From: Peter Kahrmann

To: Multiple recipients of list

Subject: Re: The Pro-death penalty argument (fwd)

X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0 -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas

X-Comment: The Transnational Radical Party List

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Date: Sun, 22 Jan 1995 06:39:15 -0500 (EST)

From: Peter Kahrmann

To: transnat@agora.stm.it

Cc: Multiple recipients of list

Subject: Re: The Pro-death penalty argument

Those of us who oppose the death penalty need to give a nod of

appreciation to Daniel A. Dorry, Esq. Although Mr. Dorry is, sadly, a

proponent of a system that does not work, his integrity in engaging in a

healthy discussion on the subject is, indeed, admirable.

Now - Mr. Dorry at one point indicated that some of us who oppose

the death penalty need to remember that "crime is for real." Let me say

this about that (as the saying goes): I am a former board member of the

NYC Chapter of Victims for Victims, an organization committed to working

with victims of crime. And believe me, I am a victim, and survivor, of

violent crime. In 1984 I was held up on the streets of Brooklyn, shot in

the head at point blank range, and now live with a bullet lodged in the

frontal lobe of my brain as a result. No one, and I mean no one, has to

tell me about the brutality of crime.

Mr. Dorry says he has heard no convincing argument that would

lead him to believe that the death penalty is NOT a deterrent. First of

all, we tend to forget that the human mind capable of inflicting the

kind of brutality that was inflicted on me is in a dangerous and

unhealthy place. A place, more like than not, that exists in a world

where the threat to life is a palpable, daily presence. So for the

government to say, if you do this, we'll kill you, the response will be:

fine, then I'll off 10 of you. It's kind of like the arms race if you

think about it.

There is also this danger inherent in the application of the

death penalty. We will and have executed innocent people. In this century

alone the U.S. has executed 23 people - that we know about - later proven

innocent of the crimes they were executed for. Eight were executed in NY. Since this country was founded, we have executed 350 people with the approving nod

of the government.

Now keep in mind, we are wrong to aim anger at Mr. Dorry for his

views. He, like most, is tired and worn from watching an American legal

system that fails miserably in its attempt to keep Americans safe.

I have a bone to pick with both sides of the death penalty

debate, and I pick this bone gently. The debate, by its nature,

draws the attention of the public, as many in the public buy into the

dangerous and false equation that being pro death penalty means you are

tough on crime and anti death penalty means you're soft on crime.

In a word - bull (sorry about the eloquence).

The desire for the death penalty is certainly understandable. But the

deabte itself distracts us from real steps that could be taken in

addressing violence. If we are to really be serious in our response to a

society addicted to violence, try these measures on.

1) If the man who shot me had been arrested one of the charges

would be attempted murder. Question: Why should the sentence for

attempted murder be less than the sentence for murder? Because the bullet

hit the frontal lobe? Because the doctors were good? Because the

emergency service units responded quickly? This should translate into

the perp doing less time?

2) Three people see a man fling a woman to the ground and start

to rape her. They stop him. Attempteds rape is the charge. Excuse me, he

does less time?

3) And - do not send non-violent criminals to the same places of

incarceration that you send physically violent ones - you're mixing the

flu with cancer.

Anyway - some food for thought. By the way, Mr. Dorry, I think it

is a healthy thing that you are in this debate and I wish you well. One

thought: since you are a proponent of the death penalty, you ahve

abovioulsy been able to come to terms with the fact we will execute

innocent people from time to time. I am curious as to how you square that

with your conscience. I have heard some propoenents say that the

occassion execution of an innocent human being is part of the price we

pay. But how do you explain that to the perons family? To their parents,

spouse, to their children? What would your words be to such a family? I

ask this not out of anger, but out of the awareness that the death

penalty is serious business, and the proponents of the death penalty

ought to have an answer for the questions I've just asked you.

Always peace,

Peter S. Kahrmann