Is It Time to End the Death Penalty in Kansas?

As a conservative and former career law enforcement officer, my attitude on crime and punishment is to say, bluntly tough, very tough. I understand cause and effect and the importance of good public safety to protect and serve the public as well as the necessity to imprison those who commit offenses. In some cases, those offenses are unthinkable. But when a government imposes death on another, I see a danger on many levels.

In 1994, Kansas revisited the death penalty issue and as a result, the legislature voted to bring back the death penalty. But looking at it from different points of view has this 1994 Law proved its value?

Fact One: No Inmates Executed – Kansas has not executed anyone since 1965. This includes the 14 years after the death penalty was re-imposed in 1994. There are presently nine on death row in Kansas. I have been personally involved with four of these cases to some extent as a former KBI agent. Those cases were Gary Klepas, the Carr Brothers (Reginald and Jonathon) and John Robinson. All four are less than acceptable human being’s as I’m sure are the other five.

Fact Two: Government Spending – Kansas spends a vast amount of money on juries and court-related hearings on either defending or prosecuting death penalty cases. Not during the trial, but as a result of already being convicted. Yes, once a death penalty inmate is convicted that is just the beginning of a whole new series of court hearings and legal work. It is hard to determine the total cost of a death penalty in Kansas. Expenses are incurred by both state and local government entities. While some individual costs are known, other costs such as local and state prosecution and court expenses are not itemized. In the John Robinson case alone, over $750,000 has been spent defending him from death.

Fact Three: The Moral Implications – As a practicing Catholic there are some non-negotiable beliefs that one must posses in order to receive the Sacraments. One is the belief that God who gives life must also be the one who takes away life. Although the Church does not place the death penalty into this category, one must ask, should a government allow the killing of humans in a non-defensive way? We certainly have the right to defend ourselves, and others, and kill if we, or others are being attacked or threatened. But after the fact, when the threat is over are we still to kill? There have been times in society when there has been lawlessness and chaos and the only defense for protection was to put someone to death. But we are not living in those times. If we lock someone up for life and allow them to die in God’s time, would they have more of a chance to know and love God?

“Nowadays, in America as elsewhere in the world, a model of society appears to be emerging in which the powerful predominate, setting aside and even eliminating the powerless: I am thinking here of unborn children, helpless victims of abortion; the elderly and incurably ill, subjected at times to euthanasia; and the many other people relegated to the margins of society by consumerism and materialism. Nor can I fail to mention the unnecessary recourse to the death penalty when other "bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons. Today, given the means at the State's disposal to deal with crime and control those who commit it, without abandoning all hope of their redemption, the cases where it is absolutely necessary to do away with an offender 'are now very rare, even non-existent practically'". (Pope John Paul II, Ecclesia in America January 1999)

Fact Four: The Constitution – The United States allows for the death penalty and certainly it has been used in past cases. But the question is, what if we are wrong? Is there corruption and cover-ups in government? Are mistakes made in government? Is it possible for the pressure of a case to be built up so much that an innocent man is arrested and convicted of a crime? While this is rare, the answer of course is yes. People have been let out of prison after serving many years based on DNA evidence that has cleared the accused. Since 1990 and the advent of DNA, 13 out of 113 death row inmates have been exonerated by the use of DNA. Is it worth even one mistake to end a life?

I’ve had a few liberals say to me, “Well, if you are pro-life, what about the death penalty?” I say back to them, “If you help to make abortions illegal, I will certainly back a law making the death penalty illegal.”

It’s time to end this government spending farce called the death penalty. All it has become is nothing more than a term politicians use to call themselves “tough on crime”. Are we willing to trade feeling good as opposed to the reality of the consequences? The death penalty promotes more government spending, it has severe moral consequences and it may cause constitutional issues if the convicted is innocent.

Are you prepared to keep the death penalty on the books according to the true facts?