Capital punishment is an absolute necessity. I’ve been for it from the time I first asked myself the question – somewhere in my early teens.
I think it went something like this…
Me: “What would be a good reason to not kill someone that just kidnapped, raped, and cut off a child’s head with a butter knife?”
Me: “Uhmmmm.”
So, that’s the reality – I just couldn’t come up with any good reason. I believed in God at the time – or thought I did. My family and environment growing up all told me I did. So, effectively I did.
Now I ask myself the same question and unremarkably, with god not in the picture anymore, I come up with exactly the same “Uhmmmm” response. There is no good reason to allow someone to live after they step over the line like that.
A person like that is anti- social, whether or not it’s true according to any clinical definition or not. A person that does something to harm a member of society that doesn’t deserve such a thing – is antisocial and not contributing to society in the big picture. One must weigh the contribution to society…
Lets say the person above that cut the head off the child is volunteering time at a children orphanage, unpaid and working 90 hours a week to help kids without parents enjoy the best life has to offer. Let’s say he is also donating $700,000 per year out of his own deep pockets to fund college tuition for moneyless high school students to attend nursing school. This person also has written six books about helping kids with cancer live meaningful lives.
Should we give him the death penalty for the crime he committed?
Absolutely – and as fast as possible.
There just isn’t any worth to an individual like this in my mind. No worth to me at all. Any thought we apply about him is wasted thought beyond how to eliminate him from the big picture, forever. He’s of no worth to society.
There isn’t anything he could do that could possibly balance the scale or tip them toward allowing him to live more life after what he did. A person like this is a problem from that day forward. Are we all to pull together to deal with this problem continually for years and years to come? Should we be expending that kind of energy for such a thing? For society to go forward we need to move forward and not look back at this issue. We expend hundreds of millions of hours of energy about these criminals instead of eliminating them immediately.
The energy I’m talking about is:
- All the thought that goes into worrying about how to prevent this one individual from ever hurting another innocent person again. We think of laws. Psychologists create rehabilitation experiments they think will generalize to reality – and it doesn’t. There’s no way to predict future behavior of antisocial people, and the fact that they were antisocial once is the best determining factor for whether they’ll do it again.
- All the legal motions that will be gone through as this jackass searches for anyway to get out earlier than what he was sentenced.
- All the emotional pain the family of the victim will go through as long as this idiot remains alive. Can you imagine knowing that this guy would be alive somewhere after what he did to your daughter or sister? I can’t fathom the pain and rage that would be inside each family member… each friend she had… for so many years…
There are no second chances in my mind for anyone like that. If there is a god and if it gives second chances – great. That’s all out of our hands. What isn’t out of our hands is how we deal with degenerates that cross the line here in our US society. We could make a serious difference by eliminating every single one of them as quickly, cheaply, and unceremoniously as possible.
When I lived in Clearwater, Florida there was big news about a guy named Lawrence Singleton. Years before he had raped a 15 year old girl and cut her hands off and left her to die in a ditch in California. She lived instead. He was sentenced to prison instead of being killed immediately after the trial. After just 8 years he was paroled.
There was big news because the idiot moved to Tampa, Florida. It wasn’t long before he killed a woman with 40+ stabs of a screwdriver.
There are some actions that don’t deserve another chance. I’d be glad to work with a national committee to draft that list that defines “the line” not to be crossed. I’d be glad to pull switches or inject drugs or whatever I needed to do to help sort it all out. I have no morality issues with that at all.
Why is the decision about whether to mete out the death penalty made at the state level? Do we go to war at the state level?
We need to make war with people that have chosen to destroy someone else’s life. When a criminal chooses that action, it’s not only the victim that’s affected, but the lives of each and every family member and friend of the victim are put through hell also. The criminal decided first to make war, and now we must make war back to resolve the issue, or we’re losers.
When we face war with war on this macro level we are going to war against someone that has caused grievous harm to other members of our society – and, unlike Iraq or Afghanistan, or the war on terror, it’s a war we can win.
We wouldn’t put up with that from a foreign enemy, and yet some states who’ve abolished the death penalty want us to put up with it from an enemy living within our borders… on our streets. Next door to us.
To me, someone that murders someone else, rapes someone else, kidnaps someone, or tortures someone in the USA is a terrorist operating on our own soil. Terrorists in Afghanistan responsible for the World Trade Center incidents must be killed. Americans don’t seem to have a problem with that at all.
Americans that kill other Americans for no good reason at all, terrorists at heart, must also be killed.
