Death penalty opponents want issue put to a vote
SALEM, Ore. (AP) - Death penalty opponents took their case to Oregon lawmakers Tuesday, imploring a state House committee to allow the public to vote on outlawing capital punishment.
The House Judiciary Committee took no action on the measure, which would ask voters in 2014 whether to amend the state constitution, making it illegal to execute anyone, including people already on death row.
"My plea today, as a citizen of Oregon, is do not kill in my name," said Aba Gayle of Silverton, whose 19-year-old daughter, Catherine Blount, was murdered in 1980. "And most importantly of all, do not tarnish the name of my beautiful daughter with another senseless killing."
Her daughter's killer, Douglas Mickey, is on death row in California.
Terri Hakim disagrees. She doesn't want to see any benefits for the father and son convicted of planting a bomb that killed her husband, Oregon State Police Senior Trooper Bill Hakim, at a Woodburn Bank in 2008.
Bruce and Joshua Turnidge should not be let into the general prison population, where they might teach bomb-making techniques and anti-police ideologies to other inmates who will eventually be freed, Hakim said.
"This resolution is not a benefit for the people of the State of Oregon," Hakim told lawmakers. "This is only enabling prisoners with more rights while taking them away from other victims."
Death penalty critics arrived at their position for a variety of reasons. Some are morally opposed to the government taking someone's life. Others say it costs too much, or that the risk of executing an innocent person is too high.
"There is one way I know of for sure to prevent the execution of an innocent person," said Jeff Ellis, a defense attorney and death penalty critic. "That is to replace the death penalty with life without parole."
The Department of Corrections doesn't know how much extra it costs to house inmates on death row, spokeswoman Elizabeth Craig said. The Office of Public Defense Services estimated in 2011 that it would save $2.6 million a year if death was not a possible sentence for aggravated murder.
Oregon has 37 people on death row. Two men have been executed since Oregon voters reinstated the death penalty in 1984, both of whom waived their right to appeal their case.
Gov. John Kitzhaber wrote a letter supporting a public vote on the death penalty, saying he's personally opposed to the death penalty and "Oregon has an expensive and unworkable system that fails to meet basic standards of justice."
"The hard truth is that in the (29) years since Oregonians reinstated the death penalty, it has only been carried out on two volunteers who waived their rights to appeal," Kitzhaber wrote.
Kitzhaber issued a reprieve for Gary Haugen, who was scheduled to be executed by lethal injection in December 2011. At the time, the governor called for a public vote on the issue. Haugen is appealing the reprieve, saying it's invalid because he never agreed to accept it.
Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.
Like voting matters anymore.
"The constitution is sacred and should never be amended"
-- Gun owners
About time, tired of keeping company with russians, china, arabs, were better than that, and we think it is more of a punishment to have to live life without possibility of being free among us, and the agony of reminding the guilty of action that led them to a cell as worthy punishment.
Does it really matter when rehab a governor who believes he is above our laws and does not have to ensure they are enforced...
Ha Ha first time Dragon came up with something good as a speako...governor rehab instead of we have!!!
@FreedomRocks He's not above them.  Go read our Constiution.  He is acting quite lawfully.
@brendan @FreedomRocks Not in good faith of the people that elected him though...he is acting like a dictator not a representative of the people that put him in office...
@FreedomRocks @brendan Well, that's the rub, we *don't* know if it's in good faith or not, that's why we want to VOTE on it, and see if he is or isn't acting in it.  36% of us haven't gotten to vote on this issue.  I'm 46 and have not yet had the chance to vote on this.  It's time to see.
Point to what exactly law he's breaking, or quit with the false accusations.  Remember, his powers aren't laws, they're Constitutional in nature.
When do we start to feel any sympathy for the victims...these people have really misplaced their sympathy and empathy to the wrong people...
@FreedomRocks Why is continuing to use a flawed system that has a good chance of taking innocent life equated with a lack of sympathy?
I have great sympathy for every innocent life taken, whether at the hands of a murderer or at the hands of the state.
