Gov. wants death penalty reinstated for those who kill officers

[Judi Lynn]

Source: KOAT Albuquerque

Gov. wants death penalty reinstated for those who kill officers
UPDATED 9:59 AM MDT Oct 28, 2013

SANTA FE, N.M. —Gov. Susana Martinez said when it comes deadly violence against police officers, she'd like to put the death penalty back on the table in New Mexico.

Martinez made the comments before four law enforcement officers were shot Saturday in Albuquerque.

"It's just simply not worth someone taking the life of a police officer. The maximum penalty should be available to individuals that do such a thing," Martinez said.

In 2009, Gov. Bill Richardson signed a bill abolishing the death penalty in New Mexico. New Mexico is the 15th state to abandon capital punishment.

Read more: http://www.koat.com/news/new-mexico/albuquerque/gov-wants-death-penalty-on-the-table-for-slain-officers/-/9153728/22669612/-/hfw909/-/index.html#ixzz2j2D3sXBP

[Diego_Native 2012]

1. Like most who support the death penalty

they fail to understand that the problem lies not with the seriousness of the crimes and dangerousness of the alleged criminals but with the specific implementation and the moral costs involved with state sanctioned murder.

Bill Richardson did not abolish the death penalty in NM because he found the murder of police officers less objectionable than Martinez.

[COLGATE4]

3. Punishment and retribution for crimes committed

is a legitimate function of the Criminal Justice system. Moral costs are not part of the equation.

[NoOneMan]

5. How does "retribution" make a population safer?

Especially compared to other more humane and cost-effective approaches

[MicaelS]

12. The executed won't kill anyone else ever again.

Like a member of prison staff, another prisoner, or someone on the outside if they escape.

I believe some crimes are so heinous, that some people are beyond rehabilitation. Thus it is a waste of time, effort, energy and money to even attempt to rehabilitate them. Either execute them, or put them in their own cell for life with no chance of parole in confinement 23 hours a day. One hour for exercise in room without other human contact.

[NoOneMan]

13. But the imprisoned will kill law abiding citizens?

Remember how I asked you to compare "retribution" to alternatives.

I believe some crimes are so heinous, that some people are beyond rehabilitation

Probably so. But emotionally involved humans aren't always the best at figuring out which is which. Frankly, humans don't even have the best track record in terms of sending innocents to jail (including death row -- see Innocence Project).

or put them in their own cell for life with no chance of parole in confinement 23 hours a day

Locking them up for life does not necessitate inhumane imprisonment simply because you want to be mean. Because otherwise, it serves no purpose to inhumanely confine a prisoner vs to humanely confine them, in regards to keeping the general population safe.

It sounds like you want the government to play Jigsaw from Saw to satisfy some fetish of yours upon the dehumanized lessers, for no additional purpose of general safety that could not be accomplished otherwise.

[COLGATE4]

21. In the case of a murderer, it removes the possibility

of that person commiting another murder.-

[NoOneMan]

22. So does life imprisonment

So, beyond stroking a retribution fetish, explain to me what I'm missing

[COLGATE4]

24. Two reasons.

1 - "Life imprisonment' doesn't necessarily mean life imprisonment. In many sentencing structures in many states it can mean a prison term substantially less than natural life.
2- Retribution has always been recognized as a legitimate function of laws. It's not a fetish - it's society's way of discouraging behavior inimical to society's functioning.

[NoOneMan]

25. "discouraging behavior" - So the death penalty lowers violent crime?

True or false?

And when I say life imprisonment, thats just what I meant. If those laws need work, dont throw out the baby with the bathwater and start killing people because of incompetence.

[COLGATE4]

27. Impractical and implausible. And, once more

there's nothing incompetent about exercising retribution in a state's justice system. The whole concept for having a penal system is punishment

[NoOneMan]

29. "The whole concept for having a penal system is punishment"

To you. Not to everyone. To some its about protecting the general population. To others, its also about rehabilitating those people who slipped through the cracks in the system. And to the worse, its about creating a slave class with cheap to free labor. No, not the whole concept.

[markpkessinger]

32. The notion of "retributive justice" . . .

. . . is a relic of our Puritan past, and should long ago have been discarded. There are only three legitimate (in my view) objectives in punishing criminals: deterrence, protection of society from a particular convicted criminal's further criminal actions and, where possible, rehabilitation. General deterrence is hard to substantiate. It rests on the notion that a would-be criminal, in deciding whether or not to carry out a crime, makes a rational, cost-benefit analysis of doing so (i.e., weighing the 'pros' of whatever is to be gained through the crime against the 'cons' of a criminal sentence). But it is highly questionable whether most would-be criminals weigh the consequences of a planned act in such a rational manner. When it comes to specific deterrence (deterring the specific individual from committing his or her particular crime), this more properly falls under the objective of protecting society, and there are plenty of ways to address that short of state-sanctioned killing. (Actually, specific deterrence is probably better considered under the rubric of protecting If there is a serious problem with convicted murders being released and then killing more people, then we can address the systems that enabled their release. 'Retributive justice' is really nothing more than a fancy, socially acceptable term for bloodlust.

