Over the years the Guardian has provided excellent coverage of death penalty issues in America. Of late they have taken a more optimistic tone as the possibility of its elimination, either by court challenge or through loss of popular support. Perhaps because I spent my first 37 years in the states I do not necessarily share their upbeat attitude. There is a significant part of the population for whom it is a deeply entrenched idea that the death penalty is not only necessary but that it is good.
This morning's paper brings, a little belatedly, coverage of the California appeal hearing of Michael Morales. Morales had his execution put on hold at the last minute this past February after the refusal of the two medical attendants to take part in the lethal injection. They cited violations of medical ethics.
The hearings took place last week and irrespective of which way the judge rules the decision will be appealed and stands a good chance of getting before the Supreme Court. I cannot see the current high court allowing the death penalty to be discarded.
Talk Left has previously discussed some of the legal, ethical and moral difficulties with lethal injection here, here and here. In testimony during the Morales hearing last week a veterinarian said that he would not use the state's lethal injection procedure on an animal because it would "lead to pain and suffering". Well at least poor Rover is safe.
The article also had a graphic (not available on line) that showed the executions by state since the reinstatement of the ultimate penalty 1976 (undoubtedly as part of the bicentennial celebrations). Two things stuck out.
This morning's paper brings, a little belatedly, coverage of the California appeal hearing of Michael Morales. Morales had his execution put on hold at the last minute this past February after the refusal of the two medical attendants to take part in the lethal injection. They cited violations of medical ethics.
The hearings took place last week and irrespective of which way the judge rules the decision will be appealed and stands a good chance of getting before the Supreme Court. I cannot see the current high court allowing the death penalty to be discarded.
Talk Left has previously discussed some of the legal, ethical and moral difficulties with lethal injection here, here and here. In testimony during the Morales hearing last week a veterinarian said that he would not use the state's lethal injection procedure on an animal because it would "lead to pain and suffering". Well at least poor Rover is safe.
The article also had a graphic (not available on line) that showed the executions by state since the reinstatement of the ultimate penalty 1976 (undoubtedly as part of the bicentennial celebrations). Two things stuck out.
- Don't live in a state that would have a Bush as governor. Texas and Florida are at numbers 1 (376 executions) and 4 (61 executions) respectively. The Texas rate works out to about one every 30 days!
- Stay out of Oklahoma and Delaware (do you hear that family members) while you are at it. They both have a per capita rate that is higher than Texas! My former state, Pennsylvania, has the second lowest per capita rate. (Excluding those superior and civilised states that don't have the death penalty.)
States without the death penalty are: Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and New York.
6 comments:
ATufMX The best blog you have!
HtKtCl Nice Article.
Wonderful blog.
Thanks to author.
Good job!
Thanks to author.
Post a Comment