With this, there is a problem?
Now – I qualified that statement two sentences ago by saying “for no good reason at all.” In my mind there are justifiable reasons for a member of the public to kill someone else. Thankfully the laws allow for that in some instances of home invasion and being threatened with deadly force. However, my idea of what is justifiable is more loosely constructed than what the law currently allows – and it’s something I’ll get into in a future post about revenge and vigilantism. I’ll make a note to write that up soon.
In this discussion I’m talking about enforcing the death penalty for everyone convicted of committing murder, rape, kidnapping, and some other crimes.
Here’s a partial list of what criminals should die for:
- killing a child
- raping a child, woman, or man
- maiming a child or adult (cutting off a finger, an ear, whatever. Stabbing, cutting, burning, electrifying, etc.)
- emotional torture
- forcing drugs on another person
Now – what about the innocents?
That’s a good question, and one we can’t ignore. The court system is not infallible. It’s pretty good, but not beyond mistakes. Reality tells me that life is full of mistakes… we live with them. I’m proposing a national death penalty to be carried out immediately after a trial with a jury. The jury only decides – guilty and deserving of death, or not. The onus is on the jury to decide whether the person is guilty or not. Juries make mistakes all the time based on what evidence they can and can’t see.
In the big picture any innocent people dying for crimes they didn’t commit is a function of society and something we live with. Sentencing someone to death as a result of genetic proof difficult to refute is something more people can believe in. I’m more for it.
Having more false negatives is better in my mind than more false positives. I’d rather see one innocent person set free even if it meant also freed were 6 guilty, or even 100 guilty. Because I think eventually the guilty commit some other crime they’ll receive the death penalty or lengthy jailtime for. Sure some of the guilty that were released will kill others when they get out – but no system is perfect. To sentence an innocent person to death is one of the most tragic events I can think of.
Is it tragic enough to eliminate the death penalty altogether? Not in my mind.
Best of Life!
Vern
As of October 2009 thirty-five United States have the death penalty. Hawaii does not.
Photo: Flickr user, Andrew Petro
About Vern Lovic
Aloha! I'm "Vern". I created this site to focus on Hawaii - all the islands - Oahu, Maui, Kauai, Big Island and even Molokai and Lanai and Kahoolawe when I can find information on them. I love living in Hawaii, and I think you would too. I hope you come away with something positive as a result of visiting Aim for Awesome. Feel free to add comments or contact me through email. All written content on this site by Vern Lovic. Contact me at Google+. Best of Life to You in 2013 - Aloha!
I was saying, “amen” while reading your artical until i cam across God. You said you used to balive in God. Why did you change your veiw? Just wanting to know.
Hi George,
Over time I outgrew god I guess. There were many instances where I had an objective look at the whole idea and realized, I had been told lies since I was little. Lies that people believed, still, I wasn’t told the truth about god, the earth, how it all came to be. Today I don’t know whether god is there or not. I do know he/she/it is not actively doing anything to change things here. I do know that no matter how hard I pray, nothing happens. I do know that there are heinous things happening on this planet. I know that, if god is real, he/she/it set it all up. If god is there – it made the rules. The rules of the world, of how human beings are wired, could have been a lot better thought out. God appears to want us to struggle and fail.
So, whether or not there is a god, it isn’t doing anything to help out the state of the world.
Aloha,
Vern
Hi Vern,
I came across your site because my husband and I are planning to move to Hawaii when he finishes school (Mechanical/Aerospace Engineering), so we’re trying to research and learn everything we can. I happened upon your “Why The Death Penalty?” article and couldn’t help but read through all the comments. I realize this was posted years ago, but I would still like to voice my opinion. First of all, I will fully admit that I am not very well educated on the death penalty. Therefore, I do not, yet, have a concrete opinion on the matter (although this article has inspired to do some digging and research). However, something you said in one of your previous comments does bother me and it concerns something that I DO have an opinion about. You stated that you were pro-choice but that you, also, are for the death penalty. This seems very contradictory to me. The way I see it, when a woman makes the choice to reproduce, the rest is out of her hands. And, yes, the choice to have sex is the choice to reproduce. They are one and the same. Period. Whether you are on the pill, using condoms etc., you are making the choice to reproduce when you make the choice to have intercourse. Accidents happen. People get pregnant when it is extremely inconvenient. If you don’t want to become pregnant, stay or become abstinent.
