Our death penalty rituals are no longer satisfying: new ceremonies are needed. The very notion of justice through execution can fall into disrepute if not applied to the satisfaction of all parties involved -- with the obvious exception of the drama's leading actor.
Let us begin by making the best possible case against the very idea of capital punishment. Maybe its critics do have a clue about what's wrong. Most critics of capital punishment conclude that it should be replaced by unrelenting life sentences. Their case, followed by succinct rebuttals from death penalty advocates:
Cost. Our extreme timidity about killing somebody unjustly has driven the budgets for supreme punishments through the roof. Keeping an inmate on death row through the years of appeals now exceeds the cost of “three hots and a cot” behind bars for life. There is no doubt that money is tight and a legal killing expensive. String 'em up and then give 'em a fair trial! Throw a party with the savings.
Method. Ancient ways to execute -- lions in the arena, burning at the stake, drawing and quartering, crucifixion -- are out of style. Somewhat newer methods – stoning, the firing squad, beheading, hanging – are also not much in vogue any place most would care to live.. Democratic societies still in the business uneasily debate electrocution vs a lethal cocktail (injected, not shaken or stirred). The ideal way would kill without hurt or dread. Luck with that. Keep looking.
Deterrence. Murder most foul is the major reason the justice system executes. We hope that others hot to murder will cool down, not wishing to die similarly. However, the abundant headlines of the “Man Kills Family, Self” variety cast some doubt. Most murderers don't think at all ("I don't know what came over me!" “It was an accident!” “I loved him! ”), and deterrence by definition requires prior scheming. We haven't invited the public to a hanging or a beheading in a long time. More research is needed.
Justice. Is not justice as ably served by life imprisonment as by delays so long that most sentenced to death die naturally before we can pull the plug artificially. But is justice what we want? See below.
The Horror. A more squeamish public no longer hankers for a public event. Calls for televised public spectacles are usually a tongue in cheek way of suggesting that society should not do what it cannot watch. People die on TV nightly: we just don't call CSI or the Iraq war a snuff series. This both reassures and acclimatizes the children.
Obedience to Scripture. The Apostle Paul taught that, “Vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.” Can Christians in good faith usurp the work of their God? A helping hand is not usurping. Are you saying God lacks television?
But even in devout America not all are Christians, and not all Christians closely follow St. Paul. Besides abolition would leave friends, lovers and family of the victims unable to heal, find closure and begin life anew. Only the Old Testament “eye for an eye,” it seems, will do that. St Paul and his anti death penalty crowd would deprive us of what we really want: the raw desire for sweet revenge. Only death gives the heavenly victim and his earthly tribe that solace.
So what new deathly ritual should we adopt to better slake this acknowledged thirst for revenge? How about we allow a willing executioner to volunteer from among those closest to the victim? He or she would flip the switch, plunge the needle, trip the trap, light the fire, etc., and, if so moved, lead the public in a fist pumping cheer for revenge at last. Now that's closure for you.
Meanwhile, in fairness, we should also offer the condemned his choice of killing method. Borrowing from economic game theory, we could call the subsequent scenario "The Executioner's Dilemma." What's wrong with executions resembling Texas Hold'em -- no limit, everything at stake?
A wily prisoner facing death might choose to have Henry VIII's axe imported from the Tower of London or the guillotine from Paris, causing the occasional nearest relative to shrink from his duty -- even with technical support from expert officials. But another less squeamish cousin would no doubt step up, especially for serial killers. No doubt public interest would occasionally be high enough for a good riot, but so what's new?
Thoughtful readers will have already noted that revenge doesn’t save money, possibly rehabilitates quaint old methods of execution, does nothing much to deter other criminals, scares the horses and other sensitive beings, and does not necessarily do justice.
Thoughtful readers will also know the meaning of the Latin phrase reductio ad absurdum -- which is more than one can say about the country's state and national legislators, and unfortunately most of those who vote for them. We will continue bungling the final scene to the occasional dismay of all, most notably the plays protagonist.
But we will have new ceremonies to enjoy or deplore as we wish. Change is good. Only progress is uncertain.
