The majority population in most (if not all) EU countries support the death penalty for some crimes (1) .
EU governments/politicians wine about the US using propofol (and other drugs) for the execution of guilty murderers (3), as Syria wipes out thousands of innocents with sarin gas, thanks to Germany (4).
EU politicians and world sanctions against Germany? Zero.
Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon decided to suspend the execution of multiple murderer Allen Nicklasson because Missouri's use of propofol for executions, prompted an EU threat to withhold propofol, thereby putting milllions of innocent patients at risk - propofol use is " . . . about four-fifths of all anesthetic procedures (in the US). . . ". (5)
see crimes of Allen Nicklasson (6)
Pro death penalty Gov. Nixon was compassionate for all of the innocent patients who would be harmed had propofol been withheld as Gov. Nixon was certain that the EU and those drug companies would harm innocent patients, by withholding that drug, had Nixon allowed the execution to go forward.
Save murderers, at any cost
Anti death penalty EU governments/politicians are much more concerned that all guilty murderers must live, than they are for innocent patients or innocent murder victims. They made their choice.
As Washington Post columnist Charles Lane observes: " . . . just when I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, some Europeans (EU governments/politicians) go and do something irresponsible like restricting the export of sodium thiopental, an anesthetic, to the United States -- because some death penalty states use it in lethal injections. Not only is this gesture unlikely to prevent any executions -- it actually could put the lives and health of innocent Americans at risk." (8)
6.3 million murdered innocents preferred over 1300 guilty murderers executed
EU governments/politicians know that they are putting innocents at risk, in order to benefit guilty murderers. That's been an anti death penalty staple forever - save all murderers, no matter the cost (9).
It seems that anti death penalty EU politicians have a moral preference for guilty murderers over innocent patients or innocent murder victims, very similar to that of anti death penalty activists in the US, whose moral/scholarly leadership has stated a preference of sacrificing an additional 6.3 million innocent murder victims rather than executing 1300 murderers (9).
Astounding, but true.
A human rights violation?
The EU and some others claim that the death penalty is a human rights violation. They have never proven it, nor can they.
Both life and freedom are fundamental human rights. However, for those who violate the rights of others both freedom and life may be removed from those criminals, which is why we have incarceration and executions. Why is it that the human right of freedom can be taken away, but not the human right of life? Anti death penalty folks have no rational argument for that.
Why? Because there isn't one (9).
Anti death penalty folks have an irrational belief that all murderers have the absolute right to life, no matter their crimes and no matter the cost. They're wrong.
Money well spent?
In 2009, the EU spent $3.6 million (US) to lobby on behalf of US murderers (11). The EU motto appears to be "Save murderers at any cost", just as it is with US based death penalty opponents (10). Should the EU spend that $3.6 million as compensation for EU murder victims families, rather than lobbying for US murderers? Do an EU poll.
How bad can it get? 5 year olds more mature than 17 year olds? Of course, says the EU.
As a matter of law, Belgium has agreed that children of any age can commit suicide (12), if they possesses "the capacity of discernment" -- undoubtedly, a human rights movement that will sweep throughout the EU.
I'll take a chance, here, and say that Belgium and the EU may end up drawing the line at 5, unless they find that would violate the human rights of those children 0-4.
EU politicians were aghast that the US would allow 16-17 year old murderers to be executed, even with thorough reviews of their mental and psychological capacities.
Why? Well, because they said, no matter what, 16-17 year olds are not mature enough to be subject to such a punishment because they can't possibly discern either murder or execution - although, somehow, 16-17 year olds do discern both murder and incarceration for that murder? Really?
But, of course, the EU finds that 5 year olds have the discernment to decide their own suicide.
EU politicians could not see that some 16-17 year old murderers may be more mature than many 18 year olds, just as many non murderous 16 and 17 years are, as the rest of us know.
But, 5 year olds? Of course.
Some idiotic US Supreme Court judges used that same illogic in Roper v Simmons, based upon EU sensibilities, to outlaw the execution of any 16-17 year old murderers, regardless of how mature they are and regardless that the rest of us, with some sense, knows than many 16-17 year olds are more mature, in every way, than are many 18 year olds. All criminal cases evaluate suspects/criminals, individually.
