Welcome to the 21st century, NJ

[SteveLaura 0]

UN votes for death penalty freeze

The UN General Assembly has passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty, with the ultimate aim of abolishing capital punishment.

It voted 104 in favour and 54 against with 29 abstentions on a resolution which, while non-binding, reflects the view of most member states.

Unusually, the US sided with countries like China and Iran to oppose it.

It calls on countries with the death penalty to respect international standards and establish a moratorium.

The UN's humanitarian panel approved the resolution last month.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon hailed what he called a bold step by the international community.

But Singapore's ambassador to the UN, Vanu Gopala Menon, spoke for those countries who say the death penalty is not a human rights issue but a matter of criminal justice.

"This resolution will make no difference to Singapore's policies," he said.

"We will continue to implement policies that work for us and best serve the interests of our people."

The vote followed a heated debate in the Human Rights Committee of the UN as Singapore accused countries in favour of the moratorium on the death penalty of trying to impose their values on the rest of the world, the BBC's Laura Trevelyan reports from the UN.

Mexican ambassador Claude Heller argued the resolution was not an attempt to impose one set of views on others.

"Our intention is to promote and to strengthen the growing trend towards the elimination of the death penalty," he said.

Most countries in the world do not have the death penalty, our correspondent adds.

Only 51 nations retain the right to use it, down from 60 countries three years ago.

Source

[Peikko 1,575]

This is my last post here. When it comes to controversial topics on politics, sex, gun laws, religion, etc., I just post my opinion and see what others have to say.

So far in this post all I see directed my way are personal attacks, pejorative comments, straw man arguments, and people taking my comments out of context.

I have no hope of swaying or convincing any anti death penalty folks and it is doubtful you will convince me housing and keeping alive dangerous convicted criminals on tax payer dollars is the morally correct thing or the 'enlightened,' way to proceed in the US.

My points have been made. If I continue here I would just lower myself to a certain level of conduct and I have no wish to do so.

which of course, we wouldn't want you to do. However, what about that nice little threat you delivered?

As for moral and enlightened, slaughtering people you don't like is neither.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Quite long but a good read to get some perspective on the toll the death penalty takes on those carrying it out. Here we have 62 lights put out and 63 lives down the drain. And he's quite clear on what the death penalty doesn't accomplish: deterring crime.

Interview With an Executioner

"Taking a Life is Not a Pleasant Thing to Do,'' He Tells ABC News

By JIM AVILA, MARY HARRIS and CHRIS FRANCESCANI

Dec. 17, 2007 —

Jerry Givens spent 17 years as a professional killer. From 1982 to 1999, he killed 62 people.

He was never punished. His work was paid for by the Commonwealth of Virginia.

As the state's chief executioner, Givens pushed the buttons that administered lethal doses of electricity to the condemned. He could even choose how many volts to administer. And he is the first to admit that it was largely guesswork.

"If he was a small guy, I didn't give that much. You try not to cook the body, you know. I hate to sound gross,'' he told ABC News in a rare interview.

Only a handful of executioners in America have ever spoken publicly about their experiences, and fewer, if any, have revealed the emotional toll the job can take on a person or the mind-set of the man behind the proverbial mask.

Givens told ABC News that his experiences in the death chamber have caused him to change course and oppose the death penalty.

Givens defies the stereotype of the cold-souled executioner. A deeply religious layman, Givens claimed he prayed with many of the condemned men he was about to execute, a bold gesture at odds with the grim, emotionless solemnity with which executions are often portrayed in the movies.

He said he'd suggest to a condemned man that this was a last chance to repent and seek forgiveness from God. And he said he'd join the men in prayer. No one's tomorrow is guaranteed, he said.

"This could be my last chance too.''

Capital Punishment in the Spotlight

The emotionally charged, ongoing debate in the United States over capital punishment has reached a near fever pitch in recent days.

On Monday New Jersey's governor signed a bill banning capital punishment in the state. In a momentous and much-anticipated showdown, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments next term on whether lethal injection constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

The U.S. has executed 1,099 people since the U.S. Supreme Court reauthorized the death penalty in 1976, according to The Associated Press. In 1999, 98 people were executed, the most since 1976; last year 53 people were executed, the lowest since 1996.

Is There a Doctor in the House?

Givens said he trained with a Texas execution team that showed him how to administer the deadly cocktail of drugs used in lethal injection executions. Still, he has no formal medical training.