@Festivus @FreedomRocks SO TRUE NO INNOCENT PERSON SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH EVER=AND I AM SPECKING IN GENERAL NOT SO MUCH THIS CASE BUT ALL CASE,S
@Festivus @FreedomRocks Hmm being it takes 20-30 years to get to the point of taking the life and now we have DNA testing not sure that is as valid an argument as it once was...
@Festivus Totally agree with that although I would not rule out eye witness completely. For example if I saw my cousin shoot my uncle then ya it is eye witness but its not "I saw some guy across the street at night without my glasses and that looks like him" testimony.
@FreedomRocks @Festivus That I would find to be a reasonable compromise.  Shadow of a doubt needs to be ironclad in capital cases.  Which to me would rule out eyewitness testimony completely.
I have no problem with life imprisonment either. Â As sad as a wrongful conviction is, it's at least reversible when the accused is still alive.
@FreedomRocks @Festivus We already have that.  The only time you get that is right when it's happening.  This is why I'm a liberal very much in favor of the 2nd Amendment.  I just simply believe the Death Penalty should be applied at the only one sure moment. (And implore people to do so)
@Festivus How hard would it be to change the law so that you can't get the death penalty for convictions purely on circumstantial evidence or where there is any doubt you did it?
http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2010/11/07/the_case_against_evidence/Â
and that includes physical evidence of any kind, which puts DNA as evidence in a murder trial at less than one out of seven incidents.Â
@FreedomRocks @Festivus You  have to have DNA to test before you can use it to prove guilt.  Rapes often leave a lot of it lying around.  Murders, not so much.
"A mere 13.5 percent of the murder cases reviewed actually had physical evidence that linked the suspect to the crime scene or victim." - See more at:
"%s"
Sounds like spoiled brats demanding their own way!Â
Oregon has voted on this issue, repeatedly stating that the majority want the death penalty, and they want it used!
@Freedom1267Â Then voting on it shouldn't be an issue, since you say "the majority want the death penalty". Â Should be an easy win for the proponents.
@Sundowner @Freedom1267 They're very, very, very afraid of that 36% that is 18 to 46 and hasn't voted on this yet.  I'd imagine a very large proportion of that demo is likely to be against it. (Young people tend to (but not always) vote more liberal.)
@Freedom1267Â
You have got to be one of the densest and most obtuse people I have ever met.
You claim I am ignorant, yet you fail to comprehend some very, very basic English, to wit: Convicted murders should not have the opportunity to murder innocent victims. This is accomplished with life without parole (and the backing of the law to mean it stays that way unless innocence is proven).  No pardons, no anything.  Prison -- for the rest of your life, period.
Just admit you want it for vengeance and be done with it.
@brendan
What is civilized about letting convicted murderers the opportunity to murder again?
What is civilized about letting more innocent victims die by the hands of known murderers?
You are not civilized, you are displaying liberal ignorance!
There may be one in a thousand wrongly convicted, but does that justify allowing the other 999 the opportunity to kill again? I don't think so!
Oregon should be using the death penalty every chance that it has and without hesitation!
@Freedom1267Â
Yes, let's go over that unwillingness to punish criminals:  I'm more than willing to shoot one if they place me or mine in danger.  I'm more than willing to pay for them to be punished; in fact, I am willing *to go out of my way to pay for it*.  I put my money where my mouth is.
I am civilized; it is a choice I make, you should look into it yourself.
I will not apologize for that. Feel free to be the barbarian: those are the ones we usually lock up...
I am not a Christian, I do not turn the other cheek. Â You screw up, you get punished.Â
 We only disagree on the *type* of punishment, not whether or not they should be punished.  Don't try to twist it otherwise, it's very poor argumentative form.
As a last note, if you're going to talk about ignorance, it's best to not screw up your grammar: "Your holier than thou mentality displays you ignorance!"
@brendanÂ
You are full of crap! Your holier than thou mentality displays you ignorance!
In our society today if you turn the other cheek you will get beat to death!
If you are unwilling to punish the criminals, don't expect then to go away any time soon!Â
@Freedom1267 @brendan Because we are civilized, even if they are not.  That is part of the price we pay to take the high road.
The moment it becomes vengeance, we as a society are no more moral than those we execute.
