A note on the Amazon ads: I've chosen to display current events titles in the Amazon box. Unfortunately, Amazon appears to promote a disproportionate number of angry-left books. I have no power over it at this time. Rest assured, I'm still a conservative.
|
Sunday, January 27, 2002
Well, I usually read Ann Landers and Dear Abby daily for a good laugh. A vast majority of the people who write in for advice lack the common sense God gave most people, it's amusing, but it's also good that there's someone with a lot of horse sense available for the wisdom-challenged.
Ann and I disagree on some things. We disagree on whether or not homosexuality is "just the way some people are born." And she is much more dismissive of the people who believe that homosexuality is morally wrong than she should be.
In today's column, Ann prints a letter from two judges and a lawyer offering suggestions to ensure that defendants facing the death penalty have fair and competent representation, in addition to ample opportunities to present evidence that could exonerate them. I agree with most of the recommendations, the exception being the call to bar the execution of people who committed the crime while they were juveniles.
But in her response, Ann lies and begins to go off the stupid end. It's infuriating, lazy and inane.
Your letter is one of the most important that has ever appeared in this space. It could save lives.
I am strictly opposed to the death penalty, no matter how heinous the crime. Unfortunately, 10 or 20 years after an execution, a confession often emerges from a criminal who is conscience-stricken or terminally ill. Alas – too late. However, even those who favor the death penalty should support your recommendations. They are compassionate and sensible.
A confession often emerges 10 or 20 years after an execution? I'm writing a letter to Ann challenging her to name ONE time that's happened. She's got tons of resources, assistants and gophers. I want the name of ONE person who's been executed in the U.S. in the last 30 years who was innocent of the crime for which they were convicted.
The truth is she will not be able to come up with a case. If there was such a case, every time the death penalty was debated, opponents would bring up the name of "John Doe" who was wrongly executed by the state. Opponents don't have someone like that to point to, so instead they point to the people spent many years on death row and then were freed after new evidence came to light. While it is unfortunate that wrongful convictions occur, the fact that the person's innocence is discovered and they are freed is proof that our system of justice works. To paraphrase Winston Churchill: It's the worst system there is, except for all of the others.
10:56 AM
|
|
