at Somers Correctional Institute in Somers, Connecticut, says in his essay, Criminals Are Not Deterred by the Death Penalty, “It is the premeditated crime that society deems most reprehensible, yet this type of crime is least likely to deterred by the threat of capital punishment”. Even the lay person can understand the meaning of that simple statement even though it comes from a self confessed killer, it rings through loud and clear; death is not a deterrent to death. Proponents of capital punishment say that we are judged by a jury of our peers and that it is a sound democratic system of justice. Thirty-eight states in our country have death penalty laws in place at this time. Five states (Texas, Kansas Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexico) currently offer no choice of life without the possibility of parole. Juries in theses states are forced to go with the death penalty simply because there are no alternatives. This is a system that is democratic and just? I suggest a closer look at policies that allow for these kinds of loopholes. We need to level the playing field to where everyone has a fair chance, especially now that technology has advanced in the field of forensics and DNA testing. We can now take crime scene evidence and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt whether or not a suspect’s genetic material was a match or not, providing that the evidence was not either lost or tampered with. Every case should be reexamined using the DNA technology. If no genetic material is available then so be it. If there is even the remotest of possibilities, we need to check it out. The only problem with that is; inmates are being put to death faster than the court systems can re-open each case. How can we as a society sit back and tell our children we must kill people who kill people, so people who might kill will know killing is wrong. Yes I know that could was confusing but re-read the last sentence and think about it. It woul...
