Monday, May 23, 2005

The best argument for the Death Penalty

Cathy Young writes in The Boston Globe about retribution (revenge actually) as the only legitimate reason for the death penalty. She claims that unless death penalty proponents admit that retrubution is their real motive their "arguments fall flat".

I get so tired of the arguments anti-death penalty people use to keep murderers alive. One of their favorites (used in a rather lame way by Ms. Young) is to claim that "life in a prison cell" is just as bad (Ms Young says "6' by 6' cell). Can anyone name a state where convicted murderers stay in a 6' by 6' cell? Can anyone name a state where they are in solitary confinement (excepting death row)? No!! Another of their arguments is to claim that "since there is always the 'chance' that an innocent person will be executed, the 'state' has no right to authorize 'murder' in my name". Only the worst of the worst murderers are sentenced to death, and then only after years of appeals are they executed, and guess what...............the state isn't doing the authorizing of execution, a jury of 12 is (that jury represents we the people, not the state)

There is one argument for the death penalty that cannot be refuted by the anti crowd, and that is this..........It is immoral and uncivil to make people (prisoners, guards, doctors, lawyers etc.) be in close contact with a known cold blooded murderer. No one should have to risk their lives being in the same cellblock with a person who enjoys killing other people. Nor should anyone have to risk being murdered while providing food, care, cloting, or anything else to one. It is far more caring to all humanity to kill a murderer than to give him the chance to murder again.

This is true even when weighing the risks of putting an innocent person to death, something that hasn't happened in a very long time.


At 9:56 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Absolutely stunning argument there.

The only problem I see here is ... judge not lest ye be judged. What gives you (or anyone) the right to pronounce a judgment on another's life?

At 4:15 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The other thing I might add, since you seem to value the word of the Lord, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

Would you still be pushing this line if you were wrongly accused of murder?

At 5:45 PM, Blogger senorlechero said...

When someone is convicted of Murder with special circumstanse, there was "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". They are then allowed many appeals before finally being executed. There is not one known case of an innocent person being executed since the death penalty was re-instituted.

That being said........whether I or anyone else is "wrongly accused" of murder is not the point. The "wrongly accused" are rarely convicted, and even more rarely sentenced to death, for the guidelines for the death penalty are stringent.

As for your bible quote taken out of context, by your standards we should never convict anyone of any crime. Using your logic, how would you feel if someone murdered your mother, confessed to the murder, even giving you details only the murderer could know, and the jury said........"judeg not not"......and found him not guilty? Your worldview causes much grief for others

At 8:50 PM, Blogger Gilbough said...

If the death penalty prevents one innocent murder...let it stand


Post a Comment

<< Home