DP Debate IV

MJB,
I used to be an attorney in the Criminal Justice Division of the AG's office, so I am fairly familiar with the legal process in this situation. You (and those on your side of this issue--more about categories in a moment) have an unreasonable interpretation of "legal ethics" and of fair process than me or the majority of the governed. We don't have to satisfy you, a vociferous DP opponent, before executing a person; we have to satisfy the law, and Alley's claim in the 11th (relatively speaking) that he was entitled to DNA testing was not supported by the law and was nothing more than a delaying tactic, in my opinion. The statute on that issue takes into account the circumstances you have noted and Alley didn't qualify for this round of process. I haven't read the details about the Reid decision, but some determinations are transferable to subsequent venues on subsequent issues . . . whether or not Reid meets the standard of mental competence for prosecution/execution is something that has not changed by the relatively-recent mentally retarded holding. But I suspect you and I would reach different conclusions on it if there is any grey area on the matter . . .
Re. self-defense, I know you are dismissive of "deterrence" as a factor in support of the DP but that is a key aspect of self-defense. The state, in defending it's citizenry has held up a very serious punishment (actually, there are worse punishments, like torture) for taking another human life. That signals the state's intention to defend against murderers and--I believe, deters murder or serious violence against others. Also, there's no reason that we should face the risk of Reid killing a fellow inmate or a prison employee or a citizen should he somehow escape.
Re. "having blood on my hands," I think you're misinterpreting my position. Though I don't agree with your characterization of it, I am not ashamed to execute a murderer or have it done in my name. I know you don't want to discuss abortion, but you have the innocent blood and fragment of developing body parts of every abortion on your hands if your support abortion "rights." I have a LOT easier time condoning one than the other.
Re. use of the term "people from your perspective," that wasn't "personalized" it was generalized, which is necessary in a situation like this and which is merited by your various assertions over the past days. You reject national sovereignty; you equate the "violence" of execution with that of Al Qaeda and Reid; you believe that the Constitution "says" whatever a majority of people on the supreme court--regardless of legal principle, say it says; you believe that the end justifies the means in using legal methods to thwart a "state killing." Frankly, I can draw a lot of conclusions about your world view based on these various assertions, and you are free to correct me if a conclusion is inaccurate--I don't have to nor want to mischaracterize your opinion/view to effectively rebut it in the public square.
I guess I should just close by saying that I don't think the Bible mandates executions or that by executing people we will solve the problem of murder. But I do personally believe it is a legitimate policy to protect citizens and it is not contrary to Biblical principles. So I won't wail if you guys were to ever get a majority of Americans to agree with you. I am unwilling, however, to allow fallacious arguments or undisclosed premises be used to thwart my policy preference. I am a born-again Christian and believe that, while I have a duty to be concerned about my community ("my neighbor") and the things that the government does in my name--as a member of "we the people" who govern ourselves in this democratic republic, I am also to be most concerned about eternity. That gives me the perspective that I need in saying, yes, Sedley Alley is now standing before God or has already done so, and he has had to answer for his life. Hopefully, his "spiritual advisor" informed him that there was a reckoning in his future and that he ought to get right with God. There is forgiveness even for what he did and in a weird way, he had an "advantage" in not being deluded into thinking that he would have a long time or the "rest of his life" to take care of such spiritual things. So, our existence as individual beings is much more than our earthly existence. I hope that you have reconciled all this in your own mind--i.e., whether you believe it . . . whether you have acted on it . . . whether you have an appropriate confidence about what will happen to you after you pass from this life. http://www.campuscrusade.com/fourlawsflash.htm You are obviously passionate, committed and articulate about what you believe, and those are good qualities; nevertheless, all that can be negated if they are harnessed in pursuit of a wrong goal. Based on what I believe, execution is a just punishment for the state to carry out in response to cold-blooded murder. Thanks for taking the time to hear me out.
E ya,
Ned