Corrections officials in the 36 states where the death penalty is legal have long faced the vexing challenge of having executions administered, or at the very least overseen, by trained medical professionals. But the Hippocratic oath ("first, do no harm") ethically prohibits medical professionals from participating in executions. The American Medical Association recommends that doctors not participate in executions.

In 2006, lawyers for the state of Missouri told a federal judge that they simply could not meet his demand that a certified anesthesiologist oversee state executions.

State attorneys reportedly told the judge that authorities in Missouri had sent certified letters to 298 qualified anesthesiologists who lived anywhere near the state's death chamber. They were turned down by every single one, according to a report in The New York Times.

Many states have abandoned guidelines requiring medical professionals to perform executions, because there are simply not enough doctors or nurses willing to perform the job. And in states like Virginia, as Givens told ABC News, training for such a consequential job is thin at best.

ABC News showed Givens the American Veterinary Medical Association's guidelines for the lethal injection of pets, which states that the drug used to euthanize an animal can be so potentially painful that "it is utmost importance that personnel performing this technique are trained and knowledgeable in anesthetic techniques, and are competent in assessing anesthetic depth appropriate for administration of potassium chloride intravenously."

Asked whether it concerned him that the nation seems to take more care in the execution of pets than it does in humans, Givens said, simply, "yeah."

"It's wild."

Givens himself said he had no medical education. "Well,'' he said as an afterthought, "first aid."

"I Was Just Performing a Job"

Givens can be remarkably matter-of-fact about his past work as an executioner. He was one of the most prolific executioners in the nation -- the 62 condemned men Givens put to death account for about 11 percent of all those executed nationwide during those years.

When he took the job -- he said he was simply picked at the age of 30 by a superior at the Virginia penitentiary where he worked -- there was a nationwide moratorium on the death penalty and violent crime and murders were on the rise in Virginia, he said.

Givens said that at the time, he believed the death penalty was an effective deterrent, but said he no longer does.

After the death penalty was reinstated in Virginia, Givens noted, ruefully, "crime went up.''

Givens described himself as a loyal employee who felt a duty to the state to accept his part-time post as executioner, even though his salary as a corrections officer did not increase.

He approached it simply as a job that somebody had to do.

"Taking a life is not a pleasant thing to do,'' he said. "You have a condemned [inmate] that didn't do anything to you."

"I didn't do it to make you suffer,'' he said. "I didn't do it to inflict pain on you. I don't want to really hurt nobody. I was just performing a job."

"I'm Going to Suffer a Lot"

But time and trouble taught him that the price he paid was too high, he said. With the emergence in the past two decades of DNA as a nearly foolproof legal tool to right wrongful convictions, Givens has been dogged by doubts about his actions.

"You're the American people,'' he said, growing momentarily animated. "You sentenced a guy to be executed. You give him a trial, then you send him to me to be put to death.

"Then later on you [say] that this guy was innocent. You didn't put him to death. I did.

"I performed the execution. So you might suffer a little. I'm going to suffer a lot, because I performed the job."

The procedures surrounding state executions are often cloaked in secrecy, and one state after another has fought in court to protect that secrecy. Executioners, for obvious reasons, almost always remain anonymous.

For 17 years, Given told no one outside his job as a corrections guard that he was an executioner.

Not even his wife. When he eventually told her, he said, she was not happy.

"You've Got to Eliminate Yourself"

Givens described to ABC News the sometimes wrenching mental and emotional preparation that would precede each of his executions -- days seared so deeply into his psyche that he can still recite the dates.

"To make that transformation from corrections officer to executioner & it was hard,'' he said. "You have to get away from yourself. You have to eliminate yourself."

The nights and days following the executions were equally challenging, he claimed.

Going back to his regular job, returning home to a wife he loved dearly but who he chose to keep completely in the dark about the executions, turned him into an emotional "yo-yo'' at times, he said.

In the time since he left the job -- after a 2000 conviction on perjury and money-laundering charges stemming from cars he bought on behalf of a convicted drug dealer who was a childhood friend of his -- he has changed his mind about the efficacy of capital punishment.

"If the jury, if you let the [jury] foreman be the executioner, than I think they'd give a second thought about execution,'' he said. "If you let the judge be the executioner, I think he would give a second thought about sending somebody to be executed."

