URBAN PHILOSOPHER
Conscience Laureate

Monday, January 24, 2011

LIFE REFLECTIONS- Two stories



An Eye for An Eye

If someone viciously murdered my sister or a loved one, I would want them immediately tortured slowly and then killed. They have no right to continue their life after taking another’s life away. That said, why am I am opposed to the death penalty as it exists now?

In Illinois there is much public discussion on whether Governor Pat Quinn should sign a bill abolishing the death penalty which has been frozen since 2000 by former Governor George Ryan. Ryan declared the moratorium after courts overturned convictions of 13 men on death row. Seven more inmates have been exonerated since.

Quinn has shown support for capital punishment in the past but is carefully reviewing the bill to abolish. Jeremy Schroeder, executive director of the Illinois Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, said, "He knows what everyone else realizes: The system is still broken.”

While I understand there have been mistakes made in the past, and currently there could be other innocent inmates on death row, there are two factors in my decision about execution.

(1) TIME AND MONEY
People do not realize that it cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars when a capital punishment case is involved because the U.S. Constitution requires a long and time consuming judicial process for capital cases.

A New York Times editorial published in 2009, in addressing the costs per state of capital punishment said, “Perhaps the most extreme example is California, whose death row costs taxpayers $114 million a year beyond the cost of imprisoning convicts for life. The state has executed 13 people since 1976 for a total of about $250 million per execution. This is a state whose prisons are filled to bursting (unconstitutionally so, the courts say) and whose government has imposed doomsday-level cuts to social services, health care, schools and parks.”

While money should not be a factor in deciding to put a criminal to death, why should an innocent population be deprived of services because money is being spent on criminals?

Because the appeal process can take up to 15 years, it is a traumatic experience for the victims’ families, causing them to relive the pain of the death of their loved one.

(2) Change the Rules on the Death Penalty

The varying state death penalty laws, as they exist now, have a lot of mitigating factors in the decision process of whether someone should be tried for a capital crime. I am against the death penalty as it is currently defined. So what legislatures need to do is re-write what type of crime deserves the death penalty. If the commission of the crime is viewed by hundreds of people (think Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords) then there is no question that the perpetrator is guilty! Nuke him immediately! I will push the start button.


MIRROR, MIRROR ON THE WALL



Besides the introspective reflection of the first story, we have actual reflection in this story. Mirrus, a unit of Clear Channel Outdoor advertising, is a company that produces innovative multimedia vehicles, has created advertising that will be reflected in mirrors in public restrooms.

O’Hare International Airport has been chosen as one of the test markets to gauge the effectiveness of this type of marketing. About 150 40 inch mirrors will be installed in both men’s and women’s bathrooms that run a video on the mirrored screen . The entire mirror is covered with an advertisement until a person walks up to it and then the ad moves to a corner so one can see their own reflection instead of the canned message.


Mirrus Founder Brian Reid said in a statement, “We developed these digital displays to provide brands with a platform to convey gender specific advertisements that are guaranteed to reach female and male audiences in an uncluttered environment.”

A couple of questions: How much did Mirrus pay O’Hare for the right to install the mirrors and how much do they charge the client for placing the ad? I’ll have to reflect on that for a while.

2 comments:

  1. Sue writes:

    "I have always believed in an eye for an eye!! The killer should die in the same way as the victim."

    ReplyDelete
  2. This mirror scares me and let me explain why. I tried looking up the technology and have found no technical specs on the mirror. There are only two ways that I know this technology could work. First, is the advertisement is rear-projected. This is the technology used at my conferences where a projector projects the image from the rear. This requires the screen to be made of a translucent material. The second technology would be if they weren't mirror but instead a small camera and a screen. Both of these are scary because they leave a possibility for invasion of privacy. Especially in the later scenario, these mirrors could open a window to very private time. Very, very scary.

    ReplyDelete