Cruel
Arthur W. Machen's article (Opinion * Commentary, Aug. 9) essentially is a plea for abolition of the death penalty, citing John Grisham's novel "The Chamber" as one of his authorities. He also regards "cruel and unusual punishment" in keeping convicted murderers on death row.
The cruel and unusual punishment suffered by the victim's survivors, such as parents of a murdered child, is not protected by our Constitution. Murder victims are bodies under ground for families and friends to mourn, gone out of sight, almost irrelevant.
We have a live flesh and blood person, the murderer, to think about. Let's not get distracted.
Mr. Machen may find the convicted felon's living a life sentence with a tortured conscience is also cruel and unusual punishment.
All this is great in the realm of mythology. In my 48 years of experience in the practice of law, a good part of it involving criminal cases, I have never heard of a murderer suffering contrition for his crimes. The regret, of course, is having been caught.
There is no such thing as a life sentence, or even 10 life sentences without the possibility of release. There are always parole boards with injunction or otherwise to make more room for other criminals and, as a last resort, a humane governor.
An example is a case I was involved in, in which a capital sentence passed by two juries in separate cases was changed to life imprisonment by the then Gov. Theodore McKeldin.
One hoary argument Mr. Machen advances is the possible execution of an innocent party. In our society it is extremely remote, with all the safeguards we have and the energy and talents of defense, private or appointed attorneys, for such mistakes to occur.
How does that contrast with the "mistake" our government made in Vietnam resulting in the slaughter of 56,000 innocent Americans and millions of Vietnamese?
True, capital punishment as a penalty is full of flaws. Unevenly applied sentences give advantage to the well-heeled criminal to buy the most expensive legal talents and the most prolonged and intricate tactics of defense, etc.
But this is like abolishing democracy because it is full of defects. Of course, we must correct the faults and aberrations of capital ++ punishment, but to abolish it is to eliminate a tool that is made to protect our society and give it a sense that it is better protected than otherwise.
Seventy percent of crimes are committed by second offenders. An executed murder can hardly become a recidivist.
Maurice M. Bassan
Baltimore
Tobacco Harms
Your Aug. 2 editorial on divesting tobacco stocks from the state pension fund contrasts the positions of proponents, with whom you take issue, and opponents, with whom you side. The Tobacco Divestment Project agrees with the sentiments of both sides as its basis for supporting tobacco divestment.
The TDP and other pro-health advocates agree with Attorney General J. Joseph Curran, Jr. that profiting from tobacco addiction is just plain wrong. Maryland's investments in tobacco companies are an affront to the educators who strive to prevent tobacco addiction, to the families of the 1,100 tobacco victims who die each day in America and to the health practitioners who treat tobacco-induced illnesses.
We also agree with Joseph Adler, the state's personnel secretary, that the trustees' "job is to see that workers' retirement money is invested in safe, secure stocks."
The tobacco industry is under siege, facing class actions and criminal cases against its executives and even the possibility of bankruptcy. Food and Drug Administration regulation is likely; further restrictions on tobacco sales and use are a certainty. In this climate, how can a prudent fiduciary regard tobacco as a safe investment? In fact, tobacco will be a profitable investment only if Maryland's tobacco prevention and education programs fail.
Brad S. Krevor
Boston
The writer is executive director, Tobacco Control Resource Center.
Derry Report
The Sun really needs to be more discriminating when picking up wire reports. Witness the Aug. 14 Associated Press report which The Sun headlined, "Northern Ireland Protestants march in peace."
The AP reports that the annual Apprentice Boys Parade "triggered no reaction from Roman Catholics, 25 years after the same parade provoked riots." The parade itself in 1969 did not provoke riots.
The fact that it was allowed to pass through Nationalist neighborhoods while the "Apprentice Boys" hurled insults, bricks and petrol bombs, all under the supervision of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, is what provoked riots.
AP also reports that "Today, Catholics control Londonderry's council, which renamed the city Derry." The AP is correct in this, so don't Catholics control Derry's council?
The AP continues to use Londonderry in its dateline as well; would it continue to use Peking rather than Beijing or Leningrad as opposed to St. Petersburg?
Perhaps rather than focusing on the religious make-up of the city's council, AP should focus on the fact that this was a democratically elected council.
Twenty-five years ago, this was not the case, as only property owners were entitled to vote and individuals had as many as three votes depending on the amount of property owned.
The vast majority of news regarding the North of Ireland is disseminated by a London-based press which is restricted by British censorship laws.
The Sun needs to remain more vigilant of the obvious biases represented by some of their sources.
John P. McNichol
Linthicum Heights
Gunning It
The Mike Smith guest cartoon of Aug. 19 just goes to show me just how sarcastic a gun grabber can be.
If the National Rifle Association is all that powerful, how come we got stuck with the Brady Bill?
T. R. Waxter
Reisterstown
Administration Exports Pro-Abortion Ideology
In an article on population growth, Timothy B. Wheeler (Aug. 14) reported, "The Reagan administration also withdrew U.S. funding for international family planning programs because they supported some groups that performed abortion. The Bush administration continued the freeze on family planning . . ."
On these points, Mr. Wheeler simply repeated the mythology of pro-abortion advocacy groups.
A bit of research would have revealed that throughout the Reagan and Bush administrations the U.S. remained the largest donor nation to international population-control programs.
In 1992, the last year of the Bush administration, the U.S. spent $430 million on overseas population-control programs -- a figure nearly equal to the total combined funds provided by all other donor nations.
Under Presidents Reagan and Bush, U.S. funds were withdrawn only from specific organizations that performed and actively promoted abortion "as a method of family planning," and all such funds were re-programmed to other agencies for contraception programs.
This policy is consistent with the belief of the great majority of Americans that abortion should not be promoted as a method of birth or population control.
In contrast, the Clinton administration has launched a campaign to legitimate abortion as a method of population control.
The new policy was signaled by White House Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers on April 1, 1993, when she said that the administration regards abortion as "part of the overall approach to population control."
The following month, senior State Department official Tim Wirth expounded the policy in a detailed speech at the U.N., stating, "A government which is violating basic human rights should not hide behind the defense of sovereignty . . . Our position is to support reproductive choice, including access to safe abortion."
More recently, in a March 16, 1994, classified "action cable" to all overseas diplomatic posts, the State Department announced, "The United States believes that access to safe, legal and voluntary abortion is a fundamental right of all women," and called for "senior level diplomatic intervention" to garner support for the U.S. position at the September U.N. conference on population in Cairo.
The Clinton administration's abortion doctrine is on a collision course with the laws of most developing nations. About 95 U.N. member states -- including most of Africa and all of Latin America (except Cuba) -- have laws that prohibit abortions, except in narrowly defined circumstances.
The administration should drop its covert campaign to export its pro-abortion ideology to peoples whose cultures, religions and laws recognize the intrinsic rights of the human fetus.
ouglas Johnson
Washington, D.C.
The writer is the National Right to Life Committee's legislative director.