voted on it. Instead they were led by Senator Ernie Chambers who is most recently famous for saying "My ISIS is the [Omaha] police."
EVERY time that has happened since 1964 (the last time a state democratically abolished the death penalty in Oregon) 1977 & 1984 in Oregon, 2006 in Wisconsin, and 2012 in California, voters have said they wanted to keep capital punishment as an option.
What will you say to the people who are murdered by those who escape, are paroled, or otherwise released. These victims can be counted and named in the hundreds. The number of people on death row who were innocent is about 35 since 1976 (when the US Supreme Court re-authorized death sentences in their decision in Gregg vs. Georgia).
EVERY time that has happened since 1964 (the last time a state democratically abolished the death penalty in Oregon) 1977 & 1984 in Oregon, 2006 in Wisconsin, and 2012 in California, voters have said they wanted to keep capital punishment as an option.
What will you say to the people who are murdered by those who escape, are paroled, or otherwise released. These victims can be counted and named in the hundreds. The number of people on death row who were innocent is about 35 since 1976 (when the US Supreme Court re-authorized death sentences in their decision in Gregg vs. Georgia).
Cheers for Nebraska!
The override reminds me of the vote to override --without a vote to spare-- the Vermont governor's veto of the bill establishing marriage equality in Vermont.
Both great steps forward for humanity and civilization.
Congratulations!
The override reminds me of the vote to override --without a vote to spare-- the Vermont governor's veto of the bill establishing marriage equality in Vermont.
Both great steps forward for humanity and civilization.
Congratulations!
7
The death penalty is pre-meditated, state sanctioned murder...an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind and is no way to run a civilized society...Congratulations to Nebraska...you have made this world a bit less violent.
14
Congratulations to Ernie Chambers, who has been fightiing this battle for decades. Well done, Senator Chambers!
26
Let's go fellow Hucksters, no more Patriot Act, no more death penalty - nothing but total freedom! We can do whatever we want! Let's party like it's 1999!!!
3
Earth to Governor Ricketts: How many murder victims have been restored to us since capital punishment became legal in your state?
5
Ah. sanity wins.
20
This is very exciting. Twice in the last several days conservative entities have shed the shackles of the past and ventured into the brave world of evolution. First, Ireland voted to allow gay marriage. In my mind, that is a stern rebuke of the Catholic Church whose historical influence over Irish politics is legendary and mostly intended to preserve the Church's power. Now Nebraska's elected legislators have overridden their staunch Republican governor's veto of its abolition of the death penalty. This is of course a very stern rebuke of Republican dogma, which dogma first tries to scare the public and then tries to persuade the public that its solutions will protect them. Here's hoping that Nebraska has pulled back the curtain enough to show all of America that such Republican dogma is fake and its solutions intended only to protect the Republican power elite. There may be hope left for us after all.
59
Shh, don't use the word "evolution", you'll scare them.
I couldn't be more proud of my home state of Nebraska! Thanks for showing the way for the rest of the states, and California should be next!
8
A victory for the murderers in Nebraska. That legislature should be ashamed of themselves.
5
For saving tax payer money by getting rid of a failed system that acts as no detrrent to crime? Shameful indeed
1
One-hundred and three countries, including Russia, around the world have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. Thirty-six countries, including the US and none of which can be considered bastions of civil liberties, retain the death penalty in law and in practice.
11
Its about time another States legislature has awakened to the many reasons why not to kill prisoners who have killed people. Its primitive, immoral, emotional revenge that serves no other perpose.
8
Good for Nebraska. The death penalty isn't justice, it's revenge. As a conservative speaking to other conservatives, if you are pro-life, you should be completely pro-life.
17
Does.make me wonder if this is in line with the will of the people here in Nebraska. I'm against governments killing their people but in rare circumstances it's warranted in my opinion as long as it is the will of the people. I think there are a lot of Republicans who aren't getting re elected.
1
There are sometimes exceptions for particularly heinous crimes. Although Israel does not have the death penalty, they made an exception for Adolph Eichmann. I think life in prison could have been a worse punishment.
Steve-O...........consider how you would feel about the Death Penalty if you were wrongly accused of murder by a witness or overzealous sloppy cops. IT Happens!
Amen.
Wisdom, commonsense and morals ride tandem.
Alleluia!
Wisdom, commonsense and morals ride tandem.
Alleluia!
14
One more state has just joined the civilized world. The US is the only western democracy that has not abolished capital punishment. Hopefully this means we are on the road to no longer being an international pariah on this issue.
22
What part of "Thou shalt not kill" do capital punishers (legal killers) fail to understand?
14
Shameful only in the sense that, nowhere in this article or in most of the comments so far, did anyone say, "I cannot support murder especially when there are probable instances when the innocent have been executed". Please, just one of these execution supporters just stand up and say unequivocally that government-sanctioned executions never have, and never will, kill a wrongly-convicted individual. As has been said so often before (apparently in a void for most people), "I would rather release 10 murderers than execute one innocent person"...that is all this can be about. We should be beyond retribution, and talking about justice - for everyone.
12
I agree with abolishing the death penalty because the ONLY way to prevent the execution of an innocent person is to execute no one.
Let us be clear however.
The choice is not between executing a murder or freeing a murderer but instead between executing or imprisoning for life without parole.
Comparison of crime and homicide rates in states with and without the death penalty do not support the death penalty as reducing these rates.
Since life without parole prevents the criminal from committing another crime and is also allows for freeing an innocent [while capital punishment does not] the death penalty must be abolished.
Let us be clear however.
The choice is not between executing a murder or freeing a murderer but instead between executing or imprisoning for life without parole.
Comparison of crime and homicide rates in states with and without the death penalty do not support the death penalty as reducing these rates.
Since life without parole prevents the criminal from committing another crime and is also allows for freeing an innocent [while capital punishment does not] the death penalty must be abolished.
3
Aaron many people have said what you just said over the past ten years of comments.
And the actual quote is “I would rather let 100 go free than murder one man in our justice system.”
