Death penalty
Senators must avoid moral arguments
Twenty-five Nebraska legislators have co-sponsored a bill
to abolish the death penalty in Nebraska.
That’s enough state senators for a majority, enough to
send the bill to Gov. Ben Nelson, who has not indicated
whether he would sign it. If there is a struggle over the death
penalty during this legislative session, it is likely to come when
supporters try for the 30 votes needed to override a veto.
Some will quote the Bible; others, Hammurabi’s Code.
Before senators pluck out each others’ eyes, they should lay
I aside the moral arguments. This is not abortion. The rights of
the unborn can be debated, but not those of the dead.
Unfortunately, arguments for and against the penalty never
cease to be emotional and sensational. A typical case for the
death penalty goes something like this:
We can all rest more peacefully knowing that a killer won’t
kill anymore. Killers are the cretins of society. They don’t
deserve to live. Society ought to kill killers for killing. Make
the punishment tit the crime. Furthermore, the death penalty
deters future killing by scaring potential killers into thinking
about it for a while.
The first argument is the easiest to shoot down. Locking
murderers up for life keeps them off the streets as surely as
| killing them. The bill introduced in the Legislature last week
contains no provision for parole. In previous years, bills would
| have allowed parole after 30 years.
From a humanist perspective, no one is a cretin. But that
(doesn’t mean we arc all OK, either. Some people, especially
when under emotional or mental duress, do things that arc
inherently anti-social. They should be punished.
But in those cases, the swiftness and surety of punishment is
essential, both to give the punishment relevancy to the crime
and in drier other anti-social acts
I Punishment in death-row cases is neither swift nor sure.
Some trials, appeals, stays and pardons drag on for years or
decades. Sensational crimes, such as murders, generate lots of
publicity and bloodlust for a short time. Then the lynch-mob
mentality dies down, and the retaliation becomes cold-blooded.
Twelve men currently arc on Nebraska’s death row, yet there
has been no execution in the state since 1959.
Nebraska's next execution was scheduled for Feb. 8. But the
Nebraska Supreme Court on Thursday granted Michael Ryan a
stay of execution. His case will continue to drag on.
Before a 13th and more Nebraskans join Ryan on death row,
the Legislature needs to send the bill to the governor. Even if
the governor makes a moral decision in favor of the death
penalty, there are plenty of practical reasons why he should
sign the bill into law.
— E.F.P.
U.S. destabilized Middle East
Is anyone at all disturbed by our
president and his Third Reich termi
nology? Is no one struck by hearing
the words “New World Order” come
from the former head cf our secret
police (the CIA)? Those crystal blue
eyes, that strong Aryan jaw, the cruel
mouth and those petulant, wire-thin
lips we’ve been reading for so many
months. While the U.S. condones the
occupation of Palestine and plays
shoot-em-up in Panama, our “pater
familias” has the audacity to call Iraq’s
takeover of Kuwait “naked aggres
sion.” The “democracy” we are de
fending is a monarchic, caste-ridden
society that treats half its population
(the women) as cattle and still stones
people to death for adultery. Is this so
much more a sovereign state than is a
country run by a drug lord with con
nections to the CIA? Call the inci
dents in Panama a “kinder, gentler”
form of aggression.
By launching an attack on Iraq, the
United States has thoroughly desta
bilized the situation in the Middle
East. A holy war against the western
world seems not only inevitable, but
almost justified. Sure, the United States
has participated in plenty of slap-and
tickle around the globe, but never
anything so sweeping as this. Is it
necessary? The U.S. military pres
ence in the gulf seemed to effectively
balance Hussein’s force and disin
cline him from further aggression.
Protection of Saudi Arabia was, after
all, our first intention. The Pentagon
should have liked it. It look them out
of their post-Cold War slump straight
into spending a billion dollars a month.
The oil still flowed. So, what hap
pened? Why must Bush’s New World
Order be one of world domination?
I’ve seen people nearly electric
with enthusiasm over the affair. They
wish they could feel the desert heal
and hear the desert wind as they watch
the cataclysm from a safe remove.
It’s almost fctishistic. Where did wc
go wrong? Was it too much violence
on television? Not enough attention
as children? Too many drugs? Arc we
really so without grace, so benighted,
so in love with death that we will
allow this war?
J.S. Clement
senior
biology
-EDITORIAL POLICY
Initialed editorials represent offi
cial policy of the spring 1991 Daily
Nebraskan. Policy is set by the edito
rial board.
The Daily Nebraskan’s publishers
are the NU Board of Regents, who
established the University of Nc
brask.a-Lincoln Publications Board tc
supervise daily production of the
paper. According to the regents’ pol
icy, responsibility for the editorial
content lies solely in the hands of the
newspaper’s student editors.
SIR, LATEST COUNT, WE'VE
LOST FIFTEEN AIRCRAFT
AND WE'VE SHOT DOWN
OVER FIFTY.
-\CI
SIR. LATEST COUNT, WE'VE
TWO AIRCRAFT AND SHOT DO
OVER 200 OF THE IMPERIALIST^
AMERICAN PIGS.
/ _
“A-^Sk
^ „ V.
