Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (July 3, 1997)
hursday • July 3, 1997 Dan Cone Columnist, Sophomore economia major C sell. IllN' elcome to Texas, leader in execu tions.” This may never make it itothe state travel fiide, but it would fit icely. No other late in the nation secutes more in- ividuals than the late of Texas. IWenty-four idividuals have icen executed in has, and there eld more ■"jllaned for the (jj, lonthof July. The at( ingle-year record frul Jexecutions al- tadyhas been Lillroken, and the ill rend is toward im venmore state- ai sanctioned mur- first iersThis trend must raise ques- ionsover the va- tli! ityand effec- iveness the death penalty in taerican society. This year, fas has killed more prisoners than the coun tries of Saudi Ara bia, Iran and Syria combined. The fact that all three countries operate under a system of govern ment dictated by Muslim law makes their treatment of felons more civil than the de mocratic system of the United States. The W^plications of capital punishment have been ignored by the American justice system. This implies that either the religious utehas not put enough pressure on the gov- mment to change, or the separation of and state has prevented the topic iombeing addressed properly. Other moral issues have been ignored in ^implementation of the death penalty. Ibefinality of the punishment means that in leimperfect system of justice in the U.S., innocent people will die. Some might justify iiisby saying the appeals process is de fer this inevitability, but even that is ia#ota perfect system. The actual carrying out ec ifthe execution is another barbaric aspect debate. The protection from cruel and unusual tfc punishment is violated by the murder itself. Although Texas uses lethal injection, the least painful method used, many other [mediates use methods that inflict unnecessary Jain. The psychological abuses suffered in be final hours before an execution also can . Jeconsidered cruel. Even when the prison- 11; Jtmay be prepared for the awaiting fate, icreis no way to be certain when the actu- ilevent may occur. Last-minute appeals nd stays of execution mean that some may repare to die many times before they are ctually killed. iit \f. r^k t "rt 506: Graphic: Brad Graeber ai- [his The economic implications of capital pun ishment have proven it to be a disproportion- al drain on government resources. The U.S. General Accounting Office re ports that executing a prisoner costs 42 percent more than imprisoning the indi vidual for life. In Florida, a state also known for its use of the death penalty, each execution cost an average of $3.2 million, a rate six times higher than life imprison ment in that state. In a nation where 7.6 million school-age children live in poverty, there are better uses for the money gener ated for trying, appealing and carrying out capital punishment cases. One of the major goals of government is to properly distribute the money it collects through taxes in a way that proves beneficial to society. The U.S. is the only Western country to still use the death penalty as a form of pun ishment. The reasons government cite for executing criminals are primarily deterrence and retribution. To murder a criminal as retribution for crimes is no excuse for denying others, es pecially disadvantaged children, from bene fits that will help improve social standards. With the majority of individuals on death row being minorities, there also is a need to educate those who are at high risk for end ing up in jail: the underprivileged youths growing up in poverty. The deterrence method is flawed because The Battalion Death of a Texan )tdt6 executions represent b&d means of punishment it requires people to rationally balance out the benefits of committing a crime punish able by death with the penalty associated with the crime. Any person who legitimately considers murdering someone for any rea son is by no means acting in a rational man ner — quite the opposite is true. The deterrence aspect also falls short due to the time factor that the appeals process calls. For death to be a viable deterrence, it must be carried out quickly — something that is far from the truth in the appeals process of capital crimes. The retribution aspect of the death penalty doesn’t work well either. Any form of punish ment is retribution, and saying that execution is the only proper sentence for committing a crime is to discount other forms of punish ment. Retribution requires that society will be better off by the killing of the individual. Plac ing criminals in jail for life, and not paroling those offenders will fulfill the aspects of retri bution for crimes. The execution of a human being as a means of punishment for crimes has be come an ineffective means to prevent crime. Capital punishment has become a burden upon the government’s budget, causing a deficiency in the total well-being of the public. Executions should be deemed a barbaric means of controlling crime in so ciety today. There is no place for capital punishment in a civilized society, and it must be abolished. D American public accepts low-end of societal stick Opinion Editor James Francis Junior English major riniployee: “Wel- ri come to McDon- M Juki’s, how may I take your order?” Customer: ‘Td like a Big Mac with a super sized order of french fries and a small diet Coke, please.” Employee: “Your total comes to $4.35, please drive to the second window.” This might seem like an or dinary conversation at one of America’s best-selling fast-food restaurants, but what happens next is an occurrence everyone has experienced at least once in a lifetime. The customer gets the order and drives from the restaurant. At a stoplight, only a few blocks from home, the individual de cides to snack on a few french fries and check to make sure everything was placed into the bag. Sure enough, the order must have been crisscrossed with someone else’s, and the unlucky customer is stuck with an order of chicken nuggets, an apple pie and a large Dr. Pepper. But the answer and sigh of frus tration is always the same: “Oh well, it’s just fast food. I’m al most home, and I’m not turning back around.” Although many of us have conducted ourselves in this same manner, it is ironic how some situations are allowed to persist while others never would be tolerated. With food, for example, it can be assumed that no one would go to a fancy restaurant and accept the wrong order, as in the case with fast food. This “rule of acception” is not new in today’s society, and it doesn’t just pertain to eating at fast-food restaurants. It’s time for people to start standing up for what they believe and de serve, thereby helping society become a more finely-tuned mesh of operations. Some of the biggest problems America faces today are teenage smoking, drinking and illegal drug usage. Although these social ills might seem too grand to tack le, one area for improvement falls under the simple category of par enting. If parents would start teaching their children about the harsh consequences of these health-abusing violations, the nation would see a dramatic de crease in percentages. While it is true that many parents instruct their children on the evil aspects of abusing their bodies, it is also obvious that many more could do the same. Each year, America loses multitudes of teenagers to drug and alcohol abuse. And even though soci ety realizes how tragic it is for a child to die from drug and alcohol abuse, the same senti ment is heard every day: “I hate to hear things like this, but what can I do?” This thought process also seems to persist in our government. People are constantly dying from horrific ailments that range from cancer to AIDS, but government intervention is not the full-scale attack we would all like to see. Instead of spending $3.2 million on the execution of a criminal in Florida, that money could be used to further re search on terminal illnesses and possibly save a life. The government, however, seems too preoccupied with nuclear advancement, repairs to the White House and pay raises to members of Congress. A good example of how peo ple can stand up for their rights was demonstrated in the Stu dent Rec Center debate earlier this summer. A policy was en acted which prevented students who were not enrolled for the summer terms to attain mem bership to the Rec Center — normally, a student could pur chase a $70 pass to work out in the center. To put an end to what many students felt was an unfair policy, individuals got to gether, voiced their opinions and the University administra tion helped to return the re-im plement the summer passes. This is the way anything and everything in society should work. People must stop over looking wrongdoings and start acting to prevent any future problems. A simple fast-food order, where a mistake is made, should sound more like this: Employee: “Welcome to Taco Bell, how may I take your order?” Customer: “I’d like two bean burritos, one soft taco and a medium Sprite.” Employee: “Your total comes to $2.69, please drive up to the first window.” Customer (after receiving the order and checking the bag’s contents): “I’m sorry, I think you must have mixed up my order with someone else’s, because I didn’t order any of these items.” Employee: “Sorry for the mix- up. I’ll be right back with your correct order and a free side or der of Spanish rice.” Customer: “Thankyou.” This conversation is the way things should be, and yes, it re ally is that simple sometimes. Mail Call Liberal ideology criticizes Baptists !n response to Mandy Cater’s July l column: Cater blasts the Southern Baptist Convention for taking a land (not endorsing hate or Bigotry) against Disney, calling Hie Convention’s delegates ciose-minded.” The SBC has stood firm in its Position against not only homo sexuality, but other forms of im moral and sinful behavior (pre marital sex, alcoholism, gambling, etc.) — a stance of which few reli gious groups still adhere. Cater claims that companies s rich as IBM, Microsoft, Bank of J^erica, and even the 49ers have lumped on the bandwagon.” °unds like her column should have been entitled, “Gay support ing groups think alike.” Cater only demonstrates how liberal minds pride themselves in being open-minded, yet gag at the notion of listening to the other side’s viewpoint. It was always my perception that liberals and free-thinkers jumped off the bandwagon and went against the norm. It is becoming more evident, however, that the embracing of homosexuality is becoming more mainstream. Cater should examine her views, determine which views are simply “in,” and think twice be fore ridiculing a group for having “conventional minds.” Steve Walkup Class of ’98 Disney driven by business mentality In response to John Lemon’s July 2 column: Let’s talk entertainment, let’s talk Southern Baptist and anyone else who wants to boycott Disney. If you boycott Disney and every thing associated with it or ever has been, people would have to give up Burger King — the conveyor belt that grills the burgers was made for Disneyland in the ’50s. Coca Cola and Diet Coke are the official soft drinks of Disney, you would have to leave home without the American Express card, these are just a few examples. As far as Disney supporting ‘Gay Days,’ the last time I checked, Disney was still a business. Let me ask you this question: If you were a business, would you turn people away at the door be cause of their sexual orientation? I don’t think so. Furthermore, as a Disney cast member who has worked for the company during one of these weekends, the com pany’s stance is “We do not sup port it, but we aren’t going to turn away a paying guest if they are here for a vacation.” Disney has put up with a lot of grief because of its stance. Once again, Disney leads the way as far as benefits for gay couples. Look at the other companies that are following instead of leading. For those of you who wish to boycott Disney, go ahead, but you won’t be able to see Hercules, Con Air and other blockbuster movies this summer. Lemons should know that Disney is an entertainment company, not just for kids and families anymore. Matthew Hunt Class of ’96 V*