And the actual quote is “I would rather let 100 go free than murder one man in our justice system.”
1
If you are a Christian, it's immoral to kill, even a killer. If your not a Christian, it's just wrong. If you think it's 'the state' that's killing the killer, you're wrong - it's the residents of the state killing the killer. Capital punishment is a revenge-only verdict. It's not nearly the punishment that life without parole is. Especially for those who would claim their death makes them a 'martyr'. Way to go Nebraska! I hope all other states and the federal government follow suit.
24
It would interesting to note if this ban is solely prospective or if it grants people like John Lotter, currently on Nebraska's death row for the murders associated with Hilary Swank's Academy Award-winning film "BOYS DON'T CRY." clemency almost 20 years after their murders.
For those quoting the Catholic bishops, they would do well to understand the difference between revenge and retribution. John Paul II in his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae" "“Protecting society is not the primary purpose of punishment. The primary purpose of punishment is retribution, by which we don’t mean revenge but by the society expressing its moral outrage, its outrage at the heinous gravity of a particular crime.”
For those quoting the Catholic bishops, they would do well to understand the difference between revenge and retribution. John Paul II in his 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae" "“Protecting society is not the primary purpose of punishment. The primary purpose of punishment is retribution, by which we don’t mean revenge but by the society expressing its moral outrage, its outrage at the heinous gravity of a particular crime.”
1
I fail to see how killing a murderer is an appropriate way to demonstrate our "moral outrage" at his/her act of killing another. Pope John Paul II would be horrified to know that his words were being used to defend capital punishment.
I am so proud of my home state today. Having only recently moved to Missouri, I have closely watched the legislative sessioins, so hoping the senators would repeal the death penalty and then override the governor's veto. I watched the session online today, but had to stop because I was so concerned some of the legislators would change their minds. Two did, but thankfully, a majority of 30 voted to override. Congratualtions to the legislators, but especially to Senator Ernie Chambers, who has been the greatest advocate for the marginalized and those without a voice in the state of Nebraska. I'm so happy for him to have lived to see this day!
24
I will volunteer every spare moment I can working for the opponents that try to unseat every GOP member of the Unicameral that voted against the Governor. I will encourage every real Conservative in Nebraska to do the same.
2
Nothing better to do in Nebraska, eh?
18
I'm a real registered Democrat. I'll vote against those in both parties who voted to repeal as well. Guess the governor has.bipartisan support on this.
Nonsense, the governor is a posturing carpetbagging outsider putting a political position over the will of the people of Nebraska. Even my most conservative friends here in Omaha (where we still use our minds) was talking about this today and agreed with their Senators. It's time to end bully politics and start thinking again.
7
Where are the people protesting the death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev? He was 19 years old when the bombing occurred.
It's so easy to cheer about an abstraction, but so much harder when the defendants are unsympathetic.
It's so easy to cheer about an abstraction, but so much harder when the defendants are unsympathetic.
2
In Massachusetts, no less.
1
Why are you so sure it's harder? Do you know, or are you assuming? I do not support the death penalty for anyone, including Tsarnaev. Anyone who is against the death penalty would agree, unless they are not truly in opposition. Bill and Denise Richard, parents of the young Boston Marathon victim Martin Richard, have been very vocal in their opposition to Tsarnaev's execution. They've been all over the news. The ACLU's spoken out. Amnesty International. Various editorials in major newspapers. Bud Welch, father of OKC bombing victim Julie Welch....
I could go on, but maybe you could Google it?
I could go on, but maybe you could Google it?
Dear Nebraskans, Your legislators are not fools, as one commentator claimed. This may not bring peace to survivors, but neither would the death penalty. I no longer say that no one deserves to die, but there are too many problems with how the death penalty is carried out to let it continue to be an option in the U.S. I have always said, either get rid of it, or call a moratorium and fix it--and I know it can't be "fixed."
2
Looks like it'll never get fixed here now. Unlike other states it has only been used here in the most heinous circumstances. It was and never will be a deterrent. It is a form of justice no longer available to the citizens of our state due to the will of our elected officials. The will of the people has been circumvented.
1
The logic espoused frequently seems to be that if the prisoner is harmless to himself and to others, there isn't any reasonable ground for capital punishment. However, then the carrying out of justice would pivot not on the terrible deed the prisoner had committed, but rather on how secure the conditions are in any prison. That can't be right--there must be substantive justice, not just procedural justice.
Hannah Arendt put it best in her book on Eichmann--that he had done something so evil that we do not deserve to share the Earth with him.
Hannah Arendt put it best in her book on Eichmann--that he had done something so evil that we do not deserve to share the Earth with him.
I have always felt dismay at the utter hypocrisy of conservative politics that often advocates for bringing children into a world they deliberately starved financially through a tax policy that always favored the well-off, not poor parents, or poor anybody. But this Nebraska vote backs up conservative political posturing with relevant political deed. Now, nobody can accuse Nebraskans of hypocrisy if their religious belief happens to infringe upon women's right to their body. There is at least a respectable consistency.
3
The death penalty is mainly about retribution. A large segment of the population believe that avenging the death of the victim brings closure. I believe that there is some form of vindication when family and friends of the victims know that the perpetrator is incapacitated. On the other hand as a society we must aspire to a higher standard and not reduce ourselves to the level of the perpetrators.
11
Good. now the Governor is forced to face his shortcomings on other more pressing matters to every day people of this state.
6
Good for Nebraska. It's time our country joined the rest of the civilized World. The death penalty is archaic, ugly and useless. No truly thinking person can support a law which takes a life. Once dead, dead forever. And, life in a small cell is indeed a just punishment, for that is no life at all...just endless regret, pain and isolation.
23
Nebraskans can hold their heads high. They elected a legislature that represents them, and had the courage to stand up to a bully and special interests. God bless Nebraska. This is what American Exceptionalism looks like.
24
Yes, American Exceptionalism at its finest - doing now what the rest of the civilized world did a generation or two ago.
