The “Death penalty should die”, claims Rudy Apodaca, in his so titled article for the Austin American Statesman. With the recently marked 35th anniversary of Gregg v. Georgia, which led to the continuance of policies allowing the death penalty, Rudy Apodaca has taken the time to address those in opposition of his view an editorial article published July 1st. Based on his statements, one can infer that Apodaca has formulated his argument to suit those who may disagree with his point of view, or those who are on the fence about the issue. For example, Apodaca makes sure to address the questions and concerns of those who do not support repealing the death penalty. To those who fear that criminals would simply continue their criminal behavior if not put to death, Apodaca mentions alternative punishments such as life imprisonment. Aside from laying out his argument against the death penalty, Apodaca also must take time to address the unease of his audience.
Although Rudy Apodaca is listed simply as a “Local Contributor” on the Austin American Statesman website, he is, in fact, much more. With a J.D. degree from Georgetown University, Apodaca has been well educated in matters of law. Aside from formal education, he is also qualified by his many years as a practiced criminal defense attorney and appellate judge. In his own words,
“As a practicing criminal attorney for 22 years and a former judge on the New Mexico Court of Appeals for almost 14 years, I've witnessed firsthand instances of flaws in our judicial system. Time and again, I've reviewed cases in which innocent individuals were convicted.”
Based on his education and experience, I would consider Rudy Apodaca to be more than qualified in asserting his argument in opposition of the death penalty.
As for the actual mechanics of his argument, Apodaca presents well supported, factual statements in favor of death penalty repeal. His main claim is that the death penalty is unfair, inconsistent, and should be abolished. Apodaca uses quantitative evidence about the number of people in the last forty plus years who have been falsely convicted of a crime which led to the death penalty. (A shocking 138, as verified by the databases found on the Death Penalty Info Organization website, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/) Aside from the number of wrongly convicted individuals, Apodaca also notes that our justice system does not always provide a competent defense for those who have court appointed attorneys. Further, Apodaca mentions the fact that often times, death penalty sentences are handed out based on ethnicity, geographic location, and the current financial situations of the counties. (This information was gathered from the qualified Richard C. Dexter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center.)
In addition to presenting sound information in support of his claim, Rudy Apodaca offers a refreshing view on the death penalty debate. While most, including myself, tend to think of the death penalty issue as mostly a debate over the morality of the punishment, Apodaca educates his audience on the accuracy of conviction. In a perfect world, it would be easy to favor a death penalty that guarantees only those 100% known to be guilty would be punished. However, we know this is not the case. With staggering statistics supporting the fact that many innocent people are sentenced to death, Apodaca makes a clear, factual, and very persuasive argument to do away with this flawed policy of capital punishment.
The full article can be read on the Austin American Statesmen: http://www.statesman.com/opinion/apodaca-death-penalty-should-die-1575925.html
No comments:
Post a Comment