I know it's not an issue that is foremost in folks' minds these days but we still have a Death Penalty in this country — one that is enforced intermittently in some locales and not others. I've been on all sides of this issue at various times and have watched as the discussion has segued from one concern to another. Once, it was about the simple morality of the State having the right to take a life. Then for a time, it was about whether having a Death Penalty was a deterrent to crime and if so, how much. Lately, it's come around to whether we're doing it right — i.e., are we only executing guilty people and if we aren't sure, isn't that a reason to not execute anyone? This last concern is helpful for some of us because if you answer "Yes," then you don't have to wrestle with the much more complex topic of whether the government should be killing people at all.
Michael Traynor is president emeritus of the American Law Institute, a group which pretty much wrote the blueprint for this nation's Death Penalty structure. I didn't hear it about then but last fall, the group reversed itself and withdrew support for its old recommendations. It now thinks the Death Penalty is unfair and unfixable. I'm still conflicted on whether if we could do it with a reasonable degree of certainty, we should be executing those who commit capital crimes. But the fact that even these people think we can't is one more reason not to.