Summer Sale Extended! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Opinion
News Opinion

Make death penalty quicker, cheaper and more effective

Amnesty International's Frank Jannuzi wrote one of those letters that causes me to ask, "Where do I begin to answer?" ("Time to repeal Maryland's death penalty," Jan. 8).

In the second paragraph, he alludes to the fact that imposition of the death penalty is "extremely expensive," and it is; but the question is, why should that be? No matter which method is used to end the life of a heinous criminal, the "means" to accomplish that are actually inexpensive. How much do those chemicals cost, or that burst of electricity?

The imposition of the death penalty is extremely expensive because it allows for endless appeals at the expense of taxpayers, including the families of the victims! Many of these cases go on for so long that the heinousness of the crime is forgotten or the witnesses actually die! Legislators should be working, not to abolish the death penalty, but to find ways to make it more cost-effective! How about this? One trial, one appeal, then either acquittal, or execution. Now that would quite effectively and greatly reduce the costs. How expensive is it for the public to incarcerate for life a convicted murderer?

In the same paragraph, he resorts to the old mantra of death penalty opponents, that "it does not deter crime." That argument is specious and impossible to prove. How many times a day do "ordinary" law-abiding citizens become so angered, so enraged with someone, that they might murder them, only to relent because they understand the possible ramifications (loss of their own lives) of such acts? No one can say how many times this happens, but similarly, no one can seriously claim that it doesn't happen either. So, at least a part of the time, the reality of a looming death penalty deters murderous conduct!

The effectiveness of the death penalty is greatly compromised when it isn't used. There needs to be a "certainty" attached to it to make it effective, and that hasn't happened. One unarguable, incontestable and unmitigated fact about the death penalty is that it is a certain and complete cure for recidivism; deny that if you will, Mr. Jannuzi!

I am all for any effort to completely eliminate any doubt concerning the death penalty! DNA tests, certainly! Certification of "eye witness" accounts, once again, certainly! Whatever is required; but once it has been determined, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the assailant is guilty, "We the People" owe them their right to a speedy trial (and disposition) unencumbered by dragging the process out endlessly with appeal after appeal at taxpayer's expense.

One last note: Due to Mr. Jannuzi's position as deputy executive director of Amnesty International, I believe his commentary to be colored more by his ideology than common sense!

Robert Di Stefano, Abingdon

The writer is a retired major with the Baltimore City Police Department.

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Don't lock up children forever

    Don't lock up children forever

    Sen. James Brochin and Baltimore County State's Attorney Scott Shellenberger recently asked whether Maryland would break its promises to victims' families by eliminating life-without-parole sentences for youth under 18. The answer: No ("Will Maryland go back on its word?" March 18).

  • Bring back the death penalty in Md.

    Bring back the death penalty in Md.

    Baltimore's very own "Public Enemy No. 1" has been sentenced to life plus 240 years for a double murder ("Killer gets life plus 240 years, flips off top prosecutor," March 24).

  • Baltimore County is still in the dark ages on the death penalty

    Baltimore County is still in the dark ages on the death penalty

    Some years ago I took a course during which the subject of racist juries in Baltimore County was discussed. I had believed that we had come a long way from those Neanderthal days until I read the op-ed by State's Attorney Scott Shellenberger and professor Richard Vatz in which they attempt to make...

  • Choose life and mercy — even for heinous crimes

    Choose life and mercy — even for heinous crimes

    While Baltimore County State's Attorney Scott Shellenberger and Towson University professor Richard Vatz have outlined many secular reasons for reinstating the death penalty ("Maryland should reinstate the death penalty," Jan. 6), I suggest that we let dead dogs lie and that we let the death penalty...

  • Shellenberger and Vatz make a weak case for the death penalty

    Shellenberger and Vatz make a weak case for the death penalty

    Baltimore County State's Attorney Scott Shellenberger and Towson University professor Richard Vatz present the oft-heard argument in favor of reinstating capital punishment in Maryland ("Maryland should reinstate the death penalty," Jan. 6). They do not, however, present a compelling argument because...

  • O'Malley overrode the public's will on the death penalty

    O'Malley overrode the public's will on the death penalty

    Good article regarding reinstating capital punishment in our state ("Maryland should reinstate the death penalty," Jan. 6). I agree that it was a big mistake ending it. I feel that the majority want to have the death penalty option, but Gov. Martin O'Malley has his own agenda, and the public be...

  • Killing each other won't make us safer

    Killing each other won't make us safer

    Reading Scott Shellenberger's and Richard E. Vatz's pleas for a reinstatement of the death penalty in Maryland reminds me of a proverbial ditty my mother was fond of during my childhood ("Maryland should reinstate the death penalty," Jan. 6).

  • The death penalty is dead; let's move on

    The death penalty is dead; let's move on

    Each one of the arguments raised in Scott Shellenberger and Richard E. Vatz's recent op-ed calling for reinstating the death penalty in Maryland was considered during the debate on capital punishment ("Maryland should reinstate the death penalty," Jan. 6).

Comments
Loading
68°