Monday

Death Penalty


            Once convicted of a crime, people start to loose hope. This is especially true when statistically the odds are not in your favor. This could be due to race, geographical, or sex. For the case of David Keaton, this factor was race. Once released his brother says, “Growing up black in this state, you know, you really didn’t have a chance when it came to a crime. You know, they say that justice is blind, but justice really isn’t blind.” This shows how because of race, the specific race looses hope in the equality of the justice system. Race in a case, while is not supposed to be a factor, does impact a case decision in some instances.
            There is a statistic that 80% of people who have been executed was for the murder of a white victim. There were two studies conducted by the Death Penalty Information Center. These two studies concluded:

RACE OF DEFENDANTS EXECUTED IN THE U.S. SINCE 1976






BLACK: 393 (34.6%) 

HISPANIC: 78 (6.87%) 

WHITE: 643 (56.6%) 

OTHER: 22 (0.62%) 




RACE OF VICTIMS* SINCE 1976

 

BLACK: 239 (14.2%) 

HISPANIC: 82 (4.87%) 

WHITE: 1324 (78.67%) 

OTHER: 38 (1.96%)

           This shows while there might be more white victims, the number of white people executed does also exceed the number of black people executed, making the statistic sound more proportionate. This effect may cause people to misinterpret how skewed the results really are.  By no means am I saying there is no bias in race through the eyes of the blind justice system. Something to be said on why low-income people are more likely to be sentenced to death is these people may not be able to afford a proper attorney. Without proper representation the defendant may not have a chance of life without parole, instead of someone who has more money to afford a proper attorney.

Abortion


Looking at the two websites, NARAL-Pro-choice America and National Right to Life, I believe the website NARAL-Prochoice America is a better website. This is based on the layout of the website, because it is easier to get to the information. The information is laid out on the home screen of the website, making it very easy to access and see all the facts. The facts themselves, are much better on the website NARAL – Pro-choice because they use more court cases to support their argument. Their website is set up by describing the problem, the challenge, and the solution. This provides a lot of information on one page, whereas the other website uses pictures and very descriptive language. The NARAL-Pro-choice has influenced my decision because of how the information is set up. The information, being easy to follow, opened more doors to the information. The other website, did teach more about how procedures were performed. This had more of an emotional influence rather then a factual influence. The side currently seeming to win the debate is NARAL – Pro-choice. On their website they have a whole section devoted to success, with current events helping their fight for pro-choice. National Right to Life does not have a section similar to this leading the reader to believe their accomplishments are not as strong or they have not accomplished as much.
I am seventeen years old, and I agree a parent should have the right to know if their child is having this procedure performed. Any other surgical procedure requires the parents’ consent, so this should still abide by these rules. Parents should have the right to consent and should be notified until the child is eighteen years old, being that this legally makes their child an adult. There should be a requirement that the father is notified. The father is responsible for the baby as well, which is why the father should be notified. Whether the father should have a right to consent the procedure is a much more complicated process. I believe the father should be on board with the procedure, but should not be required to have sign off on the procedure. This is because the mother will be the one living with the child, while pregnant, but the father can continue their life, mostly unaffected.

Being pro-choice myself, I agree with Illinois position on abortion. The law “Illinois provides low-income women access to abortion,” is beneficial to woman who cannot financially perform the procedure. The fact this law is in place allows people to professionally get the procedure, who may not be allowed to get it otherwise unless they receive the money. There is one rule that should not exist and that is prohibiting some people from having insurance covering their procedure.  Removing this will help a mother cover the cost of the abortion, and not be financially in debt.

Wednesday

Final Death Penalty Post

Recently Governor Ryan, governor of Illinois, voted to abolish the death penalty. I do agree with that. Based on information we have read in class plus two additional articles we also read, Governor Ryan's speech and a newspaper article discussing the repeal of the death penalty in Illinois, the death penalty is an unjust way to punish a person for a crime.

