Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 12, 1984)
Friday, October 12, 1934 Pago 4 Daily Nebraskan I O ri O J "J Jomfeeirt just sentence I confess to being one of those so-called bleeding hearts when it comes to these matters concerning capi tal punishment and the like. However, for the first time, I believe the Nebraska judicial system passed a just sentence when they issued their latest cell on Death Row. In a larger sense, I don't believe the death penalty serves as a deterrent. No one has proven at anytime that be cause one man is executed, crime drops. But in John Jou bert's case, it becomes more of a matter of what can you do to the individual, not what you can do as an example. Revenge is an easy crutch for most favoring arguments on the death penalty. As the judges in the Joubert case said, they trjed to sec the case through the eyes of the victims. You would have to go pretty far before you found anyone who wasn't emotionally dis turbed by Joubert's crime. It would easily follow that those same emotions could be chan neled into revenge against the perpetrator. But what can society do for felons such as Joubert who have no remorse for a crime, no reason for it? The death sentence is too cruel, too much like answering a wrong with a wrong. An irreversible life sent ence is also too cruel, too un Unsigned editorials represent official policy of tne fall 1984 Daily Nebraskan. They are writ ten by this semester's editor in chief. Chris Welsch. Editorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the university. "OltB. ,tq you belter get fair, being that it deprives the man of any chance for freedom even if he rehabilitates. And, the current status of a life sentence could mean he at least is eligible for parole and that's too good for him. Joubert didn't just stumble upon two Bellevue boys and accidentally kill them. He was, and is, a cold, calculating murderer, who didn't see fit to allow two children to live their lives. There is the problem as well of tax dollars supporting an imprisoned criminal, and the fact that some of these men are so immersed in the criminal world that they are beyond reform. A man who slaughtered two innocent boys would have to be considered in such a category. When (if ever) Joubert is executed, there is no reason to believe an equally depraved mind would hesitate to rape or kill given the opportunity. But doesn't Joubert deserve some penalty for his actions? When other ? entences have been handed down that con demned a man to death, I considered it no more than a useless eye for an eye. But it is difficult, if not impossible, to feel sorry for Joubert. As long as the state sees fit to have the death penalty in its status, this is a prime example of a de serving candidate. Word W.Triplett III Daily Nebraskan Senior Editor its employees, t he students or the NU Board of Regents. According to the policy set by the regents, responsibility for the content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of its student editors. lEctitGirizil Policy U3 off now than-you were four years -ago? hrr !.".'.' i . 17Tv-ri7gfir.fifa, ,i m hi i ' --y - - r - ;2a Letters Deathpenalty In Jeff Browne's editorial, "State needs irreversible life sentence," he stated: "If we had an irrever sible life sentence society would not have the blood of another human being on its hands." In the same article he also stated, "State law needs to be changed to take these emotional issues out of sentencing." These statements seem to be contradictory to each other. I agree that the decision to hand down a death penalty should U.S. officials listen to clink of I would like to respond to the editor's simplistic commentary, "If you dont vote, dont complain." (Page 4, of Wednesday's Daily Nebraskan.) First, let's dispense with any notion of equal partici pation in the election process. Not everyone over 18 in the United States has the chance to vote. Hundreds of thousands of homeless people in our cities can not even register because they do HAPWAlTfP j J WHAT COUR tACKOtioutJP ; I - law involves facts, not emotions not be an emotional one. The decision handed down by the three judges was based on a law that says the aggravating and mitigating circumstances must be balanced against each other. This law is the result of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in recent years, Nebraska's law concerning the death penalty deals with circum stances surrounding the murder, i;Ot emotional issues. . We already have a life sentence , in Nebraska. To be released, a not have an address. Do these people have the right to com plain? For those of us who do have a home, our voting privilege has become more a gesture than a means of change. The political weight of a single ballot has been diminished in recent years. It costs millions to be elected President and hundreds of thousands for a congressional race. The bulk of this money is lifer" must face the parole board. The parole board considers the behavior of the criminal while incarcerated and determines if he is fit to be released into society. Nebraska does not need an irreversible life sentence. The death penalty is a just and fair sentence, and an integral part of our justice system in Nebraska. Brad Stepp , .i .-v. vv.v : junior natural resources coins, not vote not donated by the average American, but by wealthy indi viduals. Political action commit tees are playing an ever increas ing role in determining the out come of elections. The Federal Election Commis sion says that corporate PACs alone have multiplied by more than 17 times since 1974. Their money i3 given as an Incentive" Csitiissed en Page 5