DEATH PENALTY REPEAL

ISSUES

Education Funding

Environment

Campaign Finance Reform

Healthy Families

Lower Electric Rates

Death Penalty repeal

Inheritance Tax Repeal

Letters to the Editor

News & Opinions

Home   

    I support repeal of the death penalty on the principle that governments, whose justice is not always perfect, should not execute people to teach that killing is wrong,  and since life imprisonment is a just (and usually less costly) alternative for the worst murderers

Speech on the NH Senate floor by Sen. Clifton Below in favor of HB 1548, to abolish the death penalty,  May 18, 2000.

Thank you Madame President.

We all know that taking the life of another human being, homicide, is, as a rule, fundamentally wrong and evil.  “Thou shall not kill” is the sixth commandment.  Most of us do recognize an exception to this rule for self defense.  It is no crime to kill in defense of one’s own life or that of another innocent person.  Perhaps the most difficult and heroic of acts is to face death in combat to defend one’s nation, freedom and democracy.  Today we contemplate another possible exception: the death penalty, a form of state sanctioned premeditated homicide, made legal by an act of this General Court.

Part I, Art. 18 of our N. H. Constitution says, “all penalties ought to be proportioned to the nature of the offense.”  The question today is do we believe that the penalty for the worst murders should be death by execution or life imprisonment without any possibility of parole.

In truth, we all seek to do the right thing.  Nothing about this issue is easy.  While some see this choice clearly, without ambivalence, most of us are conflicted.  I have felt the anger and outrage of one who has seen the precious life of another extinguished by senseless homicide.  I have felt such rage, such a passion to see evil brought to justice, that if given the chance, I thought I could volunteer to be the executioner. 

I have struggled to reconcile such an urge for retribution with my own core values and beliefs: that human life is sacred; that when possible, we should choose life over death, good over evil, the possibility of redemption over destruction, of healing over revenge; love over hate.

Why should we vote to abolish the death penalty today?  Can it make sense in a civilized society, for the state to execute – to commit homicide - to kill – in order to teach that killing is wrong?  Why would we do this?  Article 18 of our Constitution begins by stating that “all penalties ought to be proportioned to the nature of the offense” and concludes that “the true design of all punishments [is] to reform, not to exterminate…”  Now I suppose that if the threat of the death penalty were to deter murders, there might be an argument that its presence in law reforms society, if not the individual criminal, and as such is a form of self defense.  However, there is a complete lack of any such empirical evidence to indicate any deterrent effect.

Besides, it is probably safe to assume that murderers simply do not think like us, like normal rational people.  They must either think they will not be caught or do not care or think about consequences at the passionate moment in which they kill.  Deliberate consideration of the laws and their penalties, weighing life imprisonment versus lethal injection, just does not happen by those who murder. 

We do have another essential task to consider: to assure that society is protected from ever again being victimized by those who commit the most heinous of murders.  In this “live free or die” state, we can achieve this goal by saying that for those who are guilty of the worst murders, we will lock them up and throw away the key until the day they die.  They will be denied their freedom for the rest of their natural lives with life imprisonment without any possibility of parole.   We can secure our safety, our self defense, without execution.

Part II, Article 83 of our Constitution makes it a duty of our office, as legislators, to [quote] “inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence …among the people.”  Inculcate – meaning to impress upon the mind by persistent urging – the principle of humanity – civilizing, refining; having what are considered the best qualities of humankind: tenderness, kindness, mercy, compassion – and we are to inculcate the principle of general – or widespread – benevolence – meaning any inclination to do good; goodwill; charity.  Thus, it is our sworn duty, as leaders of this body politic, to foster the best qualities and the most potential for good in the people of our state.

These constitutional principles point to a very basic problem with the death penalty: it denies the possibility of redemption and reform.  No matter how great the sin, or how evil the crime, who are we to deny that through God’s love, a human spirit might be redeemed, changed and transformed; that true regret and remorse might lead to repentance, atonement, even some healing; that the best qualities of humanity might be more fully realized?  Who are we to deny such a possibility?

Two thousand years ago, Jesus said that though “you have heard an ‘Eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,’  I tell you that you should not set yourself against those who wrong you; … that although you have been told ‘Love your neighbor, hate your enemy,’  I tell you: love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you.”[1]  Jesus espoused the dignity and worth, the potential for redemption and good, in every human being.  Who are we to deny it?