It is interesting to note that many who are staunch defenders of the death penalty would also claim that government can do nothing right. Yet, these defenders of the death penalty would give the ultimate power to the judicial arm of government; i.e., to willfully terminate human life. Capital punishment leads no room for error and yet time and again we see executions that are botched and the wrongly accused executed. The Nebraska legislature has at least come to its senses.
61
I was born and raised in Nebraska. Its people are both deeply conservative and practical. My parents and two of my brothers, all conservative Republicans, still live there. I have waffled on the death penalty for decades (I'm no longer conservative nor as practical), but no more. It doesn't matter whether one's opposition is financial or moral or religious or what: The death of the death penalty is in everyone's interest.
93
Perhaps in my lifetime the only states with the death penalty will be of the old Confederacy, from Texas to Florida.
19
The only to prevent the execution of an innocent person is to execute no one.
Many cases where there was presumably do doubt of the condemned person's guilt were found to be erroneous convictions.
The Washington Post ran a series of articles about errors in the FBI lab.
Bronx DA Thompson has thrown out convictions due to improper police detective procedures.
Life without parole [where without parole must mean WITHOUT parole] prevents the criminal from committing another crime and allows for freeing an innocent person.
With the death penalty there is no way to bring a falsely executed person back to life.
Many cases where there was presumably do doubt of the condemned person's guilt were found to be erroneous convictions.
The Washington Post ran a series of articles about errors in the FBI lab.
Bronx DA Thompson has thrown out convictions due to improper police detective procedures.
Life without parole [where without parole must mean WITHOUT parole] prevents the criminal from committing another crime and allows for freeing an innocent person.
With the death penalty there is no way to bring a falsely executed person back to life.
19
Hooray for Nebraska, a smart, courageous and morally superior thing to do! I salute you, who I have always regarded with caution but today you showed the world that thinking, caring and responsible people are everywhere to be found especially in Nebraska. I am proud to be one of your fellow countrymen! PS, make arrangements for a new Governor!
27
We are working on that new guv thing. This one may pull a Palin and quit if he continues to be roadblocked! We live in hope!
4
"On Tuesday, he signed a veto in front of reporters assembled at the Capitol and talked about a gruesome bank robbery in the city of Norfolk in 2002 in which five people were shot to death as a compelling reason that Nebraska should hold on to capital punishment."
Death peanlty has been legal in NE since 1976, and this homicide in 2002. Sure looks like the death penalty FAILED to prevent a homicide, so not sure how this helps his case? Oh well, it's over now.
Good for Nebraska.
Death peanlty has been legal in NE since 1976, and this homicide in 2002. Sure looks like the death penalty FAILED to prevent a homicide, so not sure how this helps his case? Oh well, it's over now.
Good for Nebraska.
24
Weird. Never once heard a lawmaker in my 44 years living here so.much as imply that it is a deterrent. Yeahhhh, good for us. Will you come spend your tourism dollars here now that we're all enlightened together now? Omaha is a pretty cool town. We.host the College world series and have the best zoo in the US. And we have no death penalty.
2
@ Henry - "...so not sure how this helps his case?"
When used properly (swift and sure) the death penalty will never fail to prevent the killer from killing again.
When used properly (swift and sure) the death penalty will never fail to prevent the killer from killing again.
And other states will follow...stay tuned.
11
Excellent news!
Life Imprisonment is the only rational response to a murder conviction. It is the only path that allows for justice when a reversal occurs.
People who seek vengeance should be locked up.
Life Imprisonment is the only rational response to a murder conviction. It is the only path that allows for justice when a reversal occurs.
People who seek vengeance should be locked up.
10
It's not vengeance! That being said I'm not in favor of the death penalty.
Seriously? People who believe in the death penalty should be locked up? Are you out of your mind?
The Nebraska pols are fools. Anyone committing a heinous crime of murder should be faced with the death penalty. the problem is that such sentences are not executed in an expeditious manner like within 90 days or less. Justice is always pandering to the perps not the victims.
6
That's why we have the largest number of citizens per capita in prison than any other country, right?
11
The state of North Carolina recently released two innocent men who had been on death row for 30 years. There have been many other similar examples. It would be appalling for a country that cherishes individual liberty to let these men die at the hands of the state just to satisfy your sense of righteousness.
2
Great that Nebraska can now consider itself morally above the likes of Yemen, North Korea, China, Iran, Syria, etc., and a significant fraction of the rest of the great USA. How can we be so primitive? Nationwide ban now!
22
Senator Ernie Chambers is the finest legislator in the history of Nebraska. He has written much of the basic law for the city of Omaha, forcing it to democratize, and has consistently supported the side of justice and liberty. I am proud to live in this state with such a fine senator (heck, if I moved two blocks he'd be my senator).
It is also outstanding that our other state senators can put aside their objections to Senator Chambers sometimes outrageous statements and look to the substance of his legislation.
Bravo Nebraska! Bravo Senator Chambers! (but what does he do for a second act? There ain't that many cougars in the state.......)
It is also outstanding that our other state senators can put aside their objections to Senator Chambers sometimes outrageous statements and look to the substance of his legislation.
Bravo Nebraska! Bravo Senator Chambers! (but what does he do for a second act? There ain't that many cougars in the state.......)
12
I live in Lincoln and feel exactly the same way about Senator Chambers! He is a mensch!
1
Days like today give me hope that not all is lost for a decent US. It is incomprehensible to me that as a whole the US remains a country where capital punishment is somehow seen as acceptable "justice" (I use those quotes purposefully). In this, the US keeps company with countries like Saudi Arabia, China, and North Korea, and is completely out of step with more civilised nations like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and western Europe.
Bravo to the Nebraska legislature! And thumbs-down to their governor--anyone with this mediaeval mindset should not be in a position of leadership.
Bravo to the Nebraska legislature! And thumbs-down to their governor--anyone with this mediaeval mindset should not be in a position of leadership.
34
I applaud the legislators of Nebraska who voted to eliminate the the death penalty in their state.
