E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn 1987, Prosecutor Gary Van Brocklin addressed a panel of three judges deciding the fate of a man who had killed store clerk Ihsan Aydah of Youngstown, Ohio.
“Give him the same consideration he gave Ihsan Aydah – give him death,” Van Brocklin said. The judges agreed and sent the defendant, John Jeffrey Eley, then 38, to death row.
On Tuesday, 25 years after Eley was sentenced, Ohio Gov. John Kasich granted him clemency, in part because Van Brocklin, police detective Joseph Fajack and Judge Peter Economus changed how they felt about the case.
“It was something that bothered my conscience,” Van Brocklin told msnbc.com on Tuesday. “He wasn’t smart.”
At the time, a clinical psychologist found that Eley had borderline intelligence. Since then, a psychiatrist has found him to be mentally disabled -- relevant because the Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that mentally disabled defendants cannot be sentenced to death.
Van Brocklin recalled that Eley hadn't seemed sharp. The former county prosecutor, a self-described conservative Republican, said he had offered Eley a four-to-six year sentence in exchange for his testimony against his accomplice, Marvin Green. Green had given Eley the gun and told him to hold up the store.
But Eley refused to testify against his old friend.
“To this day, he quotes the Bible saying you shouldn’t be a witness,” Van Brocklin said. “But the Bible says you shouldn’t bear false witness. He’s not a bright guy.”
There were other details about the case that bothered the three lawmen. Eley had waived his right to a jury trial – that wouldn’t happen today. Also, life without parole was not a possible sentence at the time.
“This was the kind of case that nowadays would not be indicted capitally,” Van Brocklin said. “John Eley killed a man – life without parole would be a fair punishment. I never felt that I was overzealous, but I felt that it wasn’t fair.”
In June, Judge Economus wrote the parole board: "If I had been presented the additional mitigating evidence outlined in the clemency petition at the time of the trial, especially evidence of Mr. Eley's low intellectual functioning, his impoverished childhood, his significant alcohol and substance abuse, and his probable brain impairment, I would have voted for a sentence less than death."
It hadn't helped over the years that defending Eley was difficult, said Vicki Werneke, the assistant federal public defender who oversaw his case. Eley refused to be evaluated and spoke with her only by phone.
“He told his sisters he thought he would be released from prison and that Jesus was going to save him,” Werneke told msnbc.com. “I’m a believer and I think that maybe God did have a hand in it, but maybe it was through us.”
But the state didn't heed their pleas. On June 20, exactly 10 years after the Supreme Court ruling, an Ohio parole board voted, 5-3, to uphold Eley's death sentence.
It was unusual for the board to be divided, Werneke said. Even more so, however, was that the governor overruled their decision.
Then again, Gov. Kasich appears to be examining death row cases. In September, he spared a man who had slashed a woman’s throat during a 1987 robbery, The Associated Press reported. The governor said he was compelled by the man’s mental health history and the story of his tragic childhood.
In June, the governor removed a man from death row because the details of the crime were “frustratingly unclear.”
Of the governor, Van Brocklin said, “I have to commend him for a courageous stand. It’s easy to run the other way.”
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- Episcopal Church becomes biggest US church to bless gay unions
- From Russia with love? Siberian wildfire smoke means rosy sunsets in Seattle
- Farmer says Arkansas drought turns cattle ranch into 'desert'
- Video: Alligator bites off Florida teen's arm
- Hiker awaiting help for broken leg ends up rescuing his rescuer
Leave a Comment:
Regardless of one's personal position on capital punishment, the burden of deciding to step in and spare a life, or to stand aside and allow the ending of a life must weigh heavily on the governors of states which still have the death penalty. I know I couldn't shoulder that responsibility. I wonder how many of us could?
I definitely agree that it would be a very difficult part of the job. No matter what ones stance may be on capital punishment, I think Gov. Kasich did the right thing in this case.
I could. Robert in Oregon.....IF THAT CONDEMNED MAN HAD slashed YOUR MOTHER'S THROAT.....would it be DIFFICULT to ALLOW the execution to GO ON?...While you're Governor, that is.
Or would you allow that DECISION to "weigh heavily" on your mind? While you fully well know that he SLASHED your mother's throat ?
The fact that the CONDEMNED man is "crazy" or of LOW MENTAL CAPACITY.......IS NO EXCUSE for the condemned man to take a life. .....AND especially (Hypothetically), your mother's life.