[jeff47]

26. Because "Life without Parole" doesn't exist.

[Myrina]

2. Mmmmm, no.

We have got to stop worshiping at the feet of authority/cops in this country.
Yes, they do very valuable work. Yes, they save lives.
But that doesn't make them more important than the rest of us.
And if they went into the career field without the knowledge that they may die, they're not too bright.

How about the death penalty for someone who kills children or school teachers, instead?
Or better yet, how 'bout no death penalty at all?

[Ranchemp.]

7. I'll take no death penalty at all for the win.

Why just for killing cops? Are cops more important than anyone else?
If you have the DP, and I am adamantly against it, then it shouldn't be just for killing a cop.

[markpkessinger]

33. Agreed!

Also, I think treating the killing of law enforcement officers differently from the killing of any other person sends a message of valuing one type of person over another type of person.

I had a rather heated and unpleasant exchange about this issue this past summer, with my nephew, a Florida State trooper, at a family gathering. His response to me was, "You have no idea what we face on a day-to-day basis." Well, perhaps I don't have first-hand knowledge, but I am aware of, and appreciate, the risks officers face. But I am also aware that police culture intentionally exaggerates those risks in an effort to retain the exalted status given to law enforcement in this country, which in turn serves to shield many officers from closer scrutiny and accountability for misconduct.

[Blue_Tires]

4. Why would cops get special treatment?

No way that holds up in court if she tries to pass it

[loli phabay]

9. its already the law in other states, so its been through the courts

Its capital murder along with a whole slew of others, such as killing witnesses, or killing in commission of a rape etc.

[Blue_Tires]

10. Perhaps I'm not understanding this correctly

I thought it was something like "murder an average citizen and just get life imprisonment; but murder a cop and get the death penalty instead"

[loli phabay]

20. i could have worded it better, you murder an average person its not capital murder

Unless they fall under certain categorirs, ie a rapist killing his victim, or killing a witness to keep thrm quiet, or as part of a spree etc. You kill a cop then it is also a capital offence. Not sure if this explains it better. Cops are consideted in the group of victims that can bring thr death penalty.

[Conium]

6. Equal protection.

No more. No less. I oppose the death penalty. There is nothing equal about it.

[darkangel218]

8. Why am i not surprised!!

[Orsino]

11. What sentence is appropriate, then...

...for the party who cuts budgets so that officers are either overworked or laid off?

[NCagainstMcCrony]

14. Cast system

The Idea that cops are more important than other Americans needs to cease immediately.
Pigs are already so far out of control we may never remedy the situation.

[msongs]

15. ok then...and for those "officers" who kill citizens nt

[NoOneMan]

17. Medals

[Dawson Leery]

16. Equal protection

[DeSwiss]

18. BS - K&R n/t

[gopiscrap]

19. bullshit

first of all a disclaimer: I am totally against the death penalty to begin with. But why are cops lives more precious than my wife's for example (a teacher), or my son's (a postal carrier) or my daughters (a student) or mine (a church worker)? One of the things we have done since fucking Reagan is glorify and exalt authority figures cops, soldiers etc rather remind them that they are just public servants nothing more. Now I know some will say it's because they risk their lives...well I can sure as god damn fucking tell you my wife works in a tough ghetto school and every day I wonder if she is going to come home in one piece. I worked with mentally deranged homeless people and got shot twice so it's not just cops who are in harms way.

[struggle4progress]

23. I wanna kill! kill! kill!

[closeupready]

28. No.

Just no.

[Ash_F]

30. One needs only to look at the company we keep.

Look at the list of nations that still have the death penalty. That is a strong enough argument. Nothing more needs to be said.

[marble falls]

31. No death panalty.

[Hassan_Sabbah]

34. I would be all for this...

If it also applied to police officers killing innocent civilians.

[Doctor_J]

35. What about those convicted of killing officers, who really didn't?

Seriously, if we could guarantee 100% to take the mistakes out, I might consider it. Until then, just lock them up.

Edit: George Ryan suspended the DP in IL because it was found that half of the people on death row were innocent

[devils chaplain]

36. DP or no, I don't think a police officer's life is more special than anyone's who has another job...

That many think otherwise is pretty disturbing.

[Indi Guy]

37. What about the reverse situation? If a cop kills an innocent civilian...

...

[jsr]

38. +1.