22
The death penalty is a necessary punishment when innocent life is taken. The willingness and ability to distinguish between the harm done by Bernie Madoff and losses caused by the actions of the Boston Marathon bombers is critical for a civilized society. Giving them both a life sentence demeans the value of human life.
13
Doesn't the death penalty itself demean the value of a human life? Particularly in the many cases where we have executed someone (or held someone on death row) and found out later they were innocent through new evidence or recanted testimony? We know innocent and mentally disabled people have been executed. If human life is so valued how can we allow a system to remain that has led to such irreversible tragic results even once?
7
There's more to sentencing than you apparently understand. Madoff serves his time in a prison camp. With a life sentence, the Marathon bomber would serve his time in a maximum security prison. So there would be a huge difference in the sentences in these two cases.
3
No, it doesn't. How does killing a killer rectify or deter? Preventing him or her from being able to kill again is the point. A person who kills someone is a killer, yes, but that is not all that they are. Humans are not reducible to one act they've committed, and I think it is just not right that we take a life -- I don't see what purpose it serves. Unless the person is mentally deficient or deranged in some way, he or she can and should be allowed to think and evolve and change and regret and, perhaps, to seek forgiveness from his or her God and any potential family and/or friends of the victim(s).
I'm never going to accept the death penalty because it is in conflict with my view of what a human being is, at bottom. When you read a comment thread on an article about the death penalty, what you see is people using the word "murderer," as if this entirely sums up the human being. These are the same people who throw the word ''criminal'' around as if it's an innate aspect of a person who committed a crime.
Life is entirely contingent -- and I understand that free will is illusory. And I have a sort of quasi-religious view of human action, what it means, how we're all tied together. I think that killing another person is wrong, that we must move beyond Old Testament ideas of revenge. And I think that, in the future, our notions of responsibility, justice, and punishment are going to change a lot. We should incapacitate, yes, but not take a life.
I'm never going to accept the death penalty because it is in conflict with my view of what a human being is, at bottom. When you read a comment thread on an article about the death penalty, what you see is people using the word "murderer," as if this entirely sums up the human being. These are the same people who throw the word ''criminal'' around as if it's an innate aspect of a person who committed a crime.
Life is entirely contingent -- and I understand that free will is illusory. And I have a sort of quasi-religious view of human action, what it means, how we're all tied together. I think that killing another person is wrong, that we must move beyond Old Testament ideas of revenge. And I think that, in the future, our notions of responsibility, justice, and punishment are going to change a lot. We should incapacitate, yes, but not take a life.
5
With all due respect to those who feel the same as the Nebraskan quoted in the article, offering his support for the death penalty based upon the aversion for funding a prisoner's life sentence of incarceration, it is hardly cheaper to fund appeal after appeal - nor is it easy for whomever the victim left behind to face so many encounters with the person who has caused them such pain.
The death penalty might be fiscally conservative if the U.S. Justice system did not allow appeals and performed an execution within days of the first and final ruling. Thankfully, we do not function that way, or at least our system and people within it generally strive for true justice.
It is heartening to see both groups - those opposed to the death penalty for moral reasons, and those opposed for fiscal reasons - join together in support of this. They may have different motives, and they may have arrived at their imperative for different reasons, but the result is the same. Well done, Nebraska.
The death penalty might be fiscally conservative if the U.S. Justice system did not allow appeals and performed an execution within days of the first and final ruling. Thankfully, we do not function that way, or at least our system and people within it generally strive for true justice.
It is heartening to see both groups - those opposed to the death penalty for moral reasons, and those opposed for fiscal reasons - join together in support of this. They may have different motives, and they may have arrived at their imperative for different reasons, but the result is the same. Well done, Nebraska.
3
And this fine move from Nebraska's state legislature comes on the heels of a man being released (from a different state) after 30 years on death row, wrongly. If even one innocent person is executed, it is still one too many. Surely Governor Ricketts knows that capital punishment will not undo the crime he referred to; instead, it only leads to room for more tragedy and losing the moral high ground.
6
This is great news.
Ricketts says safety is his priority, but he used his public debate pulpit to focus on a gruesome bank robbery. Since Nebraska had the death penalty when the bank robbery took place, what effect did it have on public safety? It certainly wasn't a deterrent. Is his point that the bank robbers being executed (after appeals we're talking decades in the future) will make the public safer because they'll be dead? That's nebulous at best.
Sounds like he was trying to scare folks and justify state-sanctioned revenge. Kudos to the Legislature.
Ricketts says safety is his priority, but he used his public debate pulpit to focus on a gruesome bank robbery. Since Nebraska had the death penalty when the bank robbery took place, what effect did it have on public safety? It certainly wasn't a deterrent. Is his point that the bank robbers being executed (after appeals we're talking decades in the future) will make the public safer because they'll be dead? That's nebulous at best.
Sounds like he was trying to scare folks and justify state-sanctioned revenge. Kudos to the Legislature.
5
I support the death penalty for the most egregious crimes however the way society is today makes its application the essence of injustice. We have devolved into tribal, mean spirited and essentially evil beings towards others that don't look like us. The thought of 12 jurors in Staten Island looking at the same videos I saw of Daniel Pantelo choking to death Eric Garner then letting him go scotch free is but one example of what we have become. The thought that a learned judge can make such an evil decision absolving a police officer of guilt for jumping up on the windshield of a car and unloading into an unarmed black couple Naldo sickens me. The type of people we have become should exclude us from ever making a life and death judgment over another human being especially of another color than ours.
3
FYI - It was a GRAND JURY of 23 people that heard the evidence regarding the death of Eric Garner and declined to issue an indictment.
life in prison is less costly than the death penalty. remember guards make considerable considerable less than lawyers, the gov ought to check that fact out!
I am not completely opposed to the notion of putting someone to death for their crimes. BUT as humans we have failed to demonstrate an ability to use that punishment fairly, without bias. therefore we should eliminate a punishment for which there is no undo button
I am not completely opposed to the notion of putting someone to death for their crimes. BUT as humans we have failed to demonstrate an ability to use that punishment fairly, without bias. therefore we should eliminate a punishment for which there is no undo button
2
Well, that'll be a great comfort to heinous murderers and their victims.
