The effort to abolish capital punishment in the United States follows in large measure from the late 18th- and early 19th-century "anti-gallows" movement, which opposed public hangings. One of the earliest political leaders to call for ending executions, public or otherwise, was New Hampshire Gov. William Badger. This month marks the 175th anniversary of Badger's asking the New Hampshire Legislature to abolish capital punishment.
In his address, Badger compared the possible punishments for capital crime in New Hampshire relative to their effectiveness: solitary confinement in prison for life versus the death penalty.
"As expressed in the Constitution, 'the true design of all punishment is to reform and not to exterminate mankind,' " Badger said. "No one will attempt to controvert the principle that 'the prevention of crime is the sole end of punishment,' and 'every punishment which is not necessary for that purpose, is cruel and tyrannical.' If then the principle is admitted, that the sole end of punishment is the prevention of crime, two questions arise: How shall the offender be disposed of so as to prevent a repetition of the offense? And what punishment shall be most effectual in deterring others from its commission?"
In weighing the two possible solutions, Badger said, "The first question is readily answered. Perpetual solitary imprisonment is as effectual to prevent the repetition as death itself, and . . . it leaves the offender with all that space for repentance and time to make his peace with his God that He may see fit to extend it to him.
"The other is a more complicated one and not so readily answered. And, were the punishment of death as sure to follow the commission of crime as some other punishment, it would probably be the most effectual, as it is the heaviest punishment that the law inflicts; although many are of the opinion that the apprehension of solitary imprisonment and hard labor is as impressive and more terrible than death itself. But it is the certainty and not the severity of the punishment that prevents crime."
In the end, Badger concluded that in punishing capital offenders and protecting society, "The humanity of mankind revolts at the idea of taking the life of a fellow human being. And the result at the criminal tribunal is, that none are convicted unless the criminality is established beyond all doubt, adopting probably the maxim that 'it is better 10 guilty escape than one innocent suffer.' But when the punishment is imprisonment and hard labor, if the criminality is established beyond a reasonable doubt conviction follows, and few escape the merited punishment, confirming the correctness of the principles of certainty of punishment rather than its severity for the prevention of crimes, thereby destroying one of the principle sources of temptation, the hope of impunity."
The points Badger made in his 1834 address to New Hampshire lawmakers are relevant to the death penalty abolition effort today.
His comment on innocence is especially prescient, considering that the death penalty has no safeguards against mistaken convictions and executions.
One hundred thirty-three men and women have been exonerated from death rows since 1973; three men have been exonerated this year so far.
Governor Badger's words remind us of New Hampshire's historic role as a leader for human rights, and the wisdom and vision of the framers of our state's constitution who recognized "the true design of all punishment is to reform and not to exterminate mankind."
(Rep. Renny Cushing is a Democrat from Hampton.)
BOSTON (AP) -- Officials in New England's coastal areas…
NASHUA, N.H. (AP) -- William Smart, who was devastated…
BANGOR, Maine (AP) -- Two men are free on bail after…
FRANCESTOWN, N.H. (AP) -- A New Hampshire fire chief…
Comments
Cheaper for the taxpayer?
By Damkeeper - 06/11/2009 - 10:07 amAnd solitary confinement in prison for life is cheaper for the taxpayer than the death penalty? A few cents worth of electricity or a few injections of Sodium Pentathol is much cheaper. Even bringing the gallows back would be an improvement.
to vote
The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents
By dudleysharp - 06/10/2009 - 7:25 amRep. Cushing knows well that the 133 "exonerated" are no such thing. Possibly, 25 actually innocent death row inmates have been identified and released. That is 0.3% of the 8000 sentenced to death since 1972.
The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents
Dudley Sharp
Of all the government programs in the world, that put innocents at risk, is there one with a safer record and with greater protections than the US death penalty?
Unlikely.
Enhanced Due Process - No knowledgeable and honest party questions that the death penalty has the most extensive due process protections in US criminal law. Therefore, actual innocents are more likely to be sentenced to life imprisonment and more likely to die in prison serving under that sentence, that it is that an actual innocent will be executed. That is. logically, conclusive.
Enhanced Incapacitation - To state the blatantly clear, living murderers, in prison, after release or escape, are much more likely to harm and murder, again, than are executed murderers. Although an obvious truism, it is surprising how often folks overlook the enhanced incapacitation benefits of the death penalty over incarceration.
Enhanced Deterrence - 16 recent studies, inclusive of their defenses, find for death penalty deterrence. A surprise? No. Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life. Some believe that all studies with contrary findings negate those 16 studies. They don't. Studies which don't find for deterrence don't say no one is deterred, but that they couldn't measure those deterred.
What prospect of a negative outcome doesn't deter some? There isn't one.
Enhanced Fear - Some death penalty opponents argue against death penalty deterrence, stating that it's a harsher penalty to be locked up without any possibility of getting out. Reality paints a very different picture. What percentage of capital murderers seek a plea bargain to a death sentence? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment. What percentage of convicted capital murderers argue for execution in the penalty phase of their capital trial? Zero or close to it. They prefer long term imprisonment. What percentage of death row inmates waive their appeals and speed up the execution process? Nearly zero. They prefer long term imprisonment.
This is not, even remotely, in dispute.
What of that more rational group, the potential murderers who choose not to murder, is it likely that they, like most of us, fear death more than life?
Life is preferred over death. Death is feared more than life.
The False Promise - Part of the anti death penalty deception is that a life sentence, with no possibility of release, is a superior alternative to the death penalty. It's a lie. History tells us that lifers have many ways to get out: Pardon, commutation, escape, clerical error, change in the law, etc. There are few absolutes with sentencing. But, here are two: the legislature can lessen the sentences of current inmates, retroactively, and the executive branch can lessen any individual sentence, at any time. This has been, actively, pursued, for a number of years, in many states, because of the high cost of life sentences and/or geriatric care, found to be $60,000-$90,000 per year per inmate.
In choosing to end the death penalty, or in choosing not implement it, some have chosen to spare murderers at the cost of sacrificing more innocent lives.
copyright 2007-2009, Dudley Sharp
Permission for distribution of this document, in whole or in part, is approved with proper attributio
to vote
I wonder what this guy's
By Honest Abe - 06/10/2009 - 3:12 pmI wonder what this guy's opinion is regarding mass murders like George W. Bush.
to vote
Eliminating the death penality
By Honest Abe - 06/10/2009 - 5:53 amEliminating the death penality would be one way to cut the budget and safe money for the taxpayers. Thanks for the history lesson.
to vote