I'm not willing to lower our own humanity for a few dollars out of my pocket -- and I hate taxes, mind you.  And the moment someone gets found innocent, and gets to go free, it is worth every penny.  And it has happened, hundreds of times.
I wonder how willingly you'd walk to the execution chamber as an innocent man wrongly accused...
I have no problem with the death penalty, only at what point it is executed -- defensively for an immediate need.  There's one point in time you know as sure as anything can be -- like when you break into my house in the middle of the night and I drop you.  I'd much rather have life imprisonment, but also have every homeowner armed.  I daresay that'd be more of a deterrent, and that's when the death penalty works.
@brendanWhy should the taxpayers pay to support them for their lives when for less than a dollar a bullet could be spent and end the expense?
When the murderers can give their victims a second chance at life, then I would agree to give the murderers a second chance. But they can't, and I won't! I sure as hell wold not give them another chance to kill in freedom or in jail!
@Freedom1267 @Sundowner @brendan No need to.  Make life without parole mean exactly that.  Never getting out.  Ever.
@Sundowner@brendan
If all of the dumb bastards that want to do away with the death penalty or that refuse to utilize it would just step up and take responsibility for the repeat crimes that the convicted murderers commit perhaps it would not matter. But they won't. Nor can they replace the loses of the victims families. For those that allow a convicted murderer kill again deserve to be charged as an accessory to the crimes. I personally believe that those opposed to the death penalty are simple minded and weak!
@brendan Hey, if those who favor it so much could just utilize vigilante justice, it wouldn't be a factor.  Far as I'm concerned, until it can be proven that no one who's not guilty gets executed, I'd like to see a nationwide moratorium.  How someone can justify killing someone because they killed someone........
@Freedom1267So everyone ages 18 to 46 just doesn't get to vote on it. Â What a complete 'tard to think they shouldn't get a right to vote on it. Â I wonder how much of Oregon's population is in those age ranges that you just said don't matter. Â You sir, are an EXCEPTIONALLY selfish bastard.
I was 17 (and 6 weeks from being 18) the last time this was voted on.
Turns out in 2010, 36%% of Oregon's population was eligible to vote, and have not had a chance to vote on it. (Demographics cut off at 44, so the amount is even higher than stated for that 2 year segment).
Where in the world do you think it's right to discount over 1/3rd of the eligible voters?
What difference will another vote make? The majority want the death penalty, but then elect a governor who has unilateral moral issues with executing the law (no pun intended).
This has been voted on three different time and Oregonians have overwhelmingly voted to keep the death penalty. I don't think we need another vote to make sure the people still feel the same. My concern is that it will be a Vote-By -Mail election. I have honesty concerns with Secretary of State's office.
This comment has been deleted
Name calling? I'm not sure if you should be the spokesperson for those who have not had the chance to vote on this, maybe you should blame your parents if they will claim you.
I am very confident to outcome will be the same.
@MadMax64Â Then act confident and stop worrying about an election. Â Your'e going to win, right?
If ad hom was my *only* argument, I'd say you're right.  Fact is, you want to discount the votes of over 36%% of Oregon's voting population.  I'd be happy to take the name-calling back, if KATU'd let me say what I originally wanted to.  Let me explain that 36%% in some better, but dark terms:
11.4%% of voters disenfranchised.
That's how many voters would be be disenfranchised if someone were to discount every racial minority in Oregon.  Blacks, Asians, whatever...the *worst* racist wouldn't disenfranchise more than 11.4%% of Oregon's voters.  You want to disenfranchise more than 36%%.  My name-calling wasn't strong enough, stands, and I would GLADLY say it to your face in a public place and even on camera.  I will NOT be ashamed of calling you out for what you want to do.  It's horrendous, immoral, unethical and against the very principles this country was founded on.  The only other group you could swath away more of is if it was females.
You need to re-evaluate your principles, badly.
Spare the murderers and kill the babies. :(
Bring it on. But do it in a general election where the most people vote, not in an obscure election in March or April where only the schoolteachers and politically correct, professional liberals bother to go to the polls.
@hankhandsome If someone can't be arsed to vote, no matter which election it is (especially considering we all get them in the mail), they can GFT with a 2x4 sideways.  You don't vote, I don't give a bowel movement about your opinions.  I'd rather you vote against me than not vote.
