I don't support the death penalty because I do not trust the prosecution to play by the rules.

They will lie, with hold, loose and manufacturer evidence to back their side.

Weather they do this in the belief they are doing the right thing or they do it because they want a promotion or can’t stand to be wrong makes no difference to me.

Bottom line is they cannot be trusted with the lives of my loved ones and I hope you all never have to bet on their sense of fair play with the lives of yours.

Innocent people have been put to death.

Anyone, anyone, explain to me how this is the right thing to do...no one has yet!!!!

People, you can have your opinions and reasons and revenge, or whatever, but, that doesn't make it the right.

IF ONE INNOCENT PERSON IS PUT TO DEATH, THAT IS ONE TOO MANY!!!!Let's pretend the one person is YOU! Yeah, now you want it, huh????

And to the blogger below that thinks that, "to say that an innocent person could be put to death",this is a LIBERAL thing...why, because it's the SMART thing to do?? You're answer really isn't the popular one here in Alaska, we don't like the death penalty, that's why we don't have it! Got it now??

There's no way the death penalty should be implemented in Alaska. If one person's put to death unjustly, that's one too many!

Do you believe that every verdict is the correct verdict?? Probably not, right. Humans make mistakes, period.

Unless we can be guaranteed not to put an innocent person to death should this legislation be passed.

As for me, my God told me it's wrong, that's why i don't support this legislation.

It actually costs MORE to execute someone than it does to warehouse them until they die - read here. There is simply no logical reason to use it. This is a no-brainer. If we want revenge, let's simply make the prisons more unpleasant places to live.

As much as I would like to hit the delete button on some of the current malfesants, I am restrainede by haveing read the transcript of the trial of the last person executed in Alaska, (a native) it appeared then, that the punishment was far more perfect that the evidence presented. to this day, the puninshment is far more perfect that the judicial system. (see the record in Georgia, see to record in Texas)

I admire Watiis grandfather for his courageous

stand to abolish the death penalty in alaska.

We had the will to come out of the dark ages lets

not crawl back into our caves.

As a liberal, I'm really torn on this issue. On a personal level I'd love to watch the televised frying of some of the most heinous criminals. But I also believe in facts, and I know that no state has managed to implement a death penalty that GUARANTEES no innocent person will be executed by mistake, and many HAVE been executed by mistake. I also know that the death penalty hasn't been shown to be a better deterrent than life in prison.

It comes down to math for me: Is the number of innocent people who will be saved by the unproven deterrent value of the death penalty greater than or less than the number of innocent people the state will kill by mistake? Whichever policy saves the most innocent lives wins. Given the available evidence, avoiding the death penalty seems like the best policy.

But here's where I'm torn. Sometimes we KNOW KNOW KNOW the guy did it. I really want to see the 9/11 mastermind with sparks shooting out his ears on pay-per-view. The problem is, how can the justice system separate the REALLY sure cases from the fairly sure but not 100% cases? They don't make that distinction. They're supposed to ALL be sure beyond a reasonable doubt to be convicted, but we know that standard puts innocent people on death row.

So, do we try to have a death penalty only when we're really really extra double definitely 100% sure? That would be nice. Do we avoid the death penalty? That would be easier. Do we implement one just like the other states? Too much risk of misakes, I think.

AggressiveProgressive-

You "think" I couldn't be more mistaken about the death penalty being a deterrent I think you couldn't be more wrong and have googled and pulled up the first site that supported your viewpoint.

You cannot just look at murder statistics and say with any certainty whether or not there was an element of deterrence associated with those crimes in death penalty states, period. FAIL.

You use a link to an "informational site" that's board of directors are almost entirely anti-death penalty:

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/contact-dpic

Give me donations and a platoon of sympathetic lawyers to help and I'll amass some pretty convincing statistics to support my argument. Also, I'll develop some propaganda er.. lesson plans for the kids.

I know it's hard for you to understand, but there are very very bad people out there who enjoy preying on those weaker than themselves, and will do it until the opportunity to do so is removed. They must be stopped.

As far as your pot smoking buddies, they are of no concern. I believe they should be left alone if they do not infringe the rights of others.

Drug users should be rehabilitated. We are idiots if we think we can change human drug use, especially by incarceration. Sometimes we need to let hard drug users do themselves in with drugs if they refuse help. Hopefully it will be a lesson to others.

No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.

-Thomas Jefferson

"ak_bear - Do you mean Fickle Hickle?? The other gov' that cut and baled for a Fed job? After promising, and getting the voters' support for, an administration that was going to cut through all the politics and favoritism, to make AK a 'great state"?? Vision, progress, great goals, etc?? That Hickle??"

