Mississippi Death Penalty Controversy: Morality v. Legality

Mississippi House Bill 638, a bill that would allow the death penalty to be carried out by firing squad or electrocution in the state, is now in the hands of the senate.
Rep. Robert Foster, R-Hernando, first proposed the bill in order to provide other methods for the death penalty in the event that the current method of lethal injection was ruled unconstitutional.
“What this bill does is give the people, a jury of peers, the ability to determine if someone without any reasonable doubt has committed an act of pure evil,” said Foster.
The bill proposes that, upon the chance that lethal injection is deemed as cruel and unusual punishment, death by nitrogen hypoxia in a gas chamber would be the preferred method, with use of a firing squad as another option.
“If the bill becomes law, it will have little effect on the number of executions,” said Robert Mongue, an associate professor of Legal Studies at the University of Mississippi. “It is unlikely, but not impossible, that the electrocution or firing squads methods will be used, since each becomes an option only if the previously enumerated methods is unavailable.”
The controversy surrounding this bill is focused on moral concerns versus legal and economic concerns.
Organizations, like the American Civil Liberties Union of Mississippi, are opposed to the bill.
“We oppose it; ACLU opposes the death penalty in general because it violates the constitution for being arbitrarily cruel and unusual,” Blake Feldman, Criminal Justice Advocacy Coordinator for the ACLU, said.
However, Foster looks at the bill as a full-proof method of criminal punishment.
“I am convinced that giving violent offenders three ‘hots’, a cot and access to better medical care than our veterans receive in some cases does not deter violent crime,” Foster said.
“One thing I am certain of is that the death penalty has a 100% effective rate in preventing repeat violent offenders,” Foster added.
However, the ACLU argues in a statement made about House Bill 638 that the bill will take Mississippi two steps back as far as progress.
“Reinstating barbaric methods like firing squads, hangings and electrocution anchors Mississippi to the worst part of our history.”
Reflecting on the implications of passing the bill, Feldman said, “The first effect would be a botched execution in which a person would be conscious throughout the death and be dealt a cruel and unusual punishment.”
Joseph “Father Joe” Tonos of St. John Catholic Church n Oxford is also opposed.
“The Catholic Church has very small room for capital punishment. It’s almost nonexistent for reasons that one may be killed by the state. It’s just, for us, unthinkable to find a humane way of committing sin. There’s just no way. ‘Thou shall not kill’ still applies in this manner. In my opinion, firing squad, gas chamber, it’s all wrong. The needle was wrong. It’s all wrong,” said Tonos.
Despite efforts of the ACLU and other similar organizations, House Bill 638 has been moved through the system fairly rapidly in recent weeks, thus developing a fair amount of public interest. The bill was transmitted to the senate on Monday, Feb. 13.
According to Google Trends, there has been a spike in searches regarding the death penalty in Mississippi during the past seven days. These spikes seem to mimic the phases of the legislative process for House Bill 638.

As the bill continues on, the controversy between morality and legality will intensify because neither side seems to be slowing down in its efforts.
The ACLU continues to push for a defeat of the bill and Foster maintains passing the bill means “a clear message to violent offenders will be sent that we will not tolerate acts of evil in our state.”
Story contributed by Meek School of Journalism & New Media students Taylor Lewis, tlbradf1@go.olemiss.edu, and Ana Martinez, amartin6@go.olemiss.edu.