July 2, 2025 Breaking News, Latest News, and Videos

Can We Kill The Death Penalty?:

In November the SAFE California Act initiative will give state voters the chance to end the death penalty here. Since much bigger minds than mine have taken a look at exactly what having a death penalty is doing for California, let’s begin with a few of things they have already observed.

Capital cases can often drain as much as $1 million from counties. Then more state and federal money can and will be spent on special incarceration and on appeals. If those appeals produce a retrial, counties foot the bill all over again.

The death penalty, in looking for greater justice for victims, instead often creates situations in which the survivors and victim’s families must continue to actively participate in a nightmare. Years – sometimes decades – after a crime has been committed, appeals can force families to face killers and would-be killers again in court and produce yet another guilty verdict with the punishment of reliving the suffering inflicted on the innocent.

Since California voted to reinstate the death penalty in 1978 with the Briggs initiative, the state has spent an estimated $4 billion to execute 13 people. SAFE would end the death penalty and allocate $100 million over three years to solve murders and rapes in California. SAFE’s sponsors argue that 46 percent of murders and 54 percent of rapes go unsolved every year and the resources created would be spent solving those crimes and not supporting a “broken” death penalty.

In a Feb. 12 Los Angeles Times editorial Ron Briggs, son of former State Senator John Briggs, said that while his family had run a grassroots campaign to pass the Briggs initiative in 1978 they were now united in endorsing the SAFE act. From that editorial: “We thought our 1978 initiative created a system to support victims’ families. It didn’t. The only people benefiting today are the lawyers who handle expensive appeals and the criminals who are able to keep their cases alive interminably. The Briggs death penalty law in California simply does not work.”

All that comes before the often emotional feelings we might have individually about the death penalty. I know I get emotional when I hear yet another story of justice finally realized by means of DNA or just plain hard work on the part of advocates for those unjustly sentenced and finally released after having spent years in prison. Those pushing SAFE argue that since 139 people nationally have been freed from death row after they were found to be innocent, the chance that innocent people are sometime being executed remains disturbingly high.

SAFE would replace the death penalty with life in prison without the possibility of parole and would require inmates to work and pay restitution to the victims compensation fund. So we might agree that the elephant still in the room on this is whether we feel that’s enough.

It can become even more difficult to wrestle with this if one takes a wide view and pulls in such things as the trend in gun carry laws, with 49 states now allowing citizens to carry certain concealed firearms in public. My home state of Wisconsin recently passed a carry law and during some Christmas shopping I was surrealistically struck by the number by stores with signs asserting that guns were not allowed inside. Guns don’t really argue one way or another about the death penalty; they simply allow individuals to administer it at their discretion. If California joins New York, New Jersey, New Mexico, and recently Illinois in repealing the death penalty, could we soon be a nation asserting that its citizens make split-second life and death decisions on the street that are at least as good as the ones we spend months deliberating in our courts with a jury of our peers?

Perhaps fortunately, the strongest arguments for the Safe act have more to do with bringing sense and practicality to the administration of justice than they do with unwieldy arguments about how and when we invoke our basic humanity. In that same LA Times editorial Ron Briggs remembers his Dad’s fondness for saying “Facts are stubborn things.” Without even touching on any moral conundrums, Briggs unemotionally explains that “The ineffective legal beast created by California’s death penalty laws costs taxpayers more than $100 million annually and ties up the lives of prosecutors and victims who could be moving on to other things.”

After writing his superb book about Utah killer Gary Gilmore, “The Executioner’s Song,” author Norman Mailer said that he wasn’t sure the justice system needed the death penalty but he thought that perhaps we needed it: That we needed to know it was in place, waiting there for those who richly deserved it and that maybe its purpose was to give us that comfort. Whatever comfort it might provide, the administration of it in California has reached “WTF?” dimensions of cost in resources and human energy. California now has 700 prisoners on death row, more than twice that of Texas. There may ultimately be greater cruelty to a sentence of life without parole, but maybe we should first demonstrate the good sense to simultaneously stop both the hemorrhaging of resources and the nagging suspicion that we might execute an innocent person… by giving SAFE a long and thoughtful look.

in Opinion
<>Related Posts

SM.a.r.t Column: Cities That Never Shut Up – The Roaring Cost of Urban Noise

June 26, 2025

June 26, 2025

In today’s cities, silence isn’t golden—it’s extinct. From sunrise to insomnia, we’re trapped in a nonstop symphony of shrieking car...