Prof. Kontorovich writes: " . . . a system that permits the euthanasia of innocent 12 year-olds but not the punishment of guilty 17-year-olds is one that exalts autonomy without culpability." So it comes out that the juveniles cannot really make accountable decisions when it comes to killing people, unless it is themselves. Or to put it differently, Belgium will not hold children responsible when they hurt others, but gives them free license to hurt themselves." (12)
Undoubtedly, the EU will make child suicide a human right.
Complete moral bankruptcy. Nothing new.
1) 86% US Death Penalty Support: Highest Ever - April 2013
World Support Remains High
95% of Murder Victim's Family Members Support Death Penalty
2) John Murray: "Nothing shows the moral bankruptcy of a people or of a generation more than disregard for the sanctity of human life." "... it is this same atrophy of moral fiber that appears in the plea for the abolition of the death penalty." "It is the sanctity of life that validates the death penalty for the crime of murder. It is the sense of this sanctity that constrains the demand for the infliction of this penalty. The deeper our regard for life the firmer will be our hold upon the penal sanction which the violation of that sanctity merit." (Page 122 of Principles of Conduct).
Plato: “Longer life is no boon to the sinner himself in such a case, and that his decease will bring a double blessing to his neighbors; it will be a lesson to them to keep themselves from wrong, and will rid society of an evil man. These are the reasons for which a legislator is bound to ordain the chastisement of death for such desperate villainies, and for them alone”
3300 additional pro death penalty quotes
3) German firm halts US exports over execution drug row, Oman Tribune
4) Report: Germany gave Syria ingredients for deadly gas in 2011
5) "Use of anesthetic propofol in executions might cut supply", The Denver Post, Jim Salter (AP), 9/29/2013
6) Crimes of Allen Nicklasson: His many (known) murders: On a drive to buy drugs, Allen Nicklasson's car broke down. Richard Drummond stopped to help, was kidnapping, robbed and murdered by Nicklasson. In a later incident, both Joseph Babcock, 47, and his wife, Charlene, 38 also tried to assist Nicklasson, who robbed and murdered them both. During a string of additional robberies, Nicklasson murdered an unnamed waitress in Mexico (7). These are the murders we know of.
Murderpedia, Allen Nicklasson, http://murderpedia.org/male.N/n/nicklasson-allen.htm
7) Physicians & The State Execution of Murderers: No Medical Ethics Dilemma
8) "Europe's dangerous death penalty gesture", By Charles Lane, Washington Post, 2:39 PM ET, 02/ 1/2011,
9) The Death Penalty: Not a Human Rights Violation
10) The Death Penalty: Do Innocents Matter?
11) "The European Union gives millions in taxpayers’ money to anti-death penalty groups in America", By Nile Gardiner, World, THE TELEGRAPH, Last updated: March 2nd, 2011
12) What Belgium’s child euthanasia law means for America and the Constitution
Why? Justice (2).
All of a sudden, 5-17 year olds are more than capable of offing themselves, because they are mature enough. I guess mental and psychological maturity is dependent on the type of killing - or, at least, that is the only "rational" for their illogic.
William A. Petit, Jr.: "Justice is the first virtue of social institutions," according to philosopher John Rawls. It transcends national borders, races and cultures. The death penalty is the appropriate societal response to the brutal and willful act of capital felony murder. Every murder destroys a portion of society. Those murdered can never grow and contribute to humankind; the realization of their potential will never be achieved. I support the death penalty not as a deterrent or for revenge or closure, but because it is just and because it prevents murderers from ever harming again. By intentionally, unlawfully taking the life of another, a murderer breaks a sacrosanct law of society and forfeits his own right to live. (In a home invasion, Dr. Petit was, severely injured, his wife Jennifer and their 11 year old daughter Michaela were raped and murdered. Both daughters, Michaela and Hayley were burned, alive.)
The Death Penalty: Fair & Just
The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge
Killing Equals Killing: The Amoral Confusion of Death Penalty Opponents