In Governor Ryan's speech (the link to the speech is below), he stated that the death penalty in Illinois is "broken". The harm the death penalty has caused does not outweigh the justice in putting to death people who are one-hundred percent guilty. In the speech, Governor Ryan states, "I suppose the reason the death penalty has been the toughest is because it is so final. The only public policy that determines to lives and who dies." The death penalty is very controversial. The American public has leaned both ways, in favor of and against the death penalty. When putting a man to death, there is no going back, even if the person is ultimately found innocent. Abolishing the death penalty would eliminate putting to death people who defiantly commit heinous crimes, but it would also prevent an innocent man from being put to death. As Governor Ryan also points out, there is no fairness in the death sentence. "You are five times more likely to get a death sentence for first degree murder in the rural area of Illinois that you are in Cook County. Where is the just and fairness in that - where is the proportionality?" This shows how, based on geographical location, the use of the death penalty can be swayed. This is something that is not "proportionate," and a reason why the death penalty is unfair. Its use is subjective. Similar circumstances do not necessarily have similar outcomes. This is unjust and a reason why the death penalty should be abolished. Also, death row inmates often have little money and cannot afford an attorney who can properly represent them in their innocent plea. According to Governor Ryan again, "Thirty-three of the death row inmates were represented at trial by an attorney who had later been disbarred or at some point suspended from practicing law." Trials such as these are unfair. This is one of the main reasons why I believe the death penalty should be abolished. When your life is on the line, your attorney should be capable of supporting your case and proving your innocence. An ineffective attorney or one who doesn't have proper knowledge of the law, may be unable to accomplish that.

Many will argue without the death penalty people will commit murders and escape what should be due punishment for their crime. "Inmates like the serial killer John Wayne Gacy, whose guilt was never in question, were put to death and caused little controversy." This is the type of person, according to Illinois legislator McKay, who would "escape" death. However, he would still be punished for his crime by life in prison without parole. According to Michigan State University and Death Penalty Information Center, "...most states now have a sentence of life without parole. Prisoners who are given this sentence will never be released. Thus, the safety of society can be assured without using the death penalty." McKay would also like to put a dollar value on the cost of trying such cases. "These murder trials don't go away just because the death penalty won't be a sentencing option," McKay said. "With the death penalty off the table, there'll be even more trials. There'll be no incentive to plead guilty. I do not believe for one second that taking the death penalty off the table will save the Sate of Illinois any money whatsoever." I do not agree with the overall morality of placing a monetary value on peoples' lives. And as shown above, the subjective nature of the use of the death penalty, depending upon location, puts different values on life itself.

There needs to be a higher order in today's society. We are accustomed to war, terrorism, and disease. These things all take human lives. One person or a committee should not be held responsible for taking a man's life away, guilty or not guilty. In the case Top v. Dulles, a significant point was made to abolish the death penalty. In 1958, the Supreme Court decided in that case that the Eighth Amendment contained an "evolving standard of decency that marked the progress of a maturing society." Today's society is changing from what society once was. This is why abolishing the death penalty is appropriate now.

Sunday

Death Penalty


The aspects of the stages in a capital punishment case that are designed to protect the rights of the accused are the direct appeal, post-conviction review, federal habeas corpus, and the clemency process. I believe this system is sufficient enough to guarantee only the guilty are convicted. There are multiple steps for the defendant to appeal his decision and on top of that, there is the clemency process. The clemency process is the act of reducing the sentence or pardoning the persons crime if a governor, for a state offense, or a president, for a federal offense, sees fit. This could be because the person needs specialized medical care or the person may be innocent. Under all of the appeals that could happen and the clemency process I believe this system is sufficient enough to guarantee only the guilty are convicted.
The most humane method, I would say, is lethal injection. This is due to the reasoning that you are unconscious at first so the idea is you feel no pain. For all the other methods there is a lot of pain to the point where your eyes pop. For the firing squad the person must bleed out before they go into shock. Only if lethal injection is done properly is it the most humane way to give someone the death penalty.  Hanging should be considered cruel and unusual according to the 8th amendment because there is so much that can go wrong. All measurements need to be precise. Without precise measurements the result is the person is left hanging there for 45 minutes to suffer. For firing squad the person bleeds out and if the people miss the target of the heart the person bleeds out longer. Electrocution is torture. The person is usually cooked, and the process is repeated until the person is killed. The eyes pop and the skin turns red. The autopsy cannot even be done until after the body cools down because it is so hot from the electrocution. Gas chamber is also, as we know from the person nodding his head if he felt pain, painful. You are supposed to take deep breaths so you die quicker, but the result is most people try to hold their breath as a natural instinct. That is why when lethal injection is done properly it is the most humane because the person is unconscious before they are killed.


