You people have lots of thoughts on the death penalty discussion! | Hour 2

Alright, so last hour we were talking about the botched execution of Krista Pike in Tennessee. They shot her up twice with some phenobarbital, and it didn't work. She was still breathing, and so they rushed her to the hospital. She's now in critical condition there. Not really sure why they're trying to save her life, because they were trying to kill her. So I'm not really clear on those protocols. Why would you, like, why? Like, I feel like there should be just a DNR, like, de facto, you know, like, just by default. There should be a DNR on somebody that you're executing. Not sure why they're trying to save her life or keeping her alive at this point, but that is the story. And so we've been discussing some of that and the death penalty and the ethics of that. And we had a call from Mike. And as Mike tends to do, he has inspired a lot of texts recently. From you people. And so I feel I was going to move on from this topic. Lord knows I've done the show prep, but I feel it would not be right if I just abandoned all of you people and your texts. So here we go. I've not read through these all because there's a lot of them. Usually I try to screen them, you know, to make sure that Anyway, I'll just say that I usually screen them during the breaks, but I have not been able to screen them all. So let's just get into it. Here's 980 number. I think that in situations where there's no doubt whatsoever, instead of taxpayers keeping them up for years, they should be marched out of the courthouse and hung in the town square. So there is, I will say there is, I remember talking to Monroe Whitesides, the late attorney passed away several years ago, but he used to be a regular here on WBT. I would interview him regularly for, you know, legal commentary and analysis and that sort of stuff. Great guy. And Monroe Whitesides, he told me the story of how he appeared on the Phil Donahue show. Remember that? And the show. And it was on the death penalty. And there was agreement between the pro-death penalty crowd and the anti-death penalty crowd about televising executions. The pro-death penalty crowd wanted to televise executions because that was the topic, should executions be televised. And the pro-death penalty crowd was in favor of doing so because they said it would act as a deterrent. It would send the message, right? People would see this. I don't want to die like that. So I'm not going to do these things, right? So that was their rationale for it. The anti-death penalty crowd, they were like, yes, we should televise these things. So this way nobody will support the death penalty because they'll see how barbaric it is. So it's just an, it's an ironic point of agreement. where both sides would favor televising this stuff, having it made public, rather than locked away in some prison facility where 20 people come in as witnesses and that's it, and then someone comes out and says, yes, it was done, that's it, but nobody gets to see it except for the official witnesses. So, I just thought that was interesting that there is a point of agreement, but for completely opposite reasons, um, Tony says, what I find absurd is that those who oppose the death penalty, predominantly Democrats are the same fools in favor of abortions, but it's all about the burden on the taxpayers. Right. Um, I don't know if this is Dick or Nancy, but, um, And yet the left has zero problem with the death penalty in the womb for a no doubt about it. 100% innocent human being, please people at least try to be consistent in your arguments. Um, Alan says, I wonder how many clients Mike, the lawyer has sent to the great beyond having died of old age while he laboriously argues their case for jaywalking. Incredible. I, yeah, I don't know. Um, That's the Ian says as much as I would prefer human monsters be eliminated. I wish I could have 100% guarantee. No innocence would be executed. Right. And, and therein lies my dilemma is that my fear is that innocent people get put to death. And I don't want to, because I value every human life. They all have value. However, you know, even in Christianity, there is the law. So, um, 828 number says I would challenge any and all Christians to show and explain to me what God's point of view on the death penalty, because I can tell you and show you Egypt, the walls of Jericho, Sodom and Gomorrah all had lives taking or taken because God said so. Remember Achan that hide the spoils of battle, his whole family and animals slain due to his sin. Yeah. I mean, there is, this is what I referenced this piece. in the last hour by Andrew Walker, a professor of Christian ethics. He cites Genesis 9.6, Romans 13.4, For he, government, is God's servant for your good, but if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain, for he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Western law has long relied upon the natural law foundations of Christianity to justify capital punishment. So there is a case to be made. Let's see, Kimberly... What is this? That's from August. Nevermind. That's a thumbs up. Okay. Right. Walt asks, how can you be anti-death penalty pro-abortion? Yes, that's been a, that's a, a classic name and of course, or a classic argument. And then the left will turn that around. Well, how can you be, you