The Death Penalty Debate
Summary
TLDRIn this video, two legal experts debate the merits of the death penalty. Robert Blacker, a criminal law professor, argues for its necessity, citing justice and retribution as key reasons, while acknowledging the potential for executing innocent individuals. Steve Greenwald, a lawyer with death penalty experience, advocates for its abolition, citing racial and economic disparities, the lack of deterrence, and the high risk of error. Both discuss the impact of the death penalty on the broader criminal justice system.
Takeaways
- 📚 Robert Blacker is a criminal law professor and constitutional history teacher at New York Law School.
- 🔒 He has spent thousands of hours in maximum-security prisons and on death rows, interviewing convicted killers.
- ⚖️ Blacker supports the death penalty as a form of retributive justice, believing some people deserve to die for their crimes.
- 🔎 He identifies two groups as the 'worst of the worst': cold, callous killers and sadistic serial killers who derive pleasure from their crimes.
- 🤔 Blacker acknowledges the possibility of mistakenly executing innocent people but argues the ratio of error is small compared to the need for justice.
- 🏛️ He suggests that racial disparities in the death penalty can be reduced by redefining the criteria for the worst crimes.
- 👨⚖️ Steve Greenwald is a New York lawyer who has worked on death penalty cases for over 20 years.
- ❌ Greenwald opposes the death penalty and advocates for its abolition in the United States.
- 🌍 He argues that the death penalty contributes to the harshness of the U.S. criminal justice system compared to other democratic countries.
- 🚫 Greenwald states that studies show the death penalty is not a deterrent and shares personal experiences that support this view.
- 🔍 He points out the unequal application of the death penalty along racial and economic lines and the high risk of errors leading to the execution of innocent individuals.
Q & A
Who is Robert Blacker and what is his stance on the death penalty?
-Robert Blacker is a criminal law professor and constitutional history teacher at New York Law School. He supports the death penalty, believing that some people deserve to die and that society has an obligation to execute them.
What is the main reason Robert Blacker gives for supporting the death penalty?
-Robert Blacker supports the death penalty as a form of retribution, arguing that justice is served by executing those who have committed heinous crimes.
What are the two groups of criminals that Robert Blacker considers 'the worst of the worst'?
-The two groups Robert Blacker identifies as 'the worst of the worst' are the cold, callous, and wanton killers who feel nothing, and the sadistic serial killers who derive thrill and exhilaration from the suffering of their victims.
What are the two main arguments against the death penalty mentioned in the script?
-The two main arguments against the death penalty mentioned are the possibility of mistakenly executing innocent people and the racial bias in its application.
How does Robert Blacker address the concern of potentially executing innocent people?
-Robert Blacker acknowledges the horrifying possibility of executing innocent people but argues that the ratio of such errors is small compared to the number of cases where justice is served, suggesting that the death penalty is still worth it despite the risk.
What is Steve Greenwald's profession and his view on the death penalty?
-Steve Greenwald is a lawyer in New York with experience in death penalty cases. He is firmly opposed to the death penalty and believes it should be abolished in the United States.
According to Steve Greenwald, how does the death penalty influence the overall criminal justice system in the United States?
-Steve Greenwald suggests that the death penalty sets a precedent or tone for the rest of the criminal justice system, making it one of the harshest among democratic countries.
What are some reasons Steve Greenwald provides for the abolition of the death penalty?
-Steve Greenwald cites reasons such as the United States having one of the harshest criminal justice systems, the lack of the death penalty as a deterrent, racial and economic disparities in its application, and the high likelihood of errors leading to the execution of innocent individuals.
How does the script suggest addressing the racial disparity in the application of the death penalty?
-The script suggests that redefining what crimes constitute the 'worst of the worst' and implementing other changes could reduce the apparent racial disparity without eliminating the death penalty itself.
What is the Innocence Project mentioned in the script, and how does it relate to the death penalty?
-The Innocence Project is an organization that works to exonerate wrongfully convicted individuals through DNA testing and other means. The script mentions that since its establishment, around 150 individuals have been exonerated from death sentences due to errors made during trials or investigations.