.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
A Lesson In Courage From Norway
On 22 July 2011 Ander's Breivik, a quiet, apparently normal Norwegian citizen, killed 76 of his fellows by exploding a fertilizer bomb in downtown Oslo, the Norwegian capitol, and then going on a shooting spree at an island camp for young people, mostly children of Labor Party members.
Breivik had posted a 1,500 page screed on the web, partly copied from the manifesto of the American Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, that showcased the hidden workings of the mind of yet another extreme right wing, fundamentalist christian, delusional, conspiracy nut.
His methods of murder were from the playbook of Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, who also built his car bomb from fertilizer and oil. He also echoed the methods of Al Quaida, by using one murderous attack as cover for yet another.
Consider the Norwegian tragedy from an American perspective. Norway is a nation of 4.9 million people. In contrast the 2010 census counted 305 million Americans, or 71.4 times as many. Multiply that last number by the 76 who died by bomb and gunfire in two places in Norway on 7/22 and you get 5,403.
Norway is feeling what we would feel if that many Americans had died at the hands of terrorists in a single day.
Slightly less died on 9/11 and at Pearl Harbor combined (5,379). If, like me, you were young at Pearl Harbor and still around for 9/11, you can begin to know the true dimensions of the shock that has rocked this most peaceful of countries.
As we did, the Norwegian nation is searching it collective soul for reasons, lessons and remedies. No doubt they are examining our responses to the attacks on the twin towers and the naval base as well as the Oklahoma City bombing and its striking parallels to their own still raw experience.
Some responses are automatic. Both Presidents Roosevelt and Bush ordered a formal inquiry and acted on the recommendations made.. Norway’s Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg is taking the same path. One certain finding is that intelligence was inadequate. Failures in gathering, assessing and communicating information about the enemy will be deemed the fault of intelligence community agencies. Otherwise, how could "this" have happened.
But Norway’s PM has also done something more courageous. He has rallied Norwegians, not to demand vengeance, but to preserve their open and trusting society: “The answer to violence is even more democracy. Even more humanity,” he said.
That there is a risk to just carrying on is obvious. Less obvious, but no less real, are the self inflected wounds that can follow hasty, intemperate actions fueled by fear and xenophobic thoughts of revenge.
Our history has often been sullied by such over reactions. After Pearl Harbor to our shame we rounded up American citizens of Japanese ancestry residing mostly in California and stuck them in barren relocation camps in the name of national security. Thieving neighbors were allowed to steal their property and the possessions they could not carry. Franklin Roosevelt approved the order and the Supreme Court upheld his right as Commander-In-Chief of the armed forces to issue it during time of war.
This of course was unnecessary as our belated apologies and meager restitution a half-century later made uncomfortably clear. In the then territory of Hawaii, where the wreckage of the Pacific fleet still smoldered , officials refused to follow California’s example with their own large Japanese American population. They picked up a few old men of known divided loyalty – mostly for their own safety -- and that was that.
From that act of courage, independent thinking and forbearance came more courage of the highest order. The 442 Regimental Combat Team, composed entirely of Japanese Americans primarily from Hawaii, came out of the European theater of World War II as the most highly decorated unit in U. S. military history. No sunshine soldiers these.
One the eve of the 10th anniversary of 9/11, when we will dedicate a towering memorial to the casualties of that dreadful day, we should also take stock of the self inflicted collateral damage that has since been done to our reputation and our liberties out of fear and in the name of dubious security.
The record is not pretty. The fallout from Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay and those unnamed CIA interrogation camps dotted about the globe now illuminate our repute in the world’s eyes more brightly than the Lamp of Liberty in New York harbor.
No less ugly is what we did to ourselves. We traded away a measure of liberty and a lot of privacy in return for massive surveillance programs. Sure we have pounced on an occasional collection of would be terrorists who mostly talked to impress each other. And, yes, there has been no repeat of acts of terror anywhere close to the scale of 9/11. But, deep down, we know that what we have lost is more precious than the precarious safety we perhaps have gained.
Ben Franklin said it best: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” He could have also added, "And they lack the courage to be free."