1
The death penalty is a form of retribution by society. Some crimes are so heinous that the perpetrator deserves the death penalty. While some people believe that it harms the criminal more to make them live in prison, I don't think the point of the death penalty is to inflict physical or mental harm. I am in favor of lethal injection as a way to carry out the death penalty just as I am in favor of allowing people with terminal illnesses the right to die by taking medications, as they are legally allowed to do in Oregon and Washington State. That said, if these drugs are not available, other previous means of execution e.g., a firing squad cause a relatively quick death.
I am not a fan of using religious beliefs to guide these decisions, instead I am proud that we have a secular government and do not allow religious leaders to decide these issues for us.
Finally, I am aware that many criminals plead guilty to their crimes in order to receive a lesser sentence, i.e., pleading guilty to murder to avoid the death penalty. I fully expect that some will now be offered a lesser sentence than life in prison (without parole) in exchange for a guilty plea - I'm not looking forward to that because I don't think it adequately protects the rest of society. I don't even think it's fair to the prison guards or their fellow prisoners to have to be exposed to them.
I am not a fan of using religious beliefs to guide these decisions, instead I am proud that we have a secular government and do not allow religious leaders to decide these issues for us.
Finally, I am aware that many criminals plead guilty to their crimes in order to receive a lesser sentence, i.e., pleading guilty to murder to avoid the death penalty. I fully expect that some will now be offered a lesser sentence than life in prison (without parole) in exchange for a guilty plea - I'm not looking forward to that because I don't think it adequately protects the rest of society. I don't even think it's fair to the prison guards or their fellow prisoners to have to be exposed to them.
Revenge commensurate to the wrong committed is the moral and emotional analog to Newton's 3rd law of physics: for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. A life for a life (or lives) may seem commensurate on the surface, but is it? For the psychopath, death is the release from the hell life in prison and not being able to murder again and again. How is that punishment? Death is the end of punishment, regardless of the crime being punished. Death by the hand of authority for the truly guilty is indistinguishable from exoneration for the truly innocent.
I supported the death penalty for years. One Sunday I listened to a sermon on the topic, and came away fully convinced that when the government, carefully and judicially moves to take a life, it suggests to any citizen that he or she may, given the right circumstances, take a life. The thinking follows, from the most formative years onward, that there are circumstances in which I may take a life. Such action, given my consideration of the circumstances, endorses the thought process and the taking of a life. It is wrong, just as sleeping with my sister is wrong.
8
Martin,
I recall when Nebraska had its first execution in 1994 since the famed Charles Starkweather execution in 1959. I remember it clearly. An English teacher colleague's daughter had befriended Harold "Walking Willie" Otey because he was a poet. I awoke on the night of September 1, (actually, more like jolted out my slumber), and looked at the clock. It was 12:01 a.m. (Sept. 2) and I remember thinking, "they executed Willie." I went to bed earlier that night thinking he might get a stay of execution. All I could think about for days was that I had, in effect, killed a man. Thank you for sharing your words of wisdom.
I recall when Nebraska had its first execution in 1994 since the famed Charles Starkweather execution in 1959. I remember it clearly. An English teacher colleague's daughter had befriended Harold "Walking Willie" Otey because he was a poet. I awoke on the night of September 1, (actually, more like jolted out my slumber), and looked at the clock. It was 12:01 a.m. (Sept. 2) and I remember thinking, "they executed Willie." I went to bed earlier that night thinking he might get a stay of execution. All I could think about for days was that I had, in effect, killed a man. Thank you for sharing your words of wisdom.
1
I believe the Nebraska Republican legislature is most concerned about the cost of the executions. The governor, not so much.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/05/01/considering-the-...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2014/05/01/considering-the-...
The NE governor defended the death penalty with the (paraphrased) statement: We need tough laws to keep these hardened criminals behind bars. At that, it was clear that the governor is no clear thinker and would lose on this issue. Abolishing the death penalty keeps those hardened criminals behind bars. But what the governor really wanted was to put them under the ground.
5
I was neutral on capital punishment until 7th grade, when we had a debate on it. In my research I read, right after the 10 commandments, Genesis 21:12 "He that smiteth a man, so that he dies, shall be surely put to death." followed 5 verses later by Genesis 21:17 "And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death."
I didn't think I could get behind #2, so I had to let #1 go, too.
I didn't think I could get behind #2, so I had to let #1 go, too.
8
Wonderful news, good show Nebraska!
Now if only our "reliably blue" state of Cali could follow through and do the same, or are we going to keep pretending it deters crime & brings closure as we look to firing squads and electric chairs.
Getting rid of the death penalty in all the states for the right reasons might start a trend of becoming a less violent nation. Just a start, but hooray.
Bravo Nebraska!
Now if only our "reliably blue" state of Cali could follow through and do the same, or are we going to keep pretending it deters crime & brings closure as we look to firing squads and electric chairs.
Getting rid of the death penalty in all the states for the right reasons might start a trend of becoming a less violent nation. Just a start, but hooray.
Bravo Nebraska!
6
Hopefully, more states will follow. Ernie Chambers was one of my greatly admired politicians when I lived in Nebraska. This country needs more people like him to oppose the GOP ideological disregard for human life, in most of their policies and pronouncements.
8
We have a moratorium to executions installed by our governor, but I'd be surprised if ending the death penalty could win in the legislature here. Nebraska's legislators seem rational and to actually have real convictions. Weird.
4
The death penalty has nothing to do with public safety. Even a cursory google search will reveal numerous studies that conclude that the death penalty has little deterrence effect. This deterrence effect is undermined when the death penalty is administered unevenly and inaccurately (as more and more cases of exoneration through DNA evidence show.)
While I sympathize with the loss of the families of murder victims, our justice system has to take into account considerations beyond just giving them an eye for an eye, especially when we're seeing more and more cases of the system taking the wrong guy's eye.