For one thing....if you HAD A BROTHER..........what would he think?...Or your relatives....for that matter?
All these "bleeding hearts".....MAKE ME SICK.
@Rofl J. Monsanto: Excessive capitalization, double quotes, and abuse of periods only make your message look like spam.
(1) That kind of excuses does make power wane for the office of governor of Ohio.
here's the thinking process:
in 1987, murder during a robbery was very rare, and the population was smaller or tiny. there less development and some streets are not paved and less number of houses. businesses like Walmart or microsoft has not made millionaires.
in 2012, murder during a robbery is likely, and the population is much bigger or huge. Streets in county are more paved street and not gravel streets. more houses and more neighborhood cluster of houses. etc.
So if percentage/ratio of murder crimes in 1987 in proportion to population density in 1987 is less when compare ratio of murder crimes in 2012 in proportion to population density in 2012, then one of the excuses by Mayor of Ohio is lame. Less murder crimes mean it is rare like serial killer crime is rare; why murder when population is small, etc.?
I could. No problem. I just wouldn't want to have to deal with the freakin' lawyers whining at my doorstep.
Tell that to the Family related to the person he killed, and also tell that to the Family of his next victim..... Capital Punishment means nothing unless carried out in a Timely Manner.....
Sounds to me like this "honorable" governor would have NO problem with turning these vermin loose, too - so as long as they don't show up in HIS gated community. He could not care less about the safety of YOURS.
2 things. First, granting clemency does not mean release. Second, emotional responses, such as "how would so and so feel if it was your such and such that was murdered" don't really have much bearing on these cases because one can come up with an equally legitimate response of "how would you feel if you're mentally handicapped family member was in such a position". So, by adding in such a response, you only demonstrate your inability to come up with a proper legal argument.
Removing the death penalty for a handicapped individual is not magically saying it's OK for them to take a life. It's recognizing that the death penalty for such a person is cruel and unusual punishment because of the diminished capacity for such individuals to assist in their defense or fully understand such a punishment. Life without parole is in no way less safe than the death penalty for the mentally impaired.
What Ralphie boy and a lot of you are missing is that Kasich is no bleeding heart. He is cut from the same Koch brothers pocketbook cloth as any toe-the-line GNOPer out there.
@doggysaywhat- I agree completely with your post. Well said.
These comments are amazing. For those advocating the right of the victim or for public safety or swift justice - killing this man would do nothing for the victim and not killing him does not mean releasing him into anyone's community gated or otherwise. Life without parole is a credible way to protect society, to use measured levels of retribution and it teaches people that if they take a life that they will effectively forfeit their own. At the same time life without parole leaves the people and the state that represents them with very clean hands - hands without blood on them and blood that serves no purpose and no reason. In this case those advocating for the rights of the victim, the victims family and swift and certain justice miss out on a key issue - diminished mental capacity and the supreme court has already ruled on this and has said it can not be done. Good call, fair call and when you look at the people who prosecuted this man coming to his defence now well that takes courage and it takes character. The right call.
America, where you're guaranteed to find some @!$%#s who support executing retarded people.
While I agree that mental deficiencies should be a factor in determining the death sentence, I do not give a rats ass about what kind of childhood the person had. While mental illness or deficiency is definitely a mitigating factor and affects the choices a person makes, having a bad childhood is no excuse for committing murder. Many people who had bad childhoods do not grow up to be murderers and I am tired of this poor me defense for committing a heinous act. Kasich appears to have made the right decision in this case, but the idea that he would consider the criminal's childhood as a mitigating factor is completely unacceptable to me.
so any mentally disabled person can murder and we can support them for life in prison? What's the definition of mentally disabled? To what degree can they be disabled? The 2 men that raped and murdered a drs wife and two daughters (in Michigan, I think) -- strangled and burned them to death used that defense that they were mentally disabled and drug addicts and they got the death penalty so you think the governor should overturn the death penalty and give them life? You should google the story it's bone chilling! They weren't so disabled that they made the wife drive one of them to the bank and withdrawal $15k while the other one stayed behind and raped the 11 yr old girl and brought the wife back and raped her then set their beds on fire. Oh yeah, the dr heard a noise in the basement (he went down to check it out) and they beat him with a baseball bat. Sounds to me like it was thought out very well so I have a problem with the mental disability defense.
Kasich appears to have looked at this case closely. That is more than can be said of Huckabee who released a killler soley on the parole board recommendation.
