No to the death penalty
There hasn’t been an execution in New Hampshire since 1939. That should be proof positive that the death penalty is in no way a deterrent to violent crime, since New Hampshire consistently ranks in the top three “safest” states in the U.S.
Our death chamber was dismantled years ago, so what do we do if the legislature reinstates the death penalty? Is there still an agency somewhere that provides a portable electric chair? Or do we cut a deal with one of the other states that offers a choice: hanging, a menu of drugs, firing squad?
And what of the cost? Having a death penalty guarantees there will be a trial, and considerable expense for prosecution, defense, scientific testing, professional witnesses, court and personnel involvement. At a time when the legislature is so concerned about reducing expenses and balancing the budget, why would you deliberately adopt a program that involves so many financial unknowns?
Finally, and perhaps most important, there should be the consideration that killing a human being is killing a human being, even under the guise of “ serving justice”. In fact, there is no killing more premeditated than the death penalty carried out pursuant to state law, and no moral basis whatsoever for having to choose the most “humane” method of taking a person’s life.
Over the past 50 years, more than 200 innocent people have been freed from death rows nationwide — that’s one person for every eight people executed, which means, certainly, that many innocent people have died at the hands of the state. That statistic alone should be enough to put an end to any further discussion by our elected representatives.