Court TV Host: We're going to be talking to actor Mike Farrell. You may know him from his long performance as BJ Hunnicut on M*A*S*H* or you may know him as Dr. James Hansen on the television program Providence. Or you may know him from one of the many other movies he's been in. But another role that he plays in real life is that of political activist. And he's been especially active in the fight against the death penalty. He is president of the board of the group Death Penalty Focus. You can see their website at www.deathpenalty.org. And all this week Court TV has been running his "Taking A Stand" commentary against the death penalty.

Court TV Host: Mike Farrell is here. Welcome, Mr. Farrell.

beegeesfanforever: Mr. Farrell, why are you against the death penalty?

Mike Farrell: I'm against the death penalty for moral reasons. I believe that killing is wrong, more to the point, I believe that we as a civilized society that believes in, or claims to believe in fundamental human rights, have to understand that that stated belief requires we behave in a manner consistent with fundamental humanitarian and human rights laws. The first premise of the declaration of human life is the right to life, so, if someone acts in a manner that's inappropriate, including acting out violently and engaging in killing, we as a society have a right and, more to the point, have a duty to protect ourselves by seeing to it that that individual suffers the appropriate and you can literally underline the word appropriate consequences, so I think that the ultimate sanctions, the most severe punishment in a civilized society that believes in fundamental human rights principles ought to be life in prison without the possibility of parole.

killjoywriter: Mr. Farrell, how come you have an opinion? Has something in your life contributed to your opinion?

crazyrubberducky8: Has there been any personal experience in your life that would show why you have taken the stand you have on the death penalty?

Mike Farrell: To answer the second question first, I have had loved ones taken by violence, but that's not what got me involved in the issue. I have been involved in political and social issues for many years, and learned as a result of a program I was involved in (a program with people who were socially dysfunctional) that people in prison, people with drug and alcohol problems that are generally regarded as socially unacceptable, are still people, they still have value and if given the opportunity they can correct their behavior and become socially productive citizens. The program I was involved with was run by reforming drug addicts and part of our outreach was to go into prisons, so that the people I met and the things I saw during the years I was involved in this program made me understand that we are hurting ourselves as a society by deeming human beings worthless and arrogating to ourselves the right to act as god. So that's how I got involved with it.

ctv_warhorse46: Are you against the death penalty for any convicted murderer? McVeigh? Gacy? Wilson?

Mike Farrell: Yes, I'm against the death penalty for human beings.

Lutharmy: Mike,do you feel the McVeigh execution is perhaps serving the a larger purpose in that the federal government is trying to "ease us" back into accepting a federal death penalty, for lack of a better way of putting it? Personally, I find the prospect extremely frightening.

Mike Farrell: I think that's an interesting question. I don't think that the McVeigh execution is part of a conspiracy on the part of the government, but I do accept the possibility that this execution coming at this time could be in the eyes of some a way to make executions more palatable because if there ever was a person who "deserved" killing in the eyes of the public, it would probably be Timothy McVeigh; however, while I share with you the sense that this prospect has frightening aspects to it, I'm surprised that people don't recognize that this execution probably more than most others, is against the interests of us as a nation. I think that is so because McVeigh, if you believe he deserves this punishment, has dictated not only what should happen to him, but how and when. In doing so, I think we need to understand that he is not only controlling us, but he is fulfilling his vision of his own job, his own duty as a soldier fighting against an unjust enemy. Having taken that approach to the original act, the bombing in Oklahoma City, he now is continuing his crusade by giving his life for his cause. If we were to not go along with him, not give him the opportunity to be a hero and a martyr to those who support him, we would not be giving him the opportunity to become a hero in the eyes of those people, we would not be giving him the opportunity to do what in military terms is seen as the ultimate act of heroism -- the giving of one's life for his cause.

wolfspiritco: Mike, while I understand your reasons, here's my dilemma: my son-in-law murdered my 22-year-old daughter and 2 ½-year-old grandson in 1998, shooting them both multiple times in the head. I have no doubt that he is the right person, as he confessed. I feel I have every right to see him die. Why do you feel you have the right to take MY right away?

Mike Farrell: It's not an issue of my taking your right away. There is nothing inappropriate or inhuman or wrong with your fury, with your rage and with your desire to strike back. You, however, are suggesting that your -- what you call a -- right and what I see as your passion allows you the right to dictate to me the necessity of being part of the taking of human life. The reason we have laws is to try to eliminate the emotional content of decisions. The idea that our passions should supercede our reasons is exactly contrary to what makes us civilized human beings. Beginning as far back as Aristotle, the elevation of reason over passion is what has defined us as superior beings. So I don't deny you your right to be furious. I don't deny you the right to all your pain and all the pain anyone can imagine. I don't deny you any of the feelings that are appropriate to one who suffers the loss you describe, but I disagree with you when you suggest that those feelings should be allowed to dictate the actions of the society in which you live. We don't burn down the homes of arsonists, we don't rape rapists, we don't steal from thieves. When people act out inappropriately, even in a monstrous, horrible way as is the case with your family, no one is made better by having all of us stoop to the level of the perpetrator of that crime.

illinoisman1952: What if the person wants to be put to death?

Mike Farrell: That amounts to state-assisted suicide. It encourages violent actions which we then respond to by assisting in that suicide. I would rather that we did not have a law that encourages a self-destructive individual who may not have the means in order to achieve his or her aim, which is death.

lydia362426: The death penalty can actually deter crime - it promotes fear in the criminal.