Copyright © 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures

ABC

[Ban Hammer 13,636]

Honestly, it must be nice to live in the simple black/white world that you and Charles appear to inhabit, well at least uncomplicated.

and the same could be said of you - that it's awfully nice to live in that perfect world of yours with rose colored glasses where everyone gets along and criminals are coddled and cooed over.

i seriously doubt the founding fathers had this in mind, the mockery of the justice system that criminals make of it nowadays with appeal after appeal to stay their date with destiny. while they couldn't offer their victims any compassion or mercy these same criminals sure demand it and receive it in spades from a plethora of bleeding hearts. i don't see the point in someone getting 10-20 years in jail (take into account good behavior and parole boards) when a victim's life is lost. overall it sounds like a crappy trade to me - 10-20 years in prison at taxpayer expense versus someone losing up to 50 or more years of potential life.

and just to be clear on things - i'm not one of those who believes in turning the other cheek. if anyone here on vj was murdered, i'd be the first howling for the head of that criminal that did it. at least someone would be looking out for your memory rather throwing money and resources away on a burden and threat to society.

[Peikko 1,575]

Criminals in prison are not a threat to society and many murderers are not given the option of parole.

Ok, I don't get this at all, but it appears you think the criminal justice system should somehow be about value for money, is that right?

[Peikko 1,575]

Oh, and, just so you don't get confused, my world isn't all sunshine and roses, it's not fair and it's not always nice and I certainly don't think criminals should be coddled and cooed over. I, like many others simply want them to be treated humanely, no more, no less. If you read that piece that big dog posted well, it's very enlightening, and is one of the reasons I don't believe in the death penalty.

[Ban Hammer 13,636]

Criminals in prison are not a threat to society and many murderers are not given the option of parole.

Ok, I don't get this at all, but it appears you think the criminal justice system should somehow be about value for money, is that right?

if they are not a threat to society then why do they need guards?

thanks for playing anyways

[Peikko 1,575]

That makes no sense Charles, they aren't a threat to society at large when they are in prison. They need guards so that they aren't able to get out of prison and into society at large. Are you really that stupid?

[Ban Hammer 13,636]

Oh, and, just so you don't get confused, my world isn't all sunshine and roses, it's not fair and it's not always nice and I certainly don't think criminals should be coddled and cooed over. I, like many others simply want them to be treated humanely, no more, no less. If you read that piece that big dog posted well, it's very enlightening, and is one of the reasons I don't believe in the death penalty.

and if you'd read mine you'll know why i support it. you might favor talking to criminals like you do a child but it's not gonna work. the only thing that's gonna work is paying the ultimate price. and no, you won't change my mind on that.

[Ban Hammer 13,636]

That makes no sense Charles, they aren't a threat to society at large when they are in prison. They need guards so that they aren't able to get out of prison and into society at large. Are you really that stupid?

i really think the last time you took a dump you shat your brains out instead. your original statement was: Criminals in prison are not a threat to society and many murderers are not given the option of parole.

my statement: if they are not a threat to society then why do they need guards?

obviously to keep them from escaping! duh!

[Peikko 1,575]

One and one don't make three Charles, the alternative to the death penalty isn't giving prisoners every luxury known to man then letting them out of prison if they say sorry. The 'ultimate price' doesn't work, although you can carry on believing it does.

[Caladan 19]

That makes no sense Charles, they aren't a threat to society at large when they are in prison. They need guards so that they aren't able to get out of prison and into society at large. Are you really that stupid?

i really think the last time you took a dump you shat your brains out instead. your original statement was: Criminals in prison are not a threat to society and many murderers are not given the option of parole.

my statement: if they are not a threat to society then why do they need guards?

obviously to keep them from escaping! duh!

He does say 'in prison' in there. I believe that clause may be doing some work, like expressing the fact that criminals who are in prison are not out in the streets murdering anyone.

[Peikko 1,575]

So, if you keep them from escaping, they arne't a threat to society, duh.

[Kevin and 10]

Oh, and, just so you don't get confused, my world isn't all sunshine and roses, it's not fair and it's not always nice and I certainly don't think criminals should be coddled and cooed over. I, like many others simply want them to be treated humanely, no more, no less. If you read that piece that big dog posted well, it's very enlightening, and is one of the reasons I don't believe in the death penalty.

and if you'd read mine you'll know why i support it. you might favor talking to criminals like you do a child but it's not gonna work. the only thing that's gonna work is paying the ultimate price. and no, you won't change my mind on that.

Talking to kids doesn't always work either. Sometimes they just need a good swat on the behind.

[Peikko 1,575]

Some people will never evolve.