You yourself imply the only smart people are that list you mentioned.  No excuse, ever, for not voting in any election when the ballot is delivered to your door.
*THAT* is the height of civic laziness and you get exactly what you deserve.
I'm still waiting for the revaluation of a provably innocent person having been executed, followed by the lawsuit in the $Billions. That will end this debate once and for all.
@ShallowEnder
http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Cameron_Todd_Willingham_Wrongfully_Convicted_and_Executed_in_Texas.php
Being Texas, the good governor what's-his-name suppressed the investigation.
"Bruce and Joshua Turnidge should not be let into the general prison population, where they might teach bomb-making techniques and anti-police ideologies to other inmates who will eventually be freed, Hakim said."
Ma'am, I seriously doubt they are any more anti-police than any of the other inmates.
And I would seriously like to see it put to a vote, and when the majority of Oregonians vote to keep the death penalty, that maybe our governor will get out of the way and allow the punishment to proceed.
I hope those who rally for the death penalty realize it costs A LOT more to put an inmate to death than it does to keep them in prison for the rest of their lives. I, for one, as a taxpayer would rather let them rot in a jail cell. Our taxes are high enough. Don't believe me>?? www.dpic.org
Eeeh, kinda. A 25 cent bullet is surely more cost effective than room and board for the rest of their miserable lives. Even if you were to get food from the same place as the Sally Strothers 'for a dime-a-day can feed little ibvcan, here' charities got theirs. What costs is the appeals proccesses. Do away with that and you've got yourself an economically viable soultion to capital crimes.
@UselessOpinion Be even cheaper if we did away with the whole trial thing too.  Do I need to list off the countries that already do this, or can you already see what you're espousing?
It's not worth killing an innocent person.
OTOH, need to make sure LWP is LWP, period.  At least if we make a mistake, we can reverse it.
Also, if a person confesses I have np with the DP.
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
The funny thing is, even if Oregonians vote anew to keep the death penalty it will not likely be applied to anyone or carried out again. The people's vote on issues like this only seem to matter if it agrees with the politics of the government in power at the time.Â
@Ifishsum How dare the governor exercise the powers expressly given to him by virtue of election to his position.
@Ifishsum That's because the people who WANT the DP are too lazy to change the constitution of Oregon to say otherwise.  We gave him the right to do that.  We can debate about if it's right or wrong, but the law clearly states the Gov's privs.  Don't want them to have that option, get off your lazy G. maximus and change it.
This comment has been deleted
@Dr. Rawdog Over 36% of Oregon's eligible voters have never gotten a chance to vote on this (including me).  I'm 46.
This comment has been deleted
@Dr. Rawdog @brendan Exactly.
The death penalty is only as expensive as we have made it. We wanted all those appeals to prevent the death of an innocent person and we wanted the most humane way of killing someone. As far as it not being a deterant anymore, I agree, but only because it takes a long time to put someone to death. If the appeal process only took 1 year, I am sure it would deter people.
@commonsense33 Seems to work in countries that move that fast, like in the Middle East.  Heck, they haven't had  a murder in decades, right?
@brendan Statistically speaking, I would venture to guess that the number of murders per capita is a helluva lot lower than those in the US. One statistic I was able to locate .85 per 100,000 in Saudi Arabia (2007 data) and 5.22 per 100,000 here in the US (2008 data). ( http://chartsbin.com/view/1454 )
@GeauxOSU @brendan What he's saying is that comparing the murder rates of two societies so fundamentally different from the US and Saudi Arabia, then attributing that difference to a single cause is unsupportable.
@GeauxOSUÂ @brendanÂ
Correlation != causality; what other factors might affect it?  One glaring one is the availability of firearms, I'd bet.
I can show correlation between breathing oxygen and drinking water -- every murderer did both of those, but they are not the cause.  Come to think of it, so did the victims.  Is this a ridiculous example?  Sure; it's only meant to illustrate the basic concept.
@brendan No offense but I don't understand your rationale. What does religion have to do with this?Â
@GeauxOSU @brendan Yes, and what other factors, such as state religion play into that?