A Slow Death for the Death Penalty

The practical reasons you cite for supporting death penalty reform, wrongful convictions and high reversal rates, are compelling enough (“A Life-or-Death Reform,” editorial, Feb. 14). But aside from contradictory scriptural arguments (“an eye for an eye” versus “vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord”), there is also the moral and ethical question: How can the state denounce capital crime as abhorrent and simultaneously embrace murder in the role of executioner? Most other Western nations have long since answered that double-standard question--it can’t.

Norman W. Nielsen

Highland Park

*

The death penalty is an ugly issue that we often gloss over, yet one of such serious consequences that it should not disappear from our dialogue. The proposed Innocence Protection Act, introduced by Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), would provide for a more compassionate response in helping to ensure that those given such a grave sentence are truly guilty.

Yet the bill does not go far enough: It does not repeal the death penalty. There is a mountain of evidence that shows that the death penalty does not deter crime. It also costs us all an incredible amount of money to enforce, which is money that I would prefer to spend on education or prevention. But most important, are we any better than a criminal if we kill as well?

Renee Dake Wilson

West Hollywood