A CALL FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE BEATH PENALITY IN THE USA

WHERAS all persons are sacred because they are created in the image of God, and both murder and the death penalty deny that sacredness.  We deplore criminal violence, and we condemn the lack of respect that killers express toward their victims.  But for that very reason it is also wrong for the state to conduct executions, which are a continuation of the violence.  God loves the offender as well as the victim, the outcast as well as the law abiding; God both condemns the evil and seeks to redeem the evildoer, calling to reconciliation the community and the evildoer,1 and

WHEREAS justice does not require an eye for an eye, nor a death for a death.  It does require severe punishment for the most grave crimes, but that requirement can be met by long-term imprisonment.  Executing the criminal does not bring back the victim.  Instead it often expresses an unjustifiable desire for revenge and an implicit denial that the criminal is also one of God’s children, and

WHEREAS the death penalty continues to be imposed unfairly, “There is strong evidence of racial discrimination in the application of the death penalty up to 1967, especially in the southern states… A study conducted by the Center for Studies in Criminology and Criminal Law at the University of Pennsylvania examined the outcome of 3,000 rape cases in 11 southern state from 1945 to 1965 and found that blacks (especially in cases with white victims) were far more likely to be sentenced to death than whites convicted of similar crimes.”2  “Other concerns include:  problems of poor defendants’ legal representation in capital trials; unfairness or inconsistency in death sentencing; and the rarity with which clemency has been exercised by executive authorities.”3

WHEREAS when the innocent are convicted, as sometimes happens in capital cases, the death penalty prevents correction of the mistake.  Courts and juries make mistakes and the death penalty cannot be reversed.  Sometimes those sentenced to death have been found years later to have been innocent.4

WHEREAS the death penalty has not been shown to be a deterrent.  A United Nations study published in 1980 found that:  “Despite much more advanced research efforts mounted to determine the deterrent value of the death penalty, no conclusive evidence has been obtained on its efficacy.”5  “In the past 25 years dozens of researchers have analyzed crime statistics for evidence that capital punishment affects the crime rate.  After reviewing these studies in 1976, the

United State Supreme Court found no conclusive evidence that the death penalty deters violent crime.”6

WHEREAS the death penalty is costly; it does not save money.  The issue of money is secondary, but it is important to note that it costs more to have a capital trial than to keep a person in prison for life.  “A 1982 study in New York, for example, calculated the cost of reinstating the death penalty there and concluded that the average capital trial and first stage of appeals would cost the taxpayer above $1.8 million, more that twice what it cost to keep a person in prison for life.”

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT LSM-USA condemn the current reinstatement of capital punishment and oppose its under any new old state or federal law, and call for an immediate end to planned executions throughout this country.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT we appeal to the governors of each state where an execution is pending to commute to life imprisonment without parole all capital cases within their jurisdiction and encourage life imprisonment with no parole if convicted of a capital crime with a deadly weapon.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT members of LSM-USA join Amnesty International in it’s efforts to abolish the death penalty.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be sent to Amnesty International-USA

Sponsored by Mart Olson and Shari Seifert, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX 77340

1.  Statement signed by religious leaders in Texas.

2.  Page 11, United States of America The Death Penalty – Amnesty International.

3.  Page 2, DP Briefing.

4.  Page 1, “Miscarriages of Justice in Potentially Capital Cases”, Hugo Adam Beday, Department of Philosophy, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155 and Michael L. Radelet, Department of Sociology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611

5.  p. 163, ibid.