Televised Executions May Change the Public’s Perspective

I agree with Howard Rosenberg’s column “Reviving Argument for Televised Executions” (Dec. 2). As a citizen against the death penalty and a believer that imprisonment is the worst possible punishment for any crime, I am sure that visual exposure to executions can only be beneficial in opening a renewed examination of that procedure, discourse and possibly change in the public view.

But I would also support televised animal killings in slaughterhouses. These “food animals” who are conscious and sentient and, at the very least in the case of pigs, extremely intelligent, are subjected to the most painful, frightening and often torturous processes, including being boiled alive. I believe that were the TV audiences treated to the contemplation of what we eat before it comes to our tables dressed in sauces and lovely PR, that too would perhaps change our culinary addictions and mindless violence.

RACHEL ROSENTHAL

Los Angeles

While I generally respect Rosenberg’s judgment of media issues, I can’t believe he’s serious. Using televised executions as a way of pressuring the supporters of capital punishment into changing their minds is a prime example of the end not justifying the means.

DENNIS HANRAHAN

La Habra

Rosenberg’s provocative column repeated the misleading statistic that 75% of Americans are in favor of the death penalty.

In fact, several independent surveys across the country, including the well-respected Field Poll in California, have consistently found that when given the choice between imposing the death penalty or life imprisonment without possibility of parole plus restitution to the victim’s family, 67% of Americans choose the latter.

Televised executions--exposing the gruesome reality of state killing in the name of the people--could well increase the opposition even more.

STEPHEN F. ROHDE

Los Angeles

On one level, Rosenberg is right about televising executions. People should be permitted to view what they publicly support through their votes. What is wrong is that he assumes people understand what they are viewing. From preschool to what we define as adulthood, we are constantly exposed to both fictional depictions of death in our TV and movies and actual occurrences in our news reports.

At least, I think that is the current separation. It’s hard to tell. Televised executions would only be one more source of violence for a desensitized audience. Death has no sting.

NANCY MAYER

Newbury Park