Debate over death penalty resurfaces in California
The above is a nice in-depth article by Mike Gardner, not your usual newspaper headline with sound bite. Gardner cites an article by former California Chief Justice Ronald George: "Thoughtful individuals on both sides of the death penalty debate should be able to agree on one thing: The existing system... is dysfunctional and needs reform."
Update: 11/07/2012: Link: Death penalty repeal in
California was rejected by California voters
A California initiative in 1978 reinstated the death penalty, shortly after a national moratorium was rescinded for the U.S. in 1977. The national moratorium on executions began in 1972. In my opinion, the death penalty was useless then, and remains useless (and expensive in both time and dollars) today.
Four of the arguments in Westerfield's opening brief assert that the California death penalty is unconstitutional, for reasons not clear to the average lay reader. The general objections are much easier to understand: (1) the practice is barbaric compared with other civilized Western nations. (2) it is irrevocable once completed, denying the possibility of new evidence or new laws; (3) executions in the U.S. tend to be highly discriminatory against certain ethnicities and states of residence; (4) it has been shown repeatedly to be neither a deterrent nor an effective form of crime control; (5) as noted in the article above, it is wasteful of both financial and court resources; (6) a society that respects life should not kill human beings. For more information on why the death penalty in the U.S. or in your state should be repealed, see the current arguments at American Civil Liberties Union web page.