Having had someone with a learning disability briefly at our home, not having the ability to fully understand the short or long term consequences should be considered when applying a sentence.
It is so comforting to know being raised in poverty and abusing drugs/alcohol are justifiable reasons to kill someone.
'Ralph J. Monasterio' wrote:
Gosh, Ralph. With all due respect, that is an awful lot of shouting and vitriol in response to a comment that such decisions by state governors over life or death "must weigh heavily" on them. That thought is offensive to you?
Judging by your post you would disagree, but I for one wouldn't want a state governor who would not give such decisions even a passing thought, or on occasion lose sleep over such a consideration over the life or death of a human being "in our name.".
Governor Perry of Texas has made his complete lack of any feeling of disquiet over signing death warrants in his state (which conducts nearly half of all of the executions in our nation each year; 1 state almost equals all of the annual executions of the other 49 states combined!)
And Governor Perry has stated he has never lost sleep over the possibility that he might sign a death warrant for an innocent man of woman, and that the state might execute that innocent person (Note: the question was asked of Governor Perry because of recent compelling evidence that Texas has, indeed, executed innocents).
By contrast, the Governor of the State of Oregon, now in his third 4-year term, is a heart surgeon. As a physician he subscribes to the Hippocratic oath, and he has introspectively and with humility stated that allowing execution to proceed during his first term as Governor of Oregon remains the greatest regret of his life.
And he has stated that he will sign no more death warrants as Governor of Oregon. He has not commuted the sentences of those on Oregon's death row, mind you. Rather he will not advance those sentences during his Governorship.
My personal opinion about capital punishment is irrelevant and was not stated in my post to which you were so disturbed; although you insinuate that I am a "bleeding heart." I would divert you back to my original point along with this observation:
With few exceptions (one, I noted above) I have great respect for ALL Governors of any political party or personal opinions regarding capital punishment -- regardless of whether they sign death warrants to advance executions in their state, or they commute sentences after weighing the strength of evidence and the possibilities that courts & juries have erred, or whether they defer death sentences as a matter of conscience -- so long as the question of life or death of a human being weighs heavily on them.
Taking a human life 'in our name', as citizens, should rank among the most difficult of decisions for a society; most especially for our leaders. For a Governor of a state to treat such decisions with passivity and resignation rather than serious deliberation would, in my opinion, make that person unfit to serve.
God forbid our society ever has to definitively deal with the proven certainty that an innocent person has been put to death in the name of the state, or in the name of the United States of America for a crime that person did not commit!
If or when that day comes, America will truly have to come to terms with the meaning of "premeditated murder."
And the more heavily these decisions weigh on the men and women who have to make them, the less the chances are that the day of reckoning will come soon.
MINUS 1 from the THINKER. It was a mistake.
Honestly, it's even more comforting knowing society operates in a way that promotes all of those vices you mentioned. Ever think of fixing those, first?
I bet you're a christian, Ralph
no ralph does not sound like a christian , a true christian can no more support the death penalty than support pro choice, no one should take life,no one, but in this world we have many who want to kill a sad place indeed
Christian or not, the same hurt emotions over the loss of a loved one. Learning that there is a greater good takes time and accepting that truth sometimes is difficult for christian to do.
A just decision....... had it been my Mother, Wife, Sister...etc....surely, I would be devastated to say the least! But, knowing the facts, especially the mental state of the accused, I would have to forgive the the man, and let the courts decide on proper punishment. I could not live with hate & constant anguish in my heart. There is NOTHING I could do to bring the deceased back. This is not a perfect world, and many have suffered, and many more will...such as in this manner. I would pray most hard to my God that he gives me the strength to go on, and forgive, knowing that I also will die, and be reunited. Undying Faith will carry me through.....
Brothers and Sisters.....the question we SHOULD be asking is:
What Would Christian Bale Do?
Why didn't god stop him from commiting this horable act. It stopped him from doing other things like testifying against his friend. He should be executed.
Because of free will. The only thing that stopped him from testifying against his friend was his own belief. What does execution have to do with what God did or did not stop?
I not so sure he doesn't understand the bible maybe his friend didn't tell him to do anything.
an eye for an eye.....so many excuses for why he DID the murder...should have been executed years ago.another waste of taxpayers money....
An eye for an eye, tit for tat. Whether the law sanctions it or not, responding in kind makes us no better than the murderer IMO. When my son punches a sibling in the face, is it appropriate for me to punish him by doing the same?