XSiiwKSmSff WyW^r w ——'
ERIC ASPENGREN
A peace hero is needed, not Bush
Wc finally did it. Wc are at
war, and it looks like there
wiil be no stopping it until
Iraq gives up Kuwait,I regret that I
did not do more to stop it before it
happened.
Everyone in the public eye claims
to have regrets. President Bush re
grets having to send troops to kill and
die to preserve freedom. U.N. Secre
tary General Javier Perez de Cuellar
regrets that his peace missions failed.
Some men and women regret joining
the military.
Apparently, the war is going well.
We have achieved the proverbial “air
superiority.” We have taken very few
losses, and Saddam Hussein seems
unable to respond to our air attacks.
His only responses seem to be desper
ate attempts to terrorize Saudi Arabia
and to draw Israel into the war.
We have many war heroes in the
making. The press corps is enjoying
itself, loo. Heroes have been bom in
Baghdad. The story is reminiscent of
Edward R. Murrow’s reports from
London during the blitz.
What is important and likely for
f An i c that inn mac^Asi /mic An^Art,.
o *w ■■■■ .J.rvVJ V/WI vppv.'l iu
nity to see a new kind of hero emerge
from this, a “peace hero,” if you will.
During the weeks of talks and peace
initiatives, someone with vision and
strength could have stood up for peace,
and, in a sense, forced the powers that
be into peace.
We don’t know it couldn’t have
happened. The only arguments against
this idea arc the words, “you can’t
deal with a madman,” or “you can’t
appease another Hitler.” But these
are not arguments against peace ini
tiatives. They are empty rhetoric. War
is only inevitable to those with a
severe lack of vision.
Our leadersclaimcd that they were
running out of lime and had only a
few options open to them. The mili
tary option is said to be a last resort.
But we do not know what a last resort
is when we don’t have clearly defined
rules.
Although analogies between war
and sports abound, the two are not
similar. In a football game, a team
knows how much time it has left and
what kinds of plays it needs to win.
If a team is five points behind and
Although analo
gies between war
and sports abound.
the two are not
similar. In a foot
ball game. a team
knows how much
time it has left and
what kinds of plays
it needs to win.
has the ball on the other team’s 40
yard line with 10 seconds left, it throws
a Hail Mary pass into the end zone.
But in the world of politics, the
rules and procedures arc not clearly
defined, especially in the area of
keeping the peace.
The only time limit— the Jan. 15
deadline — was arbitrary. There was
no reason, in terms of peace initia
tives, to set this date. Some analysts
have said the deadline was set to
make it easier for a war to be won. It
is frightening that we may have al
lowed military considerations to limit
peacekeeping options. Bush’s priori
ties were obviously not peace.
Bui the deadline was not the only
problem. Bush’s techniques were
foolish and hypocritical. Just look at
his rhetoric, “we will strike a blow for
the ideal that might docs not make
right.” That is not the statement ol a
man who has peace on his mind.
As peace talks intensified, Bush
claimed there would be “no negotia
tions,” further signs that he did not
seek peace. He turned the word
“negotiation” into an obscenity.
Negotiating does not mean, as Bush
seems to think, rewarding aggression.
When talks did take place, Bush’s
no-negotiations stance revealed its
ineffectiveness. Bush was inflexible,
saying flexibility implies weakness.
His limited viewpoint kept him from
believing he could get Saddam out of
Kuwait with talk. He expected a fight
and “stood strong” to get us ready for
it.
Bush also sabotaged the legitimate
peace talks that did take place with
leaders of other nations and the United
Nations.
Bush cannot pass the buck to the
enemy and claim that Saddam was
solely responsible for our entry into
the war. Bush failed to gain a peace
ful cnlulinn Kp ic cicrnimT ihe orders
lo send our troops tc their deaths. He
cannot escape some responsibility.
After all of Bush’s mistakes, there
still is hope. Again, it has not been
proven that we had to go lo war. The
anti-war protests are continuing and
seem to be gaining some momentum.
Many people have learned from his
tory.
We have to continue to call for an
end to this war — but not a quick and
decisive victory. We have to end the
war. Explore the calls by Jordan’s
King Hussein for a cease-fire. This
may seem futile to some, but history
has to remember that not everyone
supported going to war. We can in
spire future generations to action.
Remember how your leadership
stood w hen election time comes around
again. Vote against our congressmen
who voted for the war resolution,
Reps. Doug Bereuter, Peter Hoag- g
land and Bill Barrett.
And next time something like this B
happens — and unless our leadership S
changes, it will happen — maybe we I
can learn from this war and stop the ■
next one before it sums.
Aspengren is a freshman philosophy B
major and a Daily Nebraskan columnist.
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes
brief letters to the editor from all
readers. Letters will be selected for
publication on the basis of clarity,
originality, timeliness and space
-LETTER POLICY
availability. The Daily Nebraskan
retains the right to edit letters.
Anonymous submissions will not
be published. Letters should include
the author’s name,'address, phone
number, year in school and group affl
filiation, if any.
Submit material to the Daily NeB
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, !4(X) 1®
St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
