Jack Brooks: “I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. Kopetski] which would strike the death…”

“I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. Kopetski] which would strike the death penalty provisions of H.R. 4092 and substitute mandatory life imprisonment. I have the utmost respect for the gentleman's sincere philosophical beliefs about the death penalty. However, in a civilized society there are acts so despicable, so heinous, that society must collectively express its revulsion for these acts by imposition of the death penalty. That penalty must, of course, be imposed under constitutionally sound procedures, which I also support. I believe the death penalty--in appropriate circumstances--to be a just penalty. I do not believe in theoretical disputes about how much deterrence or punishment is achieved by meting out the death penalty. Plain common sense tells us the death penalty is the only way to send an unequivocal message that some conduct simply will not be borne by innocent victims of heinous crimes without the highest price to be paid. A civilized society cannot send out mixed or ambiguous signals about how certain heinous acts will be treated. H.R. 4092 reflects this sound philosophy, and I believe it should be preserved. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to oppose this amendment.”