More annoying things...

Capital punishment is in the news again, this time pertaining to Stanley "Tookie" Williams. If his sentence is commuted, he will spend the rest of his life behind bars without the possibility of parole.

Here's my position (one of the few times you will see me get political on this site): I am absolutely against life imprisonment, and I do believe in capital punishment. Here we have somebody who has been convicted of crimes so heinous that society has determined that not only does he offer no useful benefit to society, but is also a risk to its safety. The result of this determination is taxpayers now have to pay his room, food, utilities, recreation, medical and dental benefits (which I, a law abiding, tax paying citizen don't have), and other necessary living expenses. According to the Department of Justice, it costs $22,632 a year, or $62.01 a day to house one inmate (as of 2001, these are the latest calculated figures). So, let's assume no inflation, and use a general number of 500 "lifers" (there are far more than that) – If they all were incarcerated at the same time, and lived the same duration of 45 years behind bars (that's gotta be conservative what with all the excellent treatment), that would be $509,220,000. Now you and I both know these figures aren't entirely accurate, but the basic math doesn't lie. Let's give this money to charity or use it to establish work programs and housing solutions for our impoverished.

You can throw all the morality issues you want at me, but the bottom line is, these are people who have proven they do not want to live by the rules of society. You read about them reforming in prison – Of course they've reformed! That's because they finally have realized the consequences of their actions and the impending outcome. If we are not going to parole them, then why are we sustaining them? Capital punishment is only a deterrent if its threat is very real. I am not uncaring and uncompassionate, and I do believe in the sanctity of human life. I am not talking about "an eye for an eye" either. I simply maintain that if it has been determined that the risks of returning an individual to society are so high we have to keep them behind bars until they die, then we should get rid of them, not unlike any other thing which has outlived its usefulness.

Along those lines, I think our appeal process needs an overhaul as well. Our judicial system provides that we either convict or acquit someone based on all the available evidence in one trial. Great! BUT – should someone be found guilty, then we have the appeal process, which is conducted on a point by point basis, each with the possibility of escalating to the next higher court. Since each contested point is handled individually, prisoners on death row can be there for 24 years (see above article on Mr. Williams). I say that if convicted, the legal team of the defendant is allowed to make a summary appeal of all the points of contention. This can be escalated as necessary, but there should be a time limit on this. This process can be handled in no more than two years! Why does it take 24? I am sorry, there can't possibly be that much legal wrangling that has to be done at this point. C'mon, a couple of my friends out there are attorneys – fill me in! Educate me! Why? Stop wasting my tax money to keep Charles Manson alive!

Rant over. I am calm now. Please feel free to respond, and enjoy this picture of Kristin Bell of Veronica Mars fame.