Standing outside of Washington Hall, early Tuesday morning, I admit, I was a little intimidated by the Secret Service men eyeing every slight move I made — the suspicious looks were enough to make me a little uneasy.

However, what really bothered me was the presence of protesters against the death penalty. Targeting Gore is definitely not the most logical course of action to take — especially since Bush is infamous for governing over the state known for executing the most inmates annually. In addition, Bush has already let it be known his plans of appointing conservative Supreme Court Justices if he gets the opportunity.

True, Bush has supported introducing accurate genetic evidence, but this recent turn of events has conveniently taken place within the last few months. Clearly this is a politically driven ploy to down-play the massive and rising numbers of executions.

Even though both candidates support the death penalty, Bush's dismal statistics on the issue make him the less favorable candidate for those opposed to the penalty. With more conservative justices on the Court, the future looks dim for those supporting a more impartial method and sporadic use of the death penalty.

For those who want to see the death penalty abolished in the U.S., the appointment of conservative justices is hardly the way to reach such ends. The protest was like hammering down the nails in the death penalty's own coffin, or better yet, the coffins of those who would likely be executed with greater frequency and less concern.

Many involved in the protest believed that they were protesting against the institution of the death penalty, without deliberately singling out either presidential candidate. While this sentiment is understandable for those adamantly opposed to the death penalty, it is hardly logical in a bi-partisan governed society.

Protesting against Gore/Lieberman is in effect, protesting not against the death penalty, but the hope of reform, and eventually the absolution of the institution of cruelty. One vote against Gore/Lieberman, is one vote against positive and substantial change on the issue, which will ultimately lead to regressing, not progressing.

As a supporter for the abolishment of the death penalty, it is frustrating to witness such ignorance of those whose actions may be potentially harmful to the long-term effects on the issue. Any kind of substantial change in policy takes place by rational means, not by biting the hand that may ultimately help your cause.

Looking at the signs held by the protesters, I saw the true and unfortunate condition of a discriminatory law, but what was equally disturbing, was the thought of the amount of Gore/Lieberman supporters who may have been swayed by the protest.

The protest succeeded in defeating the cause before the fight had even begun. Unless the protesters are planning on voting for Nader, the protest did more to hurt the movement against the penalty than actually helping it.

• Death penalty protesters short-sighted