The Norwegians, not lacking in that courage, are on track to test this ancient sentiment of one of our wisest founders. We should follow their progress carefully. We might relearn something.
Breivik had posted a 1,500 page screed on the web, partly copied from the manifesto of the American Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, that showcased the hidden workings of the mind of yet another extreme right wing, fundamentalist christian, delusional, conspiracy nut.
His methods of murder were from the playbook of Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh, who also built his car bomb from fertilizer and oil. He also echoed the methods of Al Quaida, by using one murderous attack as cover for yet another.
* * * * *
Consider the Norwegian tragedy from an American perspective. Norway is a nation of 4.9 million people. In contrast the 2010 census counted 305 million Americans, or 71.4 times as many. Multiply that last number by the 76 who died by bomb and gunfire in two places in Norway on 7/22 and you get 5,403.
Norway is feeling what we would feel if that many Americans had died at the hands of terrorists in a single day.
Slightly less died on 9/11 and at Pearl Harbor combined (5,379). If, like me, you were young at Pearl Harbor and still around for 9/11, you can begin to know the true dimensions of the shock that has rocked this most peaceful of countries.
As we did, the Norwegian nation is searching it collective soul for reasons, lessons and remedies. No doubt they are examining our responses to the attacks on the twin towers and the naval base as well as the Oklahoma City bombing and its striking parallels to their own still raw experience.
Some responses are automatic. Both Presidents Roosevelt and Bush ordered a formal inquiry and acted on the recommendations made.. Norway’s Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg is taking the same path. One certain finding is that intelligence was inadequate. Failures in gathering, assessing and communicating information about the enemy will be deemed the fault of intelligence community agencies. Otherwise, how could "this" have happened.
But Norway’s PM has also done something more courageous. He has rallied Norwegians, not to demand vengeance, but to preserve their open and trusting society: “The answer to violence is even more democracy. Even more humanity,” he said.
That there is a risk to just carrying on is obvious. Less obvious, but no less real, are the self inflected wounds that can follow hasty, intemperate actions fueled by fear and xenophobic thoughts of revenge.
Our history has often been sullied by such over reactions. After Pearl Harbor to our shame we rounded up American citizens of Japanese ancestry residing mostly in California and stuck them in barren relocation camps in the name of national security. Thieving neighbors were allowed to steal their property and the possessions they could not carry. Franklin Roosevelt approved the order and the Supreme Court upheld his right as Commander-In-Chief of the armed forces to issue it during time of war.
This of course was unnecessary as our belated apologies and meager restitution a half-century later made uncomfortably clear. In the then territory of Hawaii, where the wreckage of the Pacific fleet still smoldered , officials refused to follow California’s example with their own large Japanese American population. They picked up a few old men of known divided loyalty – mostly for their own safety -- and that was that.
From that act of courage, independent thinking and forbearance came more courage of the highest order. The 442 Regimental Combat Team, composed entirely of Japanese Americans primarily from Hawaii, came out of the European theater of World War II as the most highly decorated unit in U. S. military history. No sunshine soldiers these.
One the eve of the 10th anniversary of 9/11, when we will dedicate a towering memorial to the casualties of that dreadful day, we should also take stock of the self inflicted collateral damage that has since been done to our reputation and our liberties out of fear and in the name of dubious security.
The record is not pretty. The fallout from Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay and those unnamed CIA interrogation camps dotted about the globe now illuminate our repute in the world’s eyes more brightly than the Lamp of Liberty in New York harbor.
No less ugly is what we did to ourselves. We traded away a measure of liberty and a lot of privacy in return for massive surveillance programs. Sure we have pounced on an occasional collection of would be terrorists who mostly talked to impress each other. And, yes, there has been no repeat of acts of terror anywhere close to the scale of 9/11. But, deep down, we know that what we have lost is more precious than the precarious safety we perhaps have gained.
Ben Franklin said it best: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” He could have also added, "And they lack the courage to be free."
The Norwegians, not lacking in that courage, are on track to test this ancient sentiment of one of our wisest founders. We should follow their progress carefully. We might relearn something.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)