What the death penalty provides is an easy out for politicians when confronted with questions on crime. They can support the death penalty to appear tough on crime, while avoiding thorny issues of substance abuse, poverty, gun control, or better funding for investigative and forensic services.
While I sympathize with the loss of the families of murder victims, our justice system has to take into account considerations beyond just giving them an eye for an eye, especially when we're seeing more and more cases of the system taking the wrong guy's eye.
What the death penalty provides is an easy out for politicians when confronted with questions on crime. They can support the death penalty to appear tough on crime, while avoiding thorny issues of substance abuse, poverty, gun control, or better funding for investigative and forensic services.
73
Yeah, that 'Gun Control' thing has worked wonders in Chicago.
Nebraskans should be proud of their legislators.
The only other countries that execute citizens are those without democratic governments. There is no evidence that the death penalty deters murder or any other crime. There is ample evidence that the death penalty is applied in a discriminatory fashion, to individuals without adequate representation, and to those who have been wrongly convicted. This doesn't even consider the huge expense incurred in carrying out this sentence. Common sense prevails in the heartland!
The only other countries that execute citizens are those without democratic governments. There is no evidence that the death penalty deters murder or any other crime. There is ample evidence that the death penalty is applied in a discriminatory fashion, to individuals without adequate representation, and to those who have been wrongly convicted. This doesn't even consider the huge expense incurred in carrying out this sentence. Common sense prevails in the heartland!
25
A complete lie.
Are India and Japan totalitarian governments?
Are India and Japan totalitarian governments?
Perhaps the deepest challenge to one’s understanding of the role of government arises when police, military or the State take human life.
But an act of murder is far different from just-punishment of a murderer. The first is criminal; the second, an unfortunate, yet necessary, function of human government.
Silly clichés about "killing people to show that it’s wrong to kill people" create false dilemmas based on false comparisons. The authorities execute murderers with a punishment that fits the crime.
It's a proven restraint against acts of homicide when those who willfully take the life of another are given the death penalty.
Where humans are involved there will never be a perfect system of government but, in this world, laws and law enforcement are necessary. We must ensure equitable due process for all people but it's a mistake to allow murderers to think that they will escape the justice of capital punishment.
If capital punishment is wrongly applied by inequities in due process, revisions to the judicial system are needed. But the death penalty is also needed to protect civilized society. Elimination of it could become one more step toward anarchy or an invitation to vigilante behavior. Those who willfully take the life of another must face the punishment of losing their lives.
Some killing is unjust and we call it “murder.” Other killing is justified and we call it “self-defense,” in some cases, and “just punishment” in others.
Steve Cornell
But an act of murder is far different from just-punishment of a murderer. The first is criminal; the second, an unfortunate, yet necessary, function of human government.
Silly clichés about "killing people to show that it’s wrong to kill people" create false dilemmas based on false comparisons. The authorities execute murderers with a punishment that fits the crime.
It's a proven restraint against acts of homicide when those who willfully take the life of another are given the death penalty.
Where humans are involved there will never be a perfect system of government but, in this world, laws and law enforcement are necessary. We must ensure equitable due process for all people but it's a mistake to allow murderers to think that they will escape the justice of capital punishment.
If capital punishment is wrongly applied by inequities in due process, revisions to the judicial system are needed. But the death penalty is also needed to protect civilized society. Elimination of it could become one more step toward anarchy or an invitation to vigilante behavior. Those who willfully take the life of another must face the punishment of losing their lives.
Some killing is unjust and we call it “murder.” Other killing is justified and we call it “self-defense,” in some cases, and “just punishment” in others.
Steve Cornell
7
I think it is quite clear that your statements that capital punishment is proven to be effective are unsubstantiated at best. But beyond that, you refer to the imperfect system and how we "must ensure equitable due process". Here is where you stray so far from reality that it is hard to believe you've read or paid attention to American history for the last 200 years. The American "Justice" system is not even close to a "just" system. All of us know that money frequently buys the desired verdicts and that those without money often have no justice whatsoever. The "conservatives" in Nebraska apparently are more interested in the sheer "inefficiency" of capital cases and less or not at all with the injustice of it. That is also extremely relevant and cogent.
3
If capital punishment is such a great deterrent to crime then why is murder so abundantly more popular here in the U.S.A. than it is in all countries that do not have it?
4
The death penalty is certainly NOT a proven restraint against murder. John Lomparti, a mathematics professor at Dartmouth, authored a paper explaining why studies claiming the death penalty has deterrence effect are essentially using flawed methodology. In many cases, pro-death penalty studies completely ignore factors that might influence murder rates outside the application of the death penalty, or draw inferences that the data alone do not support.
4
What struck me was the contradiction in the governor's statement that the death penalty was necessary to protect people and the fact that there were few persons on death row.
It stands to logic that if there is such a small number involved, the danger to the community cannot be that imminent.
It stands to logic that if there is such a small number involved, the danger to the community cannot be that imminent.
14
The death penalty doesn't seem to deter crime. It costs far more than life in prison and even after the long, expensive and exhausting appeals process, we still murder more than a few innocent people.
We still have the death penalty because?
We still have the death penalty because?
20
It deters the person being executed from killing someone else.
If the death penalty deterred crime people would have stopped killing each other at the beginning of civilization. While I'm not a backer of the death penalty I also see when there is a time for it. It's not vengeance or at least it should not be motivated by that.
So does life in prison, did I miss something there, you certainly don't sound like a person that would let them out.
2
I am proud of our legislators for what they did today, particularly, Ernie Chambers who never lost faith in the last 40 years that he has been bringing the bill to the senate floor. That we should be the first among conservative states to repeal death penalty is perhaps due to our nonpartisan unicameral. We like it and urge other states to give it a try!
38
There is some sort of misconception that "Life in prison" is some sort of "reward" or less punishment than death. Life is prison is a death sentence, a very long and slow death. Living in prison is not "living" as the majority of us know it. Yes, people do adapt but it remains severe punishment.
If one considers, aside from the expense, that the death penalty ends the individuals suffering perhaps they would reconsider and be in favor of life in prison without parole.