Outlines
🏛️ Support for the Death Penalty: Justice and Retribution
Robert Blacker, a criminal law professor and constitutional history teacher at New York Law School, shares his perspective on the death penalty after spending considerable time in maximum-security prisons and on death rows. He believes that some individuals are deserving of execution and that society has an obligation to carry it out. Blacker identifies himself as a retributivist, arguing that the past actions of criminals should be the focus of punishment, rather than considering future benefits. He divides the worst criminals into two groups: the cold, callous killers who feel no remorse, and the sadistic serial killers who derive pleasure from their crimes. He addresses the concerns of death penalty opponents, acknowledging the possibility of executing innocent people but arguing that the potential for error is small compared to the need for justice. He also discusses the racial disparity in death penalty cases and suggests that it could be reduced by redefining the criteria for the most heinous crimes.
🙅♂️ Opposition to Capital Punishment: Inequality and the Risk of Error
Steve Greenwald, a New York lawyer with over 20 years of experience in death penalty cases, expresses his firm opposition to capital punishment and argues for its abolition in the United States. He points out that the U.S. has one of the harshest criminal justice systems in the world, and he believes the presence of the death penalty sets a precedent for severity in sentencing. Greenwald suggests that abolishing the death penalty could lead to broader sentencing reforms and align the U.S. more closely with other democratic nations. He also notes that studies have shown the death penalty is not a deterrent, a point he can personally attest to from his work with death row inmates. Furthermore, he highlights the systemic inequality in the application of the death penalty, particularly along racial and economic lines. Greenwald emphasizes the significant risk of executing the wrong person, citing the Innocence Project's work in exonerating approximately 150 individuals who were wrongfully sentenced to death. He concludes by advocating for the complete elimination of the death penalty.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Death Penalty
💡Retributivist
💡Abolitionists
💡Innocence
💡Racial Disparity
💡Habeas Proceedings
💡Deterrence
💡Error in the Judicial System
💡Capital Punishment
💡Aristotle's View on Evil
💡Exoneration
Highlights
Robert Blacker supports the death penalty, believing some people deserve to die and society has an obligation to execute them.
As a retributivist, Blacker emphasizes the importance of past actions independently of future consequences.
Blacker identifies two groups as the 'worst of the worst': cold, callous killers and sadistic serial killers.
The possibility of executing an innocent person is acknowledged as horrifying but considered a small price for justice in most cases.
Racial disparity in the death penalty is real, but Blacker suggests it can be reduced without abolishing the penalty itself.
Steve Greenwald opposes the death penalty and advocates for its abolition in the United States.
Greenwald argues the death penalty sets a harsh tone for the entire criminal justice system.
He believes abolishing the death penalty could lead to sentencing reform and align the U.S. with other democratic nations.
Studies show the death penalty is not a deterrent, which Greenwald confirms through his experiences with death row inmates.
The application of the death penalty is described as unequal, particularly along racial and economic lines.
Greenwald points out the high risk of error in capital punishment, citing cases of exonerated death row inmates.
The death penalty's finality and severity make it a focal point for criminal justice reform discussions.
Blacker and Greenwald present contrasting views on the death penalty, reflecting ongoing debates about its morality and effectiveness.
The transcripts highlight the complexity of the death penalty issue, involving moral, legal, and societal considerations.
Both speakers acknowledge the gravity of their positions, with Blacker emphasizing justice and Greenwald advocating for abolition.
The discussion underscores the need for careful consideration of the death penalty's impact on individuals and society.