I find it strangely amusing that those who are so vocal against the Koran allegedly being used in court decisions are also so vocal for the Bible's use.
I find it even more amusing that Christians are so quick to quote "an eye for an eye" punishment without realizing that the quote comes from the Old Testament, which is the only portion of the Bible that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all agree on.
More importantly, while an eye for an eye may be proper according to Jewish and Muslim traditions, Christians are admonished by no less than Jesus to abandon such responses to being wronged. A Christian who proposes an eye for an eye is acting counter to his or her religion. So unless Mike is a Jew or a Muslim he likely has no right to call for such a punishment based on his religion.
Really? How do you know since the bible was written, edited, rewritten, translated, paraphrased, interpreted, etc by man hundreds of years after the time of Jesus?
Who survived long enough to ensure the accuracy?
Call it a tradition then. Christians follow the words of Jesus. It doesn't matter if he was real or if he really said it. It's in the book Christians consider a guide to behavior. Beyond that it really doesn't matter for my purposes.
Gov. Kasich acts at his own peril. This will not sit well with conservative Christian voters in Ohio. They are only interested in mercy when they hear about it for an hour on Sunday. They don't vote on Sundays.
I wonder if Jesus got a twinge of excitement in his gut as he called for someone's execution? Hard to say, since he never did that, but my guess would be no.
So many ASSUME that we are all of the Christian ideology. Not all of us are bound to that thinking process.
Murder is murder, diminished capacity or not. For the person murdered, I hear very little to defend him from it. Could the victim read and write? Did he have a job? A family? Did he help his neighbor? Did he go to the religious house of his belief system? Was he a good person? Was he handicapped in any way? (and on and on). WAS THE VICTIM GIVEN A REPRIEVE? Obviously not. If justice is to have any weight or bearing on our lives, it must be fulfilled. The reason for penalties is to prevent future crimes. If the penalties are put aside, why bother with any punishments? Why are we not in constant turmoil? Why is crime not rampant? (Maybe we should look around a bit, I think we are moving that way now.)
I would much prefer that we were all honest and straightforward; that crime was a thing of the past; that murder didn't exist. But I live in the real world, and in the real world, we need real penalties. I know a great many individuals who have a number of mental and/or physical disabilities and challenges; yet, all of them know right from wrong. I don't think any of them would stoop so low as to murder another and then claim their disability as an excuse.
For Gov. Kasich--you may feel like you did the right thing, but as with so many of your other decisions, you are dead wrong on this one, too.
You think life without parole isn't a real penalty? You just sound blood thirsty. You don't want justice, you want revenge.
Life without parole is just living out an existence. Some folks would have no problem with that. Some would. Some would see it as an opportunity to kill again. Others might try to turn themselves around. And yet another might just go the suicide route. Perhaps it is bloodthirsty to want justice. I guess it's all in your point of view. I think this person could kill again, without a second thought. It's what I think, not necessarily what anyone else thinks. BTW, I live in Ohio, and I remember when this murder happened. As I recall, the murderer wasn't quite as "mentally handicapped" then, and he appears to be now. Funny how that works.
Justice is a sensation experienced by observers, revenge is felt by affected members.
Capital punishment is still a penalty to most.
So a reichwingnut has a heart...of course he still supports executing 12 year olds so he has a few hundred more years of evolution to complete...
What a bunch of blood-thirsty morons you are. Real Christians.
People scream bloody murder about tax dollars being spent on healthcare services, while states are spending billions on housing, food, healthcare services, televisions, internet access, computers, and much more for prison inmates who killed people during the commission of a crime.
A small percentage of the people incarcerated in this country are there for violent crime.
In the end, capital punishment, once reinstated 40 years ago, has done absolutely nothing to deter crime. It is vengeance, the sanctioned killing by the State on behalf of victims or next of kin. It really accomplishes nothing. I have often wondered about conservative Christians and the call for execution because the bible say "an eye for an eye" because the most famous execution by the State was that of Christ himself. Convicted of a crime he did not commit. It's hard to believe in 2000 years, our society has not really advanced enough to put corporal punishment behind us.
On that note, given Kasich's very conservative nature, I am surprised he granted clemency. Good for him for doing what he thought was right.
1. After 35 years working with the developmentally disabled I have yet to see a retarded person who would kill anyone.
2. Every university study done in the last 40 years finds that between 3 and 20 innocents are spared being murdered for each publicized execution for 1st degree murder. An additional innocent is spared the horror of being murdered for every 2 years shaved off the appeals process.
