What do you think? Is this a national disgrace, or what?Marvin Wilson, with an I.Q. of 61, is scheduled to be put to death in Texas on Tuesday. His execution would directly contradict the Supreme Court’s 2002 ruling in Atkins v. Virginia that “the mentally retarded should be categorically excluded from execution” because of “their disabilities in areas of reasoning, judgment and control of their impulses.” The court should accept Mr. Wilson’s case for review and end Texas’s illegal defiance of its explicit holding that the death penalty for the mentally retarded is unconstitutional.
Maybe it would be better to call it a Texas disgrace, since they are the most likely to partake in this travesty of justice.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
I was not familiar with this specific person, but speaking in general, I'd have to be shown that the murderer did not understand the difference between right and wrong at the time of the act--in other words, that he was insane. Conscience, though, is not a function of intelligence.
ReplyDeleteBut having looked at the details, I find that Wilson at least participated in the murder of someone who had snitched on him to the police about cocaine possession. This suggests that he was bright enough to understand killing the witness to a crime.
If we're going to have drug laws such as we currently have (we shouldn't), and if we're going to have a death penalty (with better standards of evidence and better provisions for the defense of the accused, we should), then this man meets the standard.
Letting him live won't bring back his victims.....
ReplyDeleteThat's an interesting headline, "The National Disgrace - Executing Humans". Yet, about 3,700 beating hearts are stopped daily and not a word from the likes of Mikeb. Excuse me if I fail to see the consistent rationale or moral consistency of gun controllers.
ReplyDeleteorlin sellers
Which 3700 beating hearts are you talking about?
DeleteAnd why does there have to be consistency anyway? This sounds like the silly swimming pool argument.
Mikeb asks, "And why does there have to be consistency anyway?"
DeleteThere doesn't have to be consistency, just like you don't have to have principles, morals, or character. Yet, as the saying goes, "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything."
The 3,700 beating hearts refer to the number of abortions per day. So to be fair, if consistency doesn't matter, stop a beating heart by abortion, neonaticide, an honor killing, or a massacre is all the same. You can pick and choose your principles by the day of the week.
orlin sellers
Orlin, I thought you were an individual rights guy. You wanna talk about consistency, why don't you tell us about your views on abortion and how they're consistent with all your other talk about government interference and individual rights.
DeleteIf you believe the fetus to be a separate human being from conception, then Orlin's position is consistent. You and I disagree with him on that, but he's not being sloppy in his argument.
DeleteThe death penalty is barbaric and useless. It doesn't deter crime (studies show a slight *increase* in comparable crimes in states with executions, just following those executions), they don't save money (they cost far more than life imprisonment), innocent lives have been lost or nearly lost (as evidenced by numerous DNA exonerations), and it is a way of countering violence with more violence without self-defense (something that any small child can tell you is what you shouldn't do when you are wronged). In short, the only thing it gives is a sense of violent retribution, which solves nothing at all for our society, and puts us in league with the few industrialized nations that practice it, like China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Are those really nations we want to be compared to?
ReplyDeleteThanks for explaining how you think, Oregonian. "Any small child can tell you..." First, that's because those small children have been indoctrinated by adults with an agenda. But more importantly, I don't take the word of a small child on how the world should be run.
DeleteWhat you apparently can't understand is that a person who murders another, the murderer has taken himself outside the pale.
The right purpose of a modern penal system is to reform criminals. Obviously, we don't do that very well, but tell me how it's even possible to reform a murderer. A thief can repay what he stole. Can a murderer do that?
The death penality doesnt deter. I would have to agree with that, since the death penality is too,,,,, easy, so to speak. You just go to sleep now. Make the execution fit the crime. Murder with a gun?, FIRING SQUAD! Murder by (insert crime here) execute by (insert method that matches here, see crime) and see how much of a deterent it is then.
DeleteThe firing squad ought to be 20 shooters that cant aim well either.
Capital punishment is per-meditated murder sanctioned by the state.
DeleteI think you mean PRE-meditated murder sanctioned by the state. Yes it is in a way. It is that way because the population wants it that way. The guy lost his right to breath air when denied someone else's right to do so and is no longer fit to live in any society, including prison.
ReplyDeleteMurder isn't manslaughter, which mean criminally responsible for a unintentional or negligent act. Premeditated is just that and punishable by the same.
In Texas, if you INTEND to kill us, WE will kill you back!