If one considers, aside from the expense, that the death penalty ends the individuals suffering perhaps they would reconsider and be in favor of life in prison without parole.
4
As of October 1, 2014 there were 57 women on death row. This constitutes 1.88% of the total death row population of 3,035 persons. My cousin, Susan D. Eubanks, is on California death row. I want to thank the people of Nebraska for all of their efforts to abolish the death penalty there. Had Susie been sentenced in Texas she would most likely have already been executed something I pray never happens.
16
Susie killed her four children. More sympathy for them and less for Ms. Eubanks would be in order in a fair and just world. Will Mr. Elrod now be working toward changing life without parole into life with parole? Such a movement is already going here in California.
"...Texas, which executes more inmates than any other state, has only enough drugs to carry out one more lethal injection..."
___
One was executed in May.
Two are scheduled in June, one next Wed. Later in June (18th), unless more pentobarbital is obtained, I think the alternate method they will employ is a nitrogen gas asphyxiation; but that may be Oklahoma, not sure.
https://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/death_row/dr_scheduled_executions.html
___
One was executed in May.
Two are scheduled in June, one next Wed. Later in June (18th), unless more pentobarbital is obtained, I think the alternate method they will employ is a nitrogen gas asphyxiation; but that may be Oklahoma, not sure.
https://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/death_row/dr_scheduled_executions.html
For as long as the death penalty has been on the books in the United States, it is apparent that it does not deter murders just like drugs laws do not stop people from using drugs or banking laws that do not stop the criminals on Wall Street from committing fraud.
The Death Penalty is about revenge killings, that is it.
Considering all the innocent people freed from death row every year by DNA testing of the evidence, how can any one still support the Death Penalty.
The Death Penalty is about revenge killings, that is it.
Considering all the innocent people freed from death row every year by DNA testing of the evidence, how can any one still support the Death Penalty.
53
Bravo Nebraska! Good sense prevails in the Cornhusker State.
As for Mr. Wayne Ambrosias, fret not. Endless Death Row appeals are far more taxpayer-costly than life sentences to prison. Enjoy your new-found savings! Go out and live a little.
As for Mr. Wayne Ambrosias, fret not. Endless Death Row appeals are far more taxpayer-costly than life sentences to prison. Enjoy your new-found savings! Go out and live a little.
56
"But others said they saw the issue differently, rejecting the argument that the death penalty was necessary to deter crime." As well they should reject this argument. Capital punishment has never been proven to deter crime. The only way that argument can stand is if capital punishment can be extended downward to apply to shoplifting convictions. And to those who object to their taxes going to the upkeep of imprisoned murderers, think about the huge amount of money we are shelling out to keep all other people in jail, including all the Lifers.
12
I am proud that our state legislators did the right thing. The death penalty should have been abolished years ago. I never felt any safer driving across the bridge to Iowa where the death penalty vanished decades ago. Thats because the death penalty was never a deterrent. What murderer expects to get caught?
80
Good for Nebraska. Alas I live in a state that has one of the highest per capita number of inmates on death row, and the third highest number of actual executions in the nation, after Texas and Oklahoma.
23
This is good news!
24
Congratulations to Nebraska on this step forward. An unexpectedly thoughtful act of the legislature. Here are some of the reasons we should abolish the death penalty everywhere:
1. From time to time, we accidentally convict the innocent. To some extent, that can be ameliorated pre-execution.
2. Putting people to death is blood-thirsty. It conveys to the public that violence is an innate part of our culture and society. It enables violent behavior, however subconsciously that might take place.
3. It is overly kind to vicious criminals. They do not deserve an easy release from their guilt, criminal responsibility, and incarceration. They should suffer a lifetime of confinement, with isolation and condemnation as punishment for their acts. Truly deviant people (like murderers) have an inherent death-wish underlying their conduct; they do not deserve actually to have this wish honored and carried out by the State.
4. See (2) and (3). The death penalty often actually is a CAUSE of antisocial behavior.
5. It is frequently applied inconsistently, unequally, and unfairly.
Oh, and by the way, if you happen to be Christian and have read the New Testament, you might be against it for reasons described there, too.
1. From time to time, we accidentally convict the innocent. To some extent, that can be ameliorated pre-execution.
2. Putting people to death is blood-thirsty. It conveys to the public that violence is an innate part of our culture and society. It enables violent behavior, however subconsciously that might take place.
3. It is overly kind to vicious criminals. They do not deserve an easy release from their guilt, criminal responsibility, and incarceration. They should suffer a lifetime of confinement, with isolation and condemnation as punishment for their acts. Truly deviant people (like murderers) have an inherent death-wish underlying their conduct; they do not deserve actually to have this wish honored and carried out by the State.
4. See (2) and (3). The death penalty often actually is a CAUSE of antisocial behavior.
5. It is frequently applied inconsistently, unequally, and unfairly.
Oh, and by the way, if you happen to be Christian and have read the New Testament, you might be against it for reasons described there, too.
123
6. It costs less to keep a person in prison for life than to pay for the appeals.
7
Terry,
I considered adding the costs item but, really, if it were the "right" public policy practice, given the outcomes desired, then I think we should incur the necessary costs of carrying it out properly. Clearly, it is NOT a "deterrent." [The only real benefits of the death penalty are that it prevents escape or further crimes committed in jail, and it might give some victims a sense of comfort.]
To me, the critical point is that BECAUSE the death penalty is bad policy, we need elaborate measures to apply it as fairly as possible, and this is what leads to the high cost. Not a reason to abolish the death penalty, but one that might appeal to Wayne Ambrosias (in the article)!
I considered adding the costs item but, really, if it were the "right" public policy practice, given the outcomes desired, then I think we should incur the necessary costs of carrying it out properly. Clearly, it is NOT a "deterrent." [The only real benefits of the death penalty are that it prevents escape or further crimes committed in jail, and it might give some victims a sense of comfort.]
To me, the critical point is that BECAUSE the death penalty is bad policy, we need elaborate measures to apply it as fairly as possible, and this is what leads to the high cost. Not a reason to abolish the death penalty, but one that might appeal to Wayne Ambrosias (in the article)!