Transcripts
[Music]
I'm Robert blacker I'm a criminal law
professor I also teach constitutional
history at New York law school I spent a
couple of thousand hours inside
maximum-security prisons and on death
rows across the United States
interviewing convicted killers from that
experience I've come to understand that
some people simply deserve to die and we
have an obligation to execute them so in
a word why do I support the death
penalty in a word justice in three words
they deserve it I'm a retributivist I
believe in retribution as a
retributivist for me and for my fellow
attribute visits the past counts it
counts independently of the future so
the wrong question to ask us about
punishment is what good will it do the
right question to ask us is what bad has
been done in the hundred or so murderers
whom I've interviewed at length in depth
to get their life stories and to get
them to expound upon the crimes that
committed and why they committed what's
emerged for me are two groups who I
would say are clearly the worst of the
worst of the worst remember again
Aristotle says evil lies at the extremes
and one extreme is the cold callous
wanton killer who feels nothing I'm
thinking about one of the actually to
spray shooters whom I interviewed then
there's the opposite extreme I've
interviewed and stood near people like
Danny walling sadistic serial killers
who raped tortured and mutilated their
victims and as they describe it in the
moments of their doing it they were very
emotionally involved they weren't cold
and callous they had they they felt
thrill in exhilaration these people
deserve to die
and we have an obligation to kill them
opponents of the death penalty
often called abolitionists by themselves
as well as us attack at principally
these days on two grounds number one is
that we might mistakenly execute the
innocent number two is that it's
racially biased so let's take them one
by one executing the innocent we do not
know for a fact that we have executed
even one innocent person we suspect we
have we probably have many fewer than
the abolitionists claim but we probably
have I don't know who it is but it's
horrifying that we have if we have and
we probably have so then the question
becomes first of all is that a price
worth paying the ratio is enormous the
tolerance for error is extremely small
and should be smaller still with the
death penalty than with any other
punishment but it isn't zero we do make
a sacrifice of possible the remote
remote possibility of innocence in order
to accomplish justice in the vast
majority of the cases the apparent
racial disparity in the death penalty
which is real insofar as 11 or 12% of
the population seems to occupy 40 or 45
percent of death row while real is much
more subtle than racism itself could be
radically reduced by redefining what
crimes constitute the worst of the worst
of the worst and a number of other
changes could be made which would
radically reduce the apparent disparity
without eliminating the death penalty
itself
my name is Steve Greenwald I'm a lawyer
in New York and I am someone who has
practiced in the death penalty area for
the last 20 years or so I have
represented people who were sentenced to
death and in what are called the habeas
proceedings meaning on appeal after the
death sentence has been applied or to
the individual as a result of my studies
generally and in particular my work in
the death penalty area I'm firmly
opposed to the death penalty and I think
it should be abolished in the United
States there are numbers of reasons for
about abolition in my opinion and I also
stress some of the most important ones
from my point of view one is that if we
look at the overall punishments regime
in the United States both at the federal
level and at the state level and we
compare it to punishment regimes in
other parts of the world we can see that
the United States has among the harshest
it's not the orcas
criminal justice system from a
standpoint of sentencing and punishment
of any democratic and other democratic
country in the world so we ask the
question why or who do we have such a
severe criminal justice system in my
opinion a part of the reason is that we
have the death penalty because the death
penalty to me is a capstone to the
criminal justice system since it's by
its own terms the most severe and final
sort of punishment that's possible and
if you have the death penalty as we do
in my view it sets a precedent if you
want to call it that or a tone for the
rest of the criminal justice system so I
believe that if we can abolish the death
penalty yes I think it should be
abolished that that could lead to
sentencing reform generally and bring us
more in line with
what other democratic countries are
doing all the studies that have been
done was almost all the studies have
been done show clearly that the death
money is not a deterrent and frankly
that's something I can speak to from
experience because I've represented
numbers of people on death row over the
years and I've also met with and
interviewed other people on death row
and I can tell you that deterrence would
not be a factor in any of the crimes
that these people committed third the
the application of the death penalty in
the United States is completely in equal
and unfair
in terms of on a racial along racial
lines and along economic lines and and
other dimensions another attribute or
defect is high seeded in the capital
punishment system is the likelihood of
error being made the wrong person we've
seen over the last 15 or 20 years since
the Innocence Project was first
established something in the range of
about 150 individuals who have been
exonerated from from death sentences
because errors were made during the
trial or and or in the in the
investigation that led to the trial I
think we have to get rid of the death
penalty once and for all
you
تصفح المزيد من مقاطع الفيديو ذات الصلة
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)