Needling Public Safety in San Francisco (updated)
→ The Out-Lawyer’s Blog: http://www.jaygaskill.com/blog1
→The Bridge to Being Blog: http://www.jaygaskill.com/blog2
→ The Human conspiracy Blog: http://www.jaygaskill.com/blog3And
The Policy Think Site: http://www.jaygaskill.com
All contents, unless otherwise indicated are
Copyright © 2005, 2006 and 2007 by Jay B. Gaskill
Please contact Jay B. Gaskill, attorney at law, via e mail at law@jaygaskill.com
Monday, October 29, 2007 UpDate:
THE OUT-LAWYER REPLIES ABOUT NEEDLES AND DEATH
My last piece on the Human Conspiracy Blog - http://jaygaskill.com/blog3/ , elicited some responses. I had defended the death penalty, lethal injection, and expressed my dismay at San Francisco’s proposed ‘needle’ room for addicts. I’m cross referencing that article and the recent replies on both blogs.
For my recent "needle exchange, go to the Out-Lawyer's blog http://www.jaygaskill.com/blog1
Needling Public Safety
Let me be clear. I don’t like the death penalty; I spent the better part of my legal career striving to prevent its application to any of my clients. But the evidence is now unambiguous and – I submit – beyond reasonable dispute: The death penalty has a deterrent effect; it saves innocent lives.
Many of my liberal friends are in the same state of denial about this effect as some of my conservative friends are about global warming. [My own view on the latter is nuanced. See http://jaygaskill.com/InconvenientChoice.htm .]
I’ve written about the death penalty in print and on the web extensively. [ See http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20060309/ai_n16158247 .] Let me just refer the deterrence skeptics to the Brookings Institute / A.E.I. joint study, an abstract of which is still available on the web: http://aei-brookings.org/publications/abstract.php?pid=922 .
Yes, there are studies and reports that oppose the conclusion that the prospect of execution deters would-be murderers; but these focus on older studies. And death penalty opponents obscure the deterrence question by filling the policy discussion with ideological bromides -- like the concern for “evolving standards of decency”. But as one of the Brookings Study authors put it, “Capital punishment thus presents a life-life tradeoff, and a serious commitment to the sanctity of human life may well compel, rather than forbid, that form of punishment.”
At the moment, two things are happening: There is an upsurge in murders in urban California and there is a de facto death penalty moratorium in place as a result of the 9th Circuit’s decision that lethal injection is a forbidden from of punishment. [So is the torture murder of rape and child molest victims, I am constrained to point out.]
While this issue is being decided, the U. S. Supreme court has not only agreed to take up the matter, but it has issued a stay that halts all lethal injection executions on a national basis. The California de facto moratorium has become national. If this state of affairs goes on much longer, I believe that we will begin to see an increase in the murder rate everywhere.
In this context, you might imagine my reaction to the following AP story:
By LISA LEFF, Associated Press Writer, October 19, 2007.
San Francsico. “City health officials took steps Thursday toward opening the nation’s first legal safe-injection room, where addicts could shoot up heroin, cocaine and other drugs under the supervision of nurses.”
Drug addiction is a pernicious form of chemical slavery; indeed addicts are responsible for a disproportionate number of homicides as compared with the general population. Profound drug addiction, particularly to cocaine, is a character poison. But really successful treatment models actually exist; most of them are linked to the very successful “drug court” program. This a therapeutic system with sanctions that originated in Oakland, California in the early 90’s when I was the county Public Defender. Drug addiction is chemical slavery that affects the volitional centers of the brain such that the enslaved person initially resists liberation. This is why the successful treatment models include therapeutic sanctions.
Facilitating the continuation of a serious narcotics addiction with nurses in a sterile setting is analogous to supporting continuing slavery by providing “more humane” chains.
I count myself among the “real world” liberals. Apparently the species of liberal that runs that beautiful city on the San Francsico Bay can only agree to an injection program that facilitates slavery but not one that liberates potential murder victims.
If you agree or disagree, email me at The Policy Think Site and I’ll post a sample of the responses.
JBG
Many of my liberal friends are in the same state of denial about this effect as some of my conservative friends are about global warming. [My own view on the latter is nuanced.See .]Yes, there are studies and reports that oppose the conclusion that the prospect of execution deters would-be murderers; but these focus on older studies. And death penalty opponents obscure the deterrence question by filling the policy discussion with ideological bromides -- like the concern for “evolving standards of decency”.But as one of the Brookings Study authors put it, “.”In this context, you might imagine my reaction to the following AP story:JBG Many of my liberal friends are in the same state of denial about this effect as some of my conservative friends are about global warming. [My own view on the latter is nuanced.See .]Yes, there are studies and reports that oppose the conclusion that the prospect of execution deters would-be murderers; but these focus on older studies. And death penalty opponents obscure the deterrence question by filling the policy discussion with ideological bromides -- like the concern for “evolving standards of decency”.But as one of the Brookings Study authors put it, “.”In this context, you might imagine my reaction to the following AP story:JBG