know, anti-abortion and pro-death penalty, which is like in their minds, that is a, that is a, a perfectly logical rejoinder. In their minds. They think that they totally turn the tables on the anti-death penalty, or sorry, the pro-death penalty, anti-abortion crowd. When you point out that you want to keep these death row inmates alive, spare them from the death penalty because you claim to value life, yet you are pro-abortion, they will then flip that and they'll say, aha, you have the same hypocrisy. same double standard, ignoring the fact that one of the dead in the analogy is an innocent, right? Like that's the, and so, and this gets to my dilemma, which is that I don't want innocent people murdered, right? I don't want them killed. They're innocent of any of these crimes of which they're accused. So, you know, existing or murdering somebody, whatever, like in the case of a unborn baby it's it's just existing um and in the case of you know the falsely accused falsely convicted so like that's that's my standard is i don't want innocent people murdered and when the left flips this and accuses the right of you know being uh hypocrites on this it's like yeah you're ignoring the fact that one of the dead actually went through a trial and was convicted, you know, on charges and did something heinous to warrant that penalty. 704 number says November 22nd, 1993, a jury in Monroe sentenced a man to death. He's still at central prison in Raleigh today, 33 years later, The woman he kidnapped from the Monroe Mall, raped and killed, still has seen no justice. Her name was Sherry Clark St. Germain. I don't know what this name here, Martin Richard, I don't know if that's the guy's name or the texter's name. And then Nurse Frank says, actually, I think listening to Mike's call is cruel and unusual punishment. The holidays will be here before you know it, and so now is the time to create precious and priceless family heirlooms that will last for generations. Take your old photos, slides, films, and tapes to create a video in Mint Hill. There, they'll turn those memories into the story of your lives, memories from past family events captured forever to pass down to future generations. Create-A-Video's skilled team will professionally transfer your family's stories onto easy-to-use USB drives or DVDs, That won't deteriorate over time like the old photos and tapes are doing right now. They will create a keepsake video that you can share and copy and keep forever. I can see it now. You're gathered around the holiday table with your loved ones watching all these memories and people of your lives. You're sharing laughs, maybe some tears, telling stories that make your family uniquely yours. Beat the holiday rush and get your memories in now. Go to createavideo.com or visit them in Mint Hill just off I-485. Your photos and videos are your life told through the eyes of everyone around you and all who came before you. And they will tell others to come who you are. Visit createavideo.com. On the text line, Tom says, I don't know for sure, but it has to at least be possible that six or eight bullets would be cheaper than all the drugs, especially a botched drug execution attempt. Yes. This is why states have brought back the electric chair. They've brought back a firing squad as an option. You get to choose, right? If you're on death row, you're facing execution. Some states allow you to choose these other forms. And this is also something that Charlie Cook mentioned at National Review when he was talking about how he wrestles with this question. And let me see here. He started off by saying, in recent years, the gap between what I think about the death penalty and versus how I behave when the death penalty is at stake, this gap has grown so dramatically that I have come to wonder if I'm just lying to myself out of a desire to feel virtuous or open-minded. I don't know if this is the result of me having kids, getting older, moving to the South, but whatever it is, My job is to tell people honestly what I think about political issues and what I honestly think about the death penalty now is that I'm profoundly annoyed by the people who are against it. Okay? So it's like, yeah, this is, he has this belief. And look, he says, I'm a liberal squish when it comes to the process. Like, you want a fair trial. Best, you know, the best defense. And, you know, you got to make your case. Like, all of that stuff. But when it comes to carrying out then the sentence, it's like, He looks around and he sees all these people who are anti-death penalty, which he has been. And he's like, ew, I don't have anything in common with these people. And in fact, I find them to be dishonest, unlikable, and chronically incapable of prioritizing the innocent. He also says they have invariably gone further than their brief demands and Opposing the death penalty does not require one to feel sorry for serial killers or to elevate them to victim status. They have cheated when making their case about the method. It is just too rich to see the people who have got execution methods limited to lethal injection and then reduced the availability and deficiency of those very drugs. This is the problem, is that we don't trust the left on this issue. And I know I'm generalizing the left. I know that I'm sure there are pro-death penalty people on the