            While this comic is going against my view of lethal injection being the most humane way to kill someone, I would argue, in the picture they are also saying there is no humane way to execute someone. No matter the way you put someone to rest, at the end of the day the person will still be dead. This than would bring up the controversy if someone should be put to rest based on the crime he or she committed.

            After looking at the statistics of the murder rate it makes me wonder if the death penalty is actually effective. While Arizona, who does not use the death penalty, has a murder rate of 8.8 people, Louisiana, who does have the death penalty, has a murder rate of 11.8 people. With the other states that do not have the death penalty the murder rate numbers are generally low. To me there is no indication that having a death penalty reduces the murder rate. This could mean the death penalty is not viewed as a threat to murderers. Another conclusion, slightly obvious, is far more men are put on death row than women. Looking at California alone there are 17 women on death row compared to the men in California on death row, which is 685. This shows how there is not much equality between men and women, but also woman might commit fewer crimes than males do so it is hard to say for sure. In California though we do see women getting less sentences on death row, 685 men to 17 women clearly shows a bias.

            I think that the death penalty in Illinois was fair because committing these crimes shows there is a degree of cruelty. Armed robbery would be the only one I would disagree with for being a death row candidate. If an armed robbery is committed and no one is harmed there is no reason why he or she should be killed because of a robbery. Life sentence maybe, but death just seems really harsh for a penalty like that. A reason why there is no more death penalty in Illinois could be because before 1976, there were 348 people executed. After 1976, only 12 people have been executed. This drop, in executions, could be a reason why Illinois just decided to get rid of the death penalty.

            Since 1983 the number of people executed has gone up till today peaking in 1999, with 98 executions. The lowest in time period was in 1988 with 11 executions. I was not expecting for the amount of executions to go up over 27 years. The most shocking piece of evidence I read while looking at the various charts was the white defendant and black defendant cases. When the victim was black and the defendant was white only17 people were executed. When flipped, the victim was white and the defendant was black, 255 people were executed. This is shocking to me that race is that large of a factor when looking at interracial murders. I would not expect the results to be that biased.

            If Dexter, from the television show Dexter, should not be given the death penalty because of who he has killed. Dexter kills based on a set of morals, which now that I am typing this doesn’t say much. Watching Dexter, as the viewer we get this idea that he is doing these actions for good, and as the viewers we like Dexter is taking care of these people while still having a set of morals so innocent people do not get killed. If you look at Dexter though from the viewpoint of the justice system, while Dexter is doing a good job of killing these people who get away with murder, but he is still killing people. On top of Dexter killing these people he is enjoying killing in general. This is someone who on record should be put to death, but to me personally I would not like him to receive the death penalty since the people he kills are murderers.

Student Drug Testing


I do not believe students should be drug tested to participate in particular activity. What a person does in their spare time is their business. If students want to participate better in an activity they will not do drugs because they know that it will make them perform worse at their sport. I would say if schools wanted to decrease the amount of drugs used among athletes and other clubs they could have a mandatory drug safety class. This would allow for people to become aware of the dangers involved with using drugs, and also the effects drugs would have on their performance in a sport. Having classes instead of doing the drug tests is good because the informational classes will not be an invasion of privacy. Looking around on the Internet I found a website, below, which helps talk about the various drugs plus their effects once taken and long term. 

The Website with Drug Symptoms 

Source: https://causes-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/photos/WI/Fh/tk/gi/vf/JC/0S/YHJ.jpg

Another video I found about drug testing was a school, Linn State Technical College in Missouri, which mandated all of there incoming students to participate in a drug test after the first five to ten days of first semester. This mandatory drug test is invasive though because there is no evidence these students were using drugs. The video is below.


Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8eJ5aabhS8