SM.a.r.t Column: Santa Monica Needs to See the Light

June 19, 2025

June 19, 2025

How Santa Monica’s Growing Light Pollution Is Eroding Human Health, Safety, and Sanity There was a time when our coastal...

SM.a.r.t Column: California’s Transit Death Spiral: How Housing Mandates Are Backfiring

June 15, 2025

June 15, 2025

California’s ambitious housing mandates were supposed to solve the affordability crisis. Instead, they’re creating a vicious cycle that’s killing public...

SM.a.r.t. Column: A City Dying by a Thousand Cuts

June 5, 2025

June 5, 2025

Santa Monica, once celebrated for its blend of coastal charm and progressive ideals, is slowly bleeding out — not from...

SM.a.r.t Column: Oops!! What Happened? And What Are You Going to Do About It?

May 29, 2025

May 29, 2025

Our Santa Monica Architects for a Responsible Tomorrow (SMa.r.t) articles have, over the past 12 years, collectively presented a critical...

SM.a.r.t Column: Why Santa Monica Might Need a Desalination Plant, and Maybe Even Nuclear Power

May 22, 2025

May 22, 2025

Santa Monica is known for its ocean views, sunny skies, and strong environmental values. But there’s a challenge on the...

SM.a.r.t Column: SMO (So Many Options) Part 3: “Pie in the Sky”

May 17, 2025

May 17, 2025

SMO: Fantasy, Fact, and the Fog of Wishful ThinkingBy someone who read the fine print Every few months, a headline...

SM.a.r.t. Column: Owner Occupancy Protects Against Corporate Over-Development

May 2, 2025

May 2, 2025

This week SMa.r.t. will have as guest columnist Mark Borenstein. Mark is a long-time Santa Monica resident, a retired attorney,...

Opinion: Declaration of Economic State of Emergency in Malibu & Pacific Palisades: A Direct Result of the Devastating Impact of the Palisades Fire

April 27, 2025

April 27, 2025

Malibu and Pacific Palisades Request Emergency Financial Measures By Ramis Sadrieh, Chairperson, Malibu Pacific Palisades Chamber of Commerce    On behalf...

SM.a.r.t Column: The World’s Happiest Cities

April 27, 2025

April 27, 2025

Almost every year, we see new cities, regions, and countries that make the list(s) of our planet’s happiest and healthiest...

SM.a.r.t Column: A City for Everyone

April 20, 2025

April 20, 2025

Santa Monica dazzles with its ocean views, sunshine, and laid-back charm. But beyond the postcard image lies a more complicated...

SM.a.r.t Column: Part II: Rebuilding Resilient Communities: Policy and Planning After the Fires

April 13, 2025

April 13, 2025

The January 2025 wildfires that devastated Pacific Palisades and Altadena left an indelible mark on Los Angeles County. Beyond the...

SM.a.r.t Column: Innovative Materials for Fire-Resistant Rebuilding After the LA Fires

April 6, 2025

April 6, 2025

In the aftermath of the devastating 2025 Los Angeles wildfires, homeowners face the daunting task of rebuilding their lives and...

Opinion: Supervisor Lindsey P. Horvath Community Column Regarding a More Accountable Homeless Services System

April 3, 2025

April 3, 2025

By Lindsay Horvath, Los Angeles Board of Supervisors This week marks a significant milestone in our fight to end homelessness...

SM.a.r.t Column: Bring Back The Music 2.0

March 23, 2025

March 23, 2025

This is an update of the article appearing in the SM Mirror on Feb 1, 2025 On January 28th, 2025,...