left. There may be a couple. I'm not sure. But this has traditionally been a position of the left. We don't trust you when it comes to criminal justice matters. You have proven yourself to be dishonest and a little bit too giddy when it comes to shutting down prisons and releasing all of the inmates. OK. And in this case, what he's talking about, where you restrict all forms of lethal or of executions. And you specifically say like, oh, this is the only method that you're allowed to use. And then you ban those drugs from being used. Right. You find all of these ways to prevent the death penalty from occurring. This is why we don't trust you that you're operating in good faith. And this I was kind of getting at this with Mike as well when it comes to the. when we were talking about how long it takes to actually execute somebody and then citing that duration, that long period of time, as the reason why it's too costly. Well, it's too costly because of the duration that y'all demanded, that the anti-death penalty crowd demanded, the activist crowd demanded, the lawyers demanded. Right. You guys constructed this timeline and now you cite the lengthy timeline as a reason why you can't possibly do these executions anymore. When that was the original goal was to prevent the executions. And the same thing goes for the methods, too. You got doctors, states that are like, oh, if there are any medical professionals that administer these execution drugs, then they're going to lose their licenses and such, right? So at every step along the way, you prevent the sentence from being carried out, which is why we don't believe any of the arguments that you make because they're all in service of ending executions. And that's not a defense of the executions. I'm pointing out sort of the the political machinations behind these efforts. And that's why states have gone back to the firing squad. All right, real quick. Every government number gets revised, right? Every projection gets walked back. Gold does not file corrections like GovCo. Revelation Gold Group helps families hold physical gold and silver, including in a tax-advantaged gold IRA. It's real, it's in your name, and 10 minutes tells you if your retirement account qualifies. If you want to learn more, go to calendarmetals.com. That's calendarmetals.com. There is a link in the podcast description. Or if you want to talk to somebody, you can call 888-465-3049. Let me jump over to the phone lines here and chat with Bruce. Hello, Bruce. Welcome to the program. How are you? I'm doing well and yourself? I'm doing well as well. What's up? I was a prosecutor in a country for a number of years that had the death penalty. And with the debate, we had a lot of discussions about whether we should continue the death penalty or not. The question that I'm really posing is, would you rather execute one innocent person or release three guilty people? Well, uh, I would reject the premise of the false dichotomy. I would, uh, because I don't think I have to release them. You could, you could keep them in prison. So if you're, if the question is, would I rather execute one innocent person. Um, and keep 30, uh, And not execute them. And not execute, but keep them in prison for the rest of their lives, right? All right. For me personally, yeah, I don't want, to me, the one innocent life is worth that. That's me. Now, I know that there are others who will say, you know, better to let, you know, one or better to let, you know, a hundred guilty go free than, you know, than punish one innocent. But I've always rejected that that analogy, because, again, like we don't have to let them go free. Right. We can we can still incarcerate them. So I agree 100 percent, 100 percent, because that is the the issue of, you know, there's been a lot of discussion about the the appeals process taking so long. Yeah. And the expense is because I don't believe that when you talk about taking somebody's life that you work on and you expedite this as quickly as possible. We've seen countless cases in this country where people have been on death row for 30 years and then they've been exonerated because there was a miscarriage of justice. I'm in my car, so I haven't heard all of your discussion, but I remember earlier on you indicated that it's almost an eye for an eye that if we take the life of somebody else, the penalty is we forfeit a life. Right, that's from the biblical text. Yes, yes. And I know that America has more of a punitive system rather than the European rehabilitative system. Yeah, how's that working out? Well, yeah, these things do work and they don't work. And I think that's the challenge that we face with. But if I'm going to execute somebody, it's not going to be beyond a reasonable doubt. If I'm taking somebody's life, it's got to be beyond all possible doubt. And if it's found out afterwards that I've executed, as I as the state have executed somebody who was innocent, whose life is going to get forfeit to pay for that? So I think that is a valid question to ask. There is no answer for it in our current system as to whose life then is forfeited for mistakenly putting somebody to death. I suspect the answer would be no one's right because they have government officials would have the immunity. The but the other the other standard that you raise is beyond all possible doubt. And