Two hundred years ago, John Newton wrote the words: “Amazing grace, how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me, I once was lost, but now am found; was blind, but now I  see.”  John Newton, that lost and blind wretch of a soul, was a slave trader.  He plied the coast of Africa, purchasing slaves by the handful, shackling them below deck in terrible deprivation for months at a time, while he tried to fill his hold with human lives.  By his own account, scores of slaves, scores of innocent men, women and children, died and were buried at sea, unceremoniously tossed overboard, while in his custody as he commanded slave trading ships in the 1750s.  In another time and place, in another jurisdiction, John Newton might have been found guilty of capital murder and subjected to the death penalty for his horrific crimes against humanity, for the deaths that he was directly responsible for. 

Instead, by the amazing grace of God he saw the light, repented, was redeemed and found.   Instead, John Newton became an eloquent and influential leader of the anti-slavery movement that lead directly to the abolition of slave trade under English law – and he gave us the hymn, Amazing Grace.  Who are we to deny the possibility of redemption, true change and healing?

Two years ago the State of Texas executed Karla Faye Tucker who had brutally murdered Deborah Thornton with a pick ax.  During her fifteen years on death row she underwent a religious conversion “that, according to people who knew her,” was sincere and “redirected her life” in prison to serving “God and helping others.”[2]   She expressed regret for her crime and apologized to the relatives of her victims “even as she was strapped to the gurney” for her lethal injection. 

In an unusual turn of events the victim’s brother, Ron Carlson, became the first known victim’s family member to witness an execution of behalf of a murderer.  Ron originally supported Karla’s death sentence, telling prosecutors, “I think they got what they deserved.”  After struggling for years with his loss and pain, Ron ultimately forgave Karla and worked hard to commute her death sentence.  In the publication, Not in Our Name, that you all received from Murder Victims Families for Reconciliation, Ron says: “The world is not a better place because the State of Texas killed the murderer of my only sibling – my sister, Deborah, who had raised me after our mother died – I stood with her as one of her witnesses as she was executed.  I was there to stand up for the Lord, for the strength of his love.  Karla and I had both done a lot of wrong in our lives.  We had both turned to drugs to heal our pain; we had both hurt a lot of people.  But the love of Jesus Christ transformed us.  We were able to forgive ourselves and each other.  ‘I love you Ronnie,’ was one of the last things Karla said. I still carry that love with me.”

Who are we to deny, through execution, the possibility of redemption?  Who are we, to foreclose, through the death penalty, “the prospect of genuine moral change?”²

We have been 61 years without an execution in New Hampshire.  We  do not need the death penalty in New Hampshire.   The eyes of the nation and world are upon us.  Let us set an example and become the first legislature in this nation since the ‘70s to vote to abolish the death penalty as we enter a new millennium, when virtually all civilized and democratic nations, save ours, have abolished the death penalty; and most such nations will not even extradite accused murderers to states where they might face execution. 

Our desire for justice, retribution, and even revenge comes to us naturally.  But why let murderers debase our values and diminish our love for life?  Why allow murderers to make us participants in perpetuating cycles of violence and revenge.  Why drag all of us down by placing the blood of unnecessary killing on all of our hands?

The death penalty does not advance the cause of justice.  It does not deter.  It is morally wrong; and, incidentally, it is a serious waste of the taxpayer’s money.  In case you haven’t heard, each death penalty that we as a state seek to impose is likely to cost all of us on the order of 1 to 2 million dollars more than the cost to impose and carry out a sentence of life imprisonment.  I can think of a lot better uses for such money, especially if our goal is to reduce the incidence of crime, violence, and victimization; and instead, increase the peace.

In conclusion, I urge you who are in doubt about whether to abolish the death penalty, to yield your doubt on this question to those who strongly believe that it is wrong in a democracy to place all of us, as citizens of this state, as a body politic, in the role of executioner and premeditated killer.  Please yield your doubt in favor of life, humanity and general benevolence.

Yield your vote now in favor of the power of love, the strength of compassion, and civility, and the possibilities, yes, the possibilities, of redemption and reform, forgiveness and healing. 

Thank you.

[Bill passed the Senate, 14 to 10, after passing the House, 191 to 163, only to be vetoed   by the Governor.  When the House voted to override the veto on 6/27/00, the margin of support for repeal actually increased to 194 to 148, a 57% majority, but short of the 2/3 needed to pass.]