Point. 3 is an excellent argument for sparing the life of Tsarnaev.
They still believe in the death penalty - we've successfully raised the price of execution to a point where they can't justify the cost.
5
As a conservative Nebraskan, and let's face it one of the few states that actually balances its budget, this is a fiscally conservative thing to do. It does cost more to execute than life in prison. Although I believe an "eye for an eye", a life sentence without any possibility of parole can accomplish that without death.
13
An eye for an eye is vengance, not justice.
73
Actually, almost every state balances its budget.
12
However you came to this decision, Kay from Nebraska, I applaud you.
3
The only real reason for the death penalty is a horse-already-out-of-the-barn vengeance. But they won't say that, trotting out that dead dog about deterring crime. As if the states without capital punishment are being overrun with capital crimes.
These are the same cognitively disconnected "good" church goers that nod hypocritically as they read their bibles, "Vengeance is mine, sez The Lord."
These are the same cognitively disconnected "good" church goers that nod hypocritically as they read their bibles, "Vengeance is mine, sez The Lord."
33
No one is trotting out the dead dog about it being a deterrent. If the death penalty was a deterrent, people would have stopped killing each other at the beginning of civilization.
I am overwhelmed with pride in my home state right now, not only because they have abolished the death penalty, but also why they abolished it. To honor their principles this deeply, and show that their creed is more than something they repeat on Sunday, is a truly inspiring step by these legislators. I hope that more politicians on both sides of the aisle will follow this example, put aside petty partisan positions, consider data as well as their own understanding of moral justice, and act in a way that truly advances the societies they call home.
236
Nebraska: This is good and right. Thank you to the legislators for holding fast. The death penalty is outdated and not fit for modern human society. Here's hoping other states will follow.
89
Nebraska, a very conservative state, has just abolished the death penalty; but California, which is traditionally considered a very progressive state, now wants to add more cells to San Quentin Prison's death row. There is a huge disconnect in this country on so many levels that it boggles the mind.
67
Congratulations on your decision to recognize that there is absolutely nothing good or useful about the "an eye for an eye" teaching, which which Muslims and Christians got from Jews, who got t teaching from he Babylonian king Hammurabi who enslaved the Jews.
In fact, when a Christian tells me that he or she is a follower of Jesus, I know this is not true since Jesus NEVER said anything even once that could be interpreted as support for the death penalty. And he said a lot of things that directly contradict the "an eye for an eye" teaching. Jesus, of course, was executed, based on false testimony given in a kangaroo court, because his teaching contradicted the Mosaic Law.
In fact, when a Christian tells me that he or she is a follower of Jesus, I know this is not true since Jesus NEVER said anything even once that could be interpreted as support for the death penalty. And he said a lot of things that directly contradict the "an eye for an eye" teaching. Jesus, of course, was executed, based on false testimony given in a kangaroo court, because his teaching contradicted the Mosaic Law.
44
RE: "Wayne Ambrosias, owner of the Sweet Pea Market, said he did not want his tax dollars used to pay for murderers to stay in prison for their entire lives".
Actually it's LESS expensive for tax payers than the long drawn out process of hearings, appeals and endless delays.
Actually it's LESS expensive for tax payers than the long drawn out process of hearings, appeals and endless delays.
160
And you can be sure that Wayne would like to abolish those pesky and very expensive appeals while he's at it; until it's Wayne's kid or brother who's been falsely convicted of murder.
Therein is the essence of the modern American conservative.
Therein is the essence of the modern American conservative.
The Nebraska Legislature has done a great thing for its state. Capital punishment is not a deterrent. It is subject to untenable flaws. It's a financial drain. Most importantly though, it bars the state from killing people.
Prison reform measures, making sure inmates are treated humanely, has to follow for this to not be a sentence of torture instead of death.
Prison reform measures, making sure inmates are treated humanely, has to follow for this to not be a sentence of torture instead of death.
128
I find it upsetting that we somehow need to show compassion and humanity toward the criminal that showed none of that toward his victim(s) - particularly when the evidence is clear (say on video) or otherwise without doubt. We don't have very far to look - Ft. Hood, Colorado theater shooting, Tuscon shooting....the list goes on.
The best news coming from the Nebraska Unicameral for a long time! Thank you to Senator Chambers for faithfully introducing a bill to repeal for so many years. My hero!
67
"....did not want his tax dollars used to pay for murderers to stay in prison for their entire lives." An ironic statment, regardless of whether the person is excecuted or not. I wonder if the people of Nebraska and elsewhere realize that it is more expensive to have the death penalty, given all the legal appeals, than to sentence them to life in prison?
78
I'm from Nebraska and couldn't be prouder of this state! The legislature did the right thing. Nebraska is conservative, but clearly progressive and changed what needed to be changed.
128
Harry Blacknum: 'from this day forward, I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death.'
102
Let's start a wave of death penalty abolishment across the nation.
170
I'm proud that Wisconsin abolished capital punishment in 1851.
11
I'm guessing no refunds on the lethal injection drugs the state just procured.
13
They can always sell it to Texas.
12
Nebraska hasn't executed anyone since 1997, yet the Governor claimed “It’s important to protect the safety of the public” ?
Pretty shaky logic and the Legislature wasn't buying it. Good for Nebraska!
Pretty shaky logic and the Legislature wasn't buying it. Good for Nebraska!
260
Nebraska is a red as red states get--if its lawmakers can over-ride a Governor’s veto to abolish the death penalty, that’s a significant shift. For the remaining 13 or so states that still have the death penalty—(at the risk of leaving out any other perfectly kind religions :)—I think we ask, ‘what would Jesus do?” Because as far as I can tell from news so far, that’s what some of those republican lawmakers asked themselves.
71
Congratulations to the people of Nebraska.
218
I'm impressed with the wisdom and courage exhibited by Nebraska's legislators. Well done!
15
No one learns when they are dead, therefore, it is not punishment.
The Death Sentence is Murder.