3. Brutish and stupid is not retarded.
I am astonished that anyone working with developmentally disabled people for 35 years would call them "retarded." In fact, because of that statement, I find it hard to take you at your word.
A rose by any other name.....
Oh, get over it. Retarded was a perfectly acceptable word years ago until someone made it not acceptable.
Adjective:
Less advanced, esp. mentally, than is usual for one's age.
Synonyms:
backward - delayed
Seems to sum it up perfectly.
C.E., I'm glad knowing some people have their consciences screwed on properly.
Such BS, so he gets away with murder, that's just great. I don't care if you are mentally retarded or not, you should face the same penalties as everyone else. To many damn liberal tree huggers out there these days it makes me sick when it comes to putting down worthless human beings.
Could you imagine taxes going DOWN because we can get rid of prisons and jails across the country because we put people to death that gave up their rights to live because of some horrible crime they commited? Capital punishment is a wonderful thing and we need to use it more.
Look at those crazy third world countries, you get caught stealing you lose fingers or your hand, would people here start to think twice when there is an actual punishment? I think so, 110%! If you are mentally disabled you shouldn't be out on the street with us normal people period.
Ever wonder why animals in nature eat their young, or leave the bad ones to the side? Don't get me wrong, I feel for people with loved ones that are disabled and what have you, but I mean, how many people do you see in wheelchairs that can't move at all and have no real brain function? How is that any type of quality of life for that person or that persons family?
I feel bad for situations like that but at the same time we should be able to just put loved ones like that "to sleep", like what we do to our pets when they can no longer go on. Mentally disabled or not, this guy needs to be held accountable and put to death, no questions.
Why? What does that serve? And he isn't getting away with murder, he's just not to be killed for it. you strike as someone who doesn't always think things through.
No human being is worthless. Their existence can always be made purposeful if people like you are willing to actually use his noodle and positively benefit another's outlook, lifestyle, and sense of self-worth. Go hug a tree. I hate trees. Tree hater.
I honestly don't think I would be able to execute another human being no matter what..a lot of people say they would have no problem doing just that however I tend to think they would feel differently if their hand was placed on that switch or trigger of a gun..nor is it in me to forgive..i simply move on and live with pain of losing a loved on as I don't believe there is any such thing as closure..it fades with each passing day but it will never go away..
No problem. I'll pull the switch.
Thankfully, you are not charged with defending our country or our families.
Ahemm, pardon the interruption. It's my understanding that we're not exactly at war here, at home. I'd really like to hear from some of you the kind of pleasure you get from killing someone else. Please, do explain. Explain how it's a necessary evil and why it's so necessary.
borderline retarded? i don't think so. he was able to murder someone in the commision of a crime and didn't want to snitch on a buddy? wow...a lot more criminals ought to claim being retards
Life in prison sure as hell doesn't seem to be a deterrent and capital punishment shouldn't be viewed as a deterrent either, it's a solution. It guarantees that the perpetrator will never re-offend, which an alarmingly high percentage of them do.
I feel that when you take a life, especially in the course of a crime like robbery (sometimes for a few dollars, which is really sickening), you forfeit your rights. Period.
And yes, I believe capital punishment should be carried out much more expeditiously. On death row for 24 years? That's insane. For what reason?
And no, I am neither christian nor republican. I'm a proud agnostic democrat.
That's a great idea! Just kill all the killers! So, that way, there's no telling how many people will end up dying at the hands of the government.
I wouldn't be proud if I were you.
Don't you think it would be a bit more moral and compassionate to prevent murder in the first place?
You might want to give some thought to the many reasons why others disagree with you opinion.
And you may want to give some thought to why even more agree with me.
And why on earth would a mudering scumbag warrant compassion?
Even more absurd, exactly how do you 'prevent murder in the first place'? That's the most idiotic thing I've ever heard.
If these bloodthirsty thugs saw that we immediately execute with no questions asked, maybe THAT WOULD PREVENT MURDER IN THE FIRST PLACE, you blathering idiot.
So I guess Mr Aydah's life is meaningless to you folks who are against people paying for their crimes with their lives! Do you even have a clue as to what these people do to get the death penalty? What does religion have to do with it but stifle justice and no one can decide for me what my religion should say about it. Common sense doesn't seem to have any effect anymore. Why not just commute the sentence because he is maybe uncomfortable in prison. We legally let mother's execute unborn babies at will who have done nothing to deserve it but we can't punish those who scumbags who kill people. Sometin's out of whack here. I still can't grab the fact that we go through expensive taxpayer money for lawyers but yet a Governor can decide justice at will. I guess it comes down to your definition of punishment.