that's just not a standard in our criminal justice system. Right. It's just beyond a reasonable doubt. And so maybe there should be a higher standard. of what you say beyond any possible doubt. That would make it very difficult, though, probably to carry out death sentences when you don't, because achieving that standard seems like it would be very difficult. And I'd like to make it as difficult as possible that before you take somebody's life, you've got to make it as difficult as possible. I've lived in the States now for 25 years, and I've seen not countless but a number of incidences where a prosecutor, for example, was pressurized into securing a guilty verdict and after retiring admitted that there was exculpatory evidence that he buried and concealed. And as a result, somebody ended up on death row for many years. And when he retired and admitted that there was a miscarriage of justice, the victim was released. Right. Now, you can't you can't unring a bell. Right. If somebody if somebody is incarcerated for 30 years, yes, you can let him out and you can compensate him for a miscarriage of justice. You can't fix it when you've executed somebody because of a mistake. Right. Or not even a mistake or I mean, corruption or, you know, railroading somebody for some other reason. Right. Like you because people do that and have done that. And this is why and this is why I've gone back and forth over the course of my life on support or opposition to the death penalty. And where I come down on it, me personally, is that. I don't trust the government. I just don't trust them to get this right because there are too many examples of them not getting it right. Um, in cases that aren't even death penalty cases, right now, maybe they, maybe they get more right when you compare death penalty cases versus non death penalty cases, because the, you know, maybe the, you know, if you're railroading somebody or you get blinders on as a, investigator or prosecutor and you start targeting this one person because you're totally convinced that they did it even though they didn't if the if the penalty is not death then maybe you're more likely to to go down that that blinded path right whereas if the death penalty is on the table maybe that acts as some sort of a restraint and it makes you question more than you would if the death penalty is not on the on. The table yeah You know, for many years as a prosecutor, I was very much pro the death penalty. But once I realized that these miscarriages of justices do take, the question that I had to ask myself was, would I rather have a larger number of people commuted to life imprisonment as opposed to the possibility of executing an individual who is innocent? There was only one answer for me, and since then I have been anti the death penalty. Yes, there are times when my blood runs hot and vengeance is out and I want to take revenge. And people always say to me, what happens if it was one of your family members who was brutally slaughtered by somebody? Would you be pro death penalty? That is a bad question to ask because essentially we're not at the lynch mob stage in this country anymore. And therefore, the decision for a death penalty must not be decided by blood or anger or retribution. It must be decided by society. Well, by law. Yeah, by evidence and the laws of evidence. Well, and essentially the laws are going to be a reflection of what people want. Yeah. And I'm not aware of there having been a referendum in the last 25 years as to where do most Americans sit in terms of the death penalty. The idea of this being publicized is just absolutely horrifying that we're going to have a TV program out now where you can go and watch people being executed. Yeah. To me, we... America has passed that. We've always said we hold ourselves to a much higher standard. And public executions and video executions and public stonings and things like that, America's not there. We've passed that. We're not publicly stoning. Stoning is a barbaric methodology there. So nobody's talking about that. No, but they used to hang people in the public square. That was a part of American history. That occurred all the. Time, right? But I think hanging and the lethal injection are both barbaric because we get hangings wrong. There have been numerous cases where the hangman has miscalculated the size of the neck and the weight, and they've actually pulled the guy's head right off. But there have also been others where he hasn't actually had his neck snapped and somebody's had to go down and hang on his legs to hasten the execution process. We put pets down mercilessly or mercifully and peacefully, and yet we don't seem to be able to do this when it comes to human beings. Now we can we again. So this gets so this gets to the point I was making about the people who have been anti-death penalty that have been constructing through lawsuits for the better part of 50 years now. They keep suing and they keep constraining the methods. They constrain the timelines or they elongate the timelines. Right. They. They built in all of these appeals. Then they cite the cost of those appeals as reasons not to do it. Then you also have the same people that are out there lobbying for decarceration, for commutation of sentences. And if you get a life sentence, that's not really life. It's just like 25 