Pearl, You are speaking of his first governorship when he went to work for the dept of the interior under Nixon. He came back and was governor again a decade or so later. One of his finest achievements was when he told the EPA right on TV we were not going to be poisoned anymore by oxygenated fuels. If you were here then it was a serious health crisis. Don't get me wrong, the EPA has done some good things too, but what they were doing then was despicable. Anyway the EPA backed right down! While he certainly wasn't my favorite governor, he did have a way with leading the state forward. I think Jay Hammond was a better gov and human being, but in this day and age we need someone more of Hickel's leadership to get our hydro projects moving.

AudentesFortunaJuvat - You couldn't be more mistaken about the death penalty being a deterrent. It's a fantasy to believe that a person about to shoot or kill another person will be deterred because they might get the death penalty. Check out the real numbers and get a clue:http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates#stateswithvwithout

The punitive, "tough on crime" mentality is not serving us. We incarcerate entirely too many people for manufactured crimes like drug use, for one. Other nations, Canada being one, rehabilitate their offenders and as a result, have much lower recidivism rates. If we end the asinine, for massive profit drug war on Americans, we'd have room in the prisons to keep dangerous people for life, and money to rehabilitate the ones who will get out. California is going broke because of its three-strikes law. What was meant to lock violent people up for life on their third strike, has people getting life for stealing a slice of pizza for their third strike. It's insane to keep doing the same punitive thing over and over, expecting different results. http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/prg/cor/acc/about-eng.aspx http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/01/green-jobs-prison-work

Prison is like a giant time out. We can use it constructively or punitively. Odds are, the former will produce better behavior, and the latter will produce criminal behavior.

anonymous - Your post is so full of crap it's not even funny.

The liberal argument is that innocent people could be put to death.

The conservative argument is that many scumbags could be removed from the gene pool before release and repeat offense.

It's a trade off, I am personally for the death penalty because it send the strongest message possible:

IF YOU VIOLENTLY INFRINGE UPON THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER, YOU WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, PERIOD.

(no free health care, room, food for the rest of your life, you get to die in a quick and painless manner- THIS is what a life sentence should be)

I do take issue with the long process of the modern day execution. It is cruel to drag out the process in which the person knows they will be put to death.

One bullet will do, no theatrical electric chair or ultra expensive lethal injection needed. Why do we do that dumb crap anyways?

The threat of death is the strongest criminal deterrent and most effective means of stopping repeat offenders we have.

Let's use it.

This is a political move, plain and simple. We have far too many other things to worry about without a non-passable bill being introduced.

There may be a time and place for the death penalty, but not here, and not now. I am against it in general, because there is too much chance of killing someone who is innocent. If we kill the innocent to get to the guilty, what type of people does that make us?

Liberals are the most dangerous group of people in America.

Killing a baby: Liberals made it legal and now have the government pay for it.

Executing a child rapist and murderer: Liberals want it to be illegal and the child rapist and murderer to be freed from jail to rape and murder again.

Liberals are the most dangerous group of people in America.

watii, true and correct, sad, but true.

AggressiveProgressive, good words.

ak_bear - "I believe this is intended to be yet another wedge issue to divert our attention from the real business that we desperately need to have happen THIS YEAR." I believe you're correct. We need REAL business done, not this bunch of crap!

watii - EXCELLENT points as well. Racial disparity as well as economic disparity makes the death penalty an unfair method of dealing with crime.

(formerly MJHemple) Where is Oh_Please with the "PanderBear"? lol

"Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?"

"An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. - Ghandi

Jesus said it was wrong, so if you're a Christian you should be against the death penalty. "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also."

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty - "Since 1973, 139 people in 26 states have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence." I wonder how many innocent ones are still there.

“Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others.” ~William Greider

My grandfather, as a member of the Alaska Territorial Legislature, introduced the bill to abolish capital punishment in Alaska in 1957 with Vic Fischer. According to many accounts, he gave a very impassioned speech to the territorial legislature. Between 1900 and 1957, there had been 8 death sentences handed down extrajudicially under "miner's laws". The most important reason given by my grandfather was the racial disparity of those executed.

Of the 8 that were executed (all for murder), two were white, three were Alaska Native, two were African American, and one was a foreigner (race unknown), in spite of the fact that most murders committed in territorial days were by white men.

I am not convinced that times have changed enough to make this argument moot. Only the very rich or the extremely lucky can obtain the most competent counsel to represent them in a case of such gravity. This factor weighs heavily in favor of the white defendant.

An interesting statistic that I read recently is that nationally, 97.6% of district attorneys deciding death penalties have been white, 1.2% have been black, and 1.2% have been hispanic. I do not have the cite for this at hand but will attempt to find it.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-penalty-black-and-white-who-lives-who-dies-who-decides