Because a psychiatrist has found him to be mentally disabled he can get away with murdering someone. I would understand if it was so bad that he had no understanding of right and wrong but come on people. He Killed somebody and all we get from one of his mind you that and I quote "He’s not a bright guy." Does that justify not giving him the death sentence. It's like saying well I got straight D's in High School I should not get the death penalty for killing someone. If that is all it takes to get away with murder these days then I'm going to have to be paranoid for the rest of my life.
Is school really any indication of intelligence, anyway? After all, why don't you tell me a better way of judging someone's character and mindfulness?
Without such fictitious and infinite accuracy peering into an unknown mind, you have absolutely no standing to judge another's capacity.
So it's wrong to kill a mentally disabled person but it's perfectly fine to lock him up for life?
Tell me this country has it's priorities in order and I'll know you're crazy.
OK Anony, I've had it with you. What exactly would you have us do with individuals like this? Dismiss their crimes altogether because some psychiatrist says he has diminished mental capacity?
He commited murder during a robbery. Think about that for a minute. He decided to rob someone, and THEN decided to SLASH that someone's throat. Probably for resisting, but maybe for no reason at all.
I can tell immediately that you, nor anyone you've even known, have ever been the victim of a violent crime. It's time to open your eyes and realize that there is true evil out there. No, not satan, just regular people that want to take everything from you, including your life.
You've had it with me? Not yet.
It's not right to take someone's life just because they took another's. It might sound right on a judicial level, but on a moral, conscionable level, it couldn't be further from the truth.
Let's look at it this way. Instead of asking if an insane person deserves harsh punishment if he/she commits a crime, let's ask this... What justification would a rational person have to commit violent crime?
The answer to that is none, unless the law didn't punish it. Since the law does punish violent crime, the rational person would only commit a crime under necessary circumstances, in full understanding of the implications and punishment.
Perhaps, even, some violent crime is justifiable under certain conditions, and would give reason to the the rational person to commit it. The difference is that insane persons are not the only people who can claim a crime is just and avoid trouble. That's where your argument stands. But, I've just explained that there is a possibility of sane (reasonable) people committing a crime, and getting away with it.
So, don't you think it would make sense to actually decide on a case-by-case basis who was socially aware of his/her acts?
I think this makes sense for many reasons. First, it would force society to judge people for who they are and not simply by-the-book. We can often see the differences between the liberal/conservatives states in this aspect. Why would you always want to fully punish someone who doesn't deserve it?
If someone asks for something, does it mean that he/she deserves it? What right does society have to inflict harm on someone else? Mind you, an individual has no right to truly inflict harm on society, either-but they are one in the same. Society should have no more leeway to hurt someone than someone does to hurt society.
So, enter moral hazard, the judicial system, etc., and we have some very hard-lined opinions on always dishing out the harshest punishments, which are not always right--nor effective in preventing other crimes.
Try to stop looking at the individual circumstances and the individual's protections, but look at the larger social cost to destroying lives, families, etc. There is hardly any benefit to society to take out 1 violent criminal than there is to identifying the environmental and genetic circumstances that may have led up to such crime.
This leads to another question: if rational people can sometimes commit violent crime, is there any such thing as a rational person at all? So, which way do you have it? Believe no one is rational all the time and do something to fix society, or believe no one is rational all the time, and just punish everyone.
I'd rather take the sunny side and believe in people instead of hoping someone else with a better conscience is born tomorrow. By, the way, that's not to say that wouldn't be the case tomorrow, but it's very probable that evolution takes longer than it does society to fix itself. So, if we keep allowing our fellow humans to hurt themselves and others, society will become even more unstable unless we start to help people who need help and stop thinking about ourselves.
I think we should go back to public hangings. This system is not working!!! I for one am tired of supporting the criminals. They have more benifits than I, I have had a difficult life, but save one time when I stole a pack of hot dogs from a grocery store to feed my children, I have not turned to a life of crime. I'm sick and tired of the boo-hooer, my life is too hard. BS get a grip, grow up, be responsible. No the real deal is it just easier to rob, & kill. There isn't much WORK involved with crime. DO THE CRIME--PAY THE PRICE period.