years. That's the problem over in Europe. I went over some of those stats. And it's like that's the problem is if somebody commits these heinous crimes that used to be punishable by death, that if you're going to say that they're going to go into prison for life, that should mean life. But in too many states, it does not. And that's why there's very little trust for the anti-death penalty activist crowd when it comes to these incarceration topics, because we don't believe that you actually want to put them in prison for the rest of their lives. We think that you actually want to let them out at some point. And some of these activists say that. They actually do say that. They want to close down the prisons. Well, I think it gets back to whether we've got a punitive system or whether we've got a rehabilitative system. If you're talking life and the. Accused— We do not have a rehabilitative system. No, we don't. We have a punitive system without any doubt about that. So now he gets to the age of, in his twenties, he's committed a heinous crime and he's sentenced to life and he has done 30 or 40 or 50 years in prison. And he's now reached the ripe old age of 80. What is the benefit of keeping him incarcerated? If his sentence is life in prison, then he finishes his life in prison. That's what that means. I know. I know. That's the law. That's just. But they have defined life as being a shorter sentence. No. Life means. Or they can let him out on parole. No. See, and that's the thing. Life means life. If you're going to sentence, that's the tradeoff. See, and this is what I mean. This is why there's no trust here is that if I'm going to say, okay, I will take the death penalty off the table as a potential sentence, right? And in exchange, life means life in prison. That means you die in prison. Then we get the shifting of the goalposts to what you just outlined, which is, okay, How about now when they're 80? Let's just let them out at age 80. Well, no, that's not just because the just sentence was life in prison in lieu of execution. So now you're moving the goalposts to say, okay, now we're going to let them out earlier than life in prison. They will get to taste freedom again, unlike their victims. Good point. But I know we have two standards here. We have some people who are sentenced to life imprisonment, and we have others who are sentenced to life imprisonment without the option of parole. So depending on the circumstances of the case... If you're actually intending him to live out the rest of his life, then you sentence him to life without the option of parole. Correct. In other words, the court is basically saying this person will be a threat to society for the rest of his natural life. Not necessarily. If the law is that. Life means life, right? Life in prison means life in prison. No possibility of parole. Then that's what is just. You robbed somebody of their life, and so now you pay for it with your own. And that doesn't mean we execute you. It means that you go away and you never come back out. So that is the punishment side of it, right? It's punitive, right? So that's what justice demands. I don't have a problem with that at all, with putting somebody away. Because even if you do sentence him to life imprisonment, there's nothing to stop him from continuing the research and the appeal process. Right. But if new evidence comes to the fore that there was a miscarriage of justice, the state can correct a mistake. Yeah. And those are his options for the rest of his natural life. Bruce, I appreciate the. Call, sir. Thanks so much. Thank you very much. All right, take care. Message from Beth's favorite Russ. I am 100% pro-death penalty and about 50% confident in government's ability to not screw it up. I have thought it through most of my adult life and don't get swayed by the extenuating circumstances. The penalty is for the crime, not who you are as an individual. I once saw a clip of a law professor saying, If you stick a fork in the electrical socket, it doesn't matter your personal story or your intentions. The consequences are the same. Kathy says, regarding the death penalty, I do not believe in it. I believe God one day will pass a judgment on those who kill others. Also, the cost of all the legal maneuvers that take place through the process of someone being sentenced to death and on death row and then carrying out the death penalty is exorbitant. What I'd like to see is stricter punishment for violent criminals, particularly murderers. Prisoners should not be allowed to have TV or makeup. Yeah, she's wearing, Krista Pike was wearing makeup, all of that. So no TV, no extra anything. Get meals, water, books, that's it. Right, and that's what we were kind of getting to, what I was getting to with Bruce there. It's like, it is not a rehabilitative thing. And if you want me to take the death penalty, off the table then life has to mean life no parole you die in jail all right that'll do it for this episode thank you so much for listening i could not do the show without your support and the support of the businesses that advertise on the podcast so if you'd like please support them too and tell them you heard it here you can also become a patron at my patreon page or go to the pete calendar show.com again thank you so much for listening and don't break anything while i'm gone