Mike Farrell: The idea that the death penalty deters crime has simply been discredited by every reasonable criminologist, sociologist, and psychologist who has looked at the issue. America is the only developed Western democracy that continues to kill its own citizens. All of our allies who fit into that category, and now a majority of all the nations in the world have given up the death penalty because they have found that it's ineffective inappropriate, uncivilized and that it has no deterrent value. Closer to home, 12 states in the U.S. do not have a death penalty. On average, the murder rates and rates of violent crime in those states are lower than in states that do have the death penalty. Most violent crime, including murder, is committed in the heat of the moment of rage when one is not thinking of consequences, therefore deterrence is simply an antiquated and fallacious justification for continuing capital punishment.

Lutharmy: Mike, are you involved in helping to prevent the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal?

Mike Farrell: Yes I am, I have for some years co-chaired with Ossie Davis the Commitee To Save Mumia Abu-Jamal. I have involved myself in the case not because I know whether he is innocent or guily, but because it's clear to me that he did not get a fair trial. Capital punishment aside, a fair trial is foundational in the American criminal justice system.

silverado_46236: Mr. Farrell, in general, most people who oppose the death penalty under the guise of "right to life" , support abortion... Do you see a hypocracy in that social dichotomy?

Mike Farrell: No I don't, I think its a pairing that is made by people who oppose abortion for their own purposes and very much a comparison of unequals. The Catholic Church, as you probably know, holds to what they call a consistent life ethic, which suggests that its communicants should oppose both abortion and capital punishment. Most religions, most major religions in the world, oppose capital punishment. But not all of them believe that abortion under any circumstances is necessarily wrong. I personally do not support abortion. I don't think the questioner can fairly suggest that to most people who oppose capital punishment feel one way or another about abortion. Where I part company with those who presume to call themselves "right-to-lifers" is that I believe the issue of a termination of a pregnancy is a question that ought to be left up to a woman and her doctor.

BurningIsis: Mike, do you feel that capital punishment is racially biased?

Mike Farrell: Very definitely in this country. It is not only racially biased, it is economically biased. The saying on death row is "them that has the capital don't get the punishment." The sad fact is that the poorer classes of our country are the ones who are exclusively visited with the executioner's action. And, as we know, racial minorities in our country are in too many cases, part of that group.

Court TV Host: Here's a follow-up to your answer about Mumia Abu-Jamal...

nwofirefighter62: Mike...How do you know he did not get a fair trial??

Mike Farrell: I think anybody who reads even a significant portion of the trial transcript can see the bias of the judge, the illegal tactics of the prosecutor and the pressures brought to bear on witnesses by the police. There are any number of books, articles, and studies that have been done on the case, but the one I suggest you read is a fairly short on in a conservative magazine called The American Lawyer written by Stewart Taylor Jr. who, while he believes Abu Jamal is probably guilty, also clearly believes and states that he did not get a new trial and deserves a new one.

surivior01: I don't believe McVeigh's death should be aired on any TV, closed circuit or not, do you?

philip0101us: What do you think of McViegh having his execution televised on closed circuit TV?

Mike Farrell: Obviously, as I said, I don't believe McVeigh should be executed at all. The question of his execution being televised, I find personally to be a horrifying thought that will be a degrading spectacle. There are some who believe that televising executions, will make people shrink in horror and bring and end to executions in this country

happytrac14: Mike, it might help the D/P Opponents!

Mike Farrell: I don't agree. I fear that televising executions will not only degrade all of us, but in a way that will make them feel that it is not as awful as it actually is.

cw5233: What is the best way to defeat crime then? If not the deterrence of the death penalty, then what should society do as an alternative?

Mike Farrell: To restate, there is no deterrence to the death penalty. Separation from society is the appropriate punishment. What we should be doing while people are in prison is a subject too long to get into, but it should be addressed. Number one, if we want to stop violence in society, we have to be less violent in government posing the model that might makes right. State killing teaches our children is that killing is OK, all you have to do is justify it. I'm here to tell you that everybody that kills somebody else has justified it in his/her mind. So again, I think we need to stop violence in our society by discontinuing the practice of violence.

squiggy72: With all these discussions about the death penalty and more and more people seriously considering all the biased circumstances of the death penalty, do you think that a nation-wide moratorium will come closer in the next couple of months/years?

Mike Farrell: Very definitely. The moratorium instituted by the governor of Illinois, a conservative Republican, has caused a seismic shift in the debate in this country. The release of I believe it's now 100 innocent people from death rows in the past 25 years has awakened a suspicion in the minds of Americans. That suspicion is that the death penalty really is not fair, really does not work efficiently, really does not work for society and is in fact being promoted by politicians for their own political advantage. I think those facts plus the exposure of racism and classism in executing the poor only and those who have only a bad court appointed attorney is moving the American people to a place where we will soon do what the American Bar Association asked us to do four years ago: that is, declare a moratorium on all executions, study the situation see if the problems in the system can be fixed and, if not, do away with it.

koolkat327: Ohio is scheduled to execute an inmate this Tuesday. What do you suppose is the best course of action one could take to protest this event?

Mike Farrell: An outpouring of opposition to the governor is a necessary step. Politicians need to know that they can't get away with taking life for their own political purposes.

cardiocountry: How can we help to stop capital punishment?

hsl6: Mike, was wondering how can I become a part of your issue and work with you.

Mike Farrell: You can contact Death Penalty Focus at www.deathpenalty.org or call 1-888-2-ABOLISH. Human Rights Watch, the largest American based human rights organization in the world is based in New York with offices in Washington DC, Los Angeles, and San Francisco and London, Belgium and a number of other places in the world they can use your help. Amnesty Internation is the world's largest and they can use their help, there are many ways. Most important is to inform yourself and to speak out. And I thank you for your time and attention.

Court TV Host: Thank you very much, Mike Farrell for being our guest online today.