True, there are instances (rape, incest etc.) where abortion should be an option. But, again, this is because the woman did NOT make the choice to reproduce. Anyway, I guess my point is this: in most cases, abortion is murder of the purest and most innocent form of human life, and completely contradicts your argument of being for the death penalty. Considering the points you made, if a woman chooses to abort her baby, she should receive the death penalty.
I’ll end my opinion there, seeing as this was a side-note on one of your comments and nowhere near the point of your article, but I just felt so strongly about it, that I really wanted to voice my opinion.
With all this said, thanks for all your posts about Hawaii and other adventures you’ve had. I enjoy reading them and I wish you the best!
Hi Robyn,
Thanks for writing in response to that article… I like your idea about staying abstinent if you’re not ready for a baby… however, that isn’t the reality. Maybe nowhere on the planet is it the reality. Can we convince the world’s inhabitants to stop having sex if they’re not ready for babies? Not a chance. It’s just too fun and people feel lucky – so they chance it. It’s a sad state of affairs, but, we as humans didn’t create the rules of the game – we only play it as best we can. Ignoring sex until we’re ready to have kids is not going to happen. I’d argue that whatever started this game – never meant for it to happen.
So kids will be born to parents that are not ready, not capable… they might be addicted to something. They might not have money enough to support themselves. They might not have means – physical, mental, or emotional means, to make life better for themselves and the new member of their family – their own child.
I’ve seen kids grow up in the absolute worst of conditions. I’ve counseled the kids of prostitute moms… I’ve talked with a mother that drowned both of her children. I’ve seen kids in the welfare system, and the adoption system – state care… it’s an all-out horrorshow and brings tears to my eyes as I type this.
Abortion occurs before there is a baby. If you call it a baby, ok that’s fine, abortion occurs before there is a “knowing” organism. The baby does not have a consciousness as we do. It does not even understand what life is or could be outside the womb. It doesn’t have a clue what it is doing, what it is, or what it will be doing in 5 years. Death to a fetus, to a baby unborn, would not be an unpleasant event, nor pleasant. I think it is a non-event. Whether there is a soul or something inside the baby at that point – let whatever created this game figure that out – because we as humans – cannot. We have not.
Though I cringe at the thought of a woman having an abortion – having just watched my wife give birth to a healthy girl, and loving every minute I have spent with her over the past 30 months. I think the alternative – living a life with parents that cannot take care of a child, or worse, parents that don’t care about the child and give him/her EVERYTHING in the world possible… is unacceptable. Better the life never was, than the life that had to suffer through 70+ years of hell because 2 human beings that thought they were getting away with something – got called on it and had a baby.
Life in this world is full of outlandish conditions. I am always 80% ready to write a book about this topic, and yet, I think nobody wants to hear how bad it really is here. Those of us that are suffering through life – see enough of it. We don’t have to read about how the originator of this mess set it up for us to fail.
Do we?
Ok then – best of luck and life to you and your husband on your move to Hawaii… I don’t think there is a better place to live on the planet… I hope so, and I hope I find it – but not expecting to! Hawaii is truly paradise.
Why did I post anonymously? Because I forgot to fill in the “name” field. Maybe that is stupidity on my part that means I deserve to be removed from the gene pool.
Lets just say we value life differently. We also seem to have a different opinion on the deterrent effect of the death penalty. I really don’t’ see some one who would commit a crime with a minimum penalty of 20 years changing their minds if the same crime would get the death penalty. At that stage people people either aren’t thinking of the consequences, or believe there is a minuscule chance of getting caught.
People are very bad at weighing long odds. Would you buy a lottery ticket for $5 if you had a 1 in 5 change of winning $20 dollars, or $5 for a ticket when you has a 1 in 5 million chance of winning $2 million? Lotteries around the world rely on people not being able to understand odds, which is why I don’t gamble. There is also the concept of “personal positive bias”, you might want to look up that term.
Why should the drunk driver who kills some one in an accident be punished differently from the drunk driver who gets caught on the way home? Their choice was the same, their level of stupidity the same, yet because of a random event one would die.
I’m also not OK with the whole idea of “death or free”, because I think it would actually remove the deterrent. I can easily see some one thinking “If I get caught, they wouldn’t kill me for it, so I walk away free”.
I also think the variability in people is too high, you could draw 12 people like you who seem to be saying the death penalty is the only option, or 12 people like me who wouldn’t convict some one (or voluntarily give evidence against some one) if it could result in the death penalty. Same crime, but in one person gets acquitted, the other gets death based on luck of the draw.
Hi Owen,
A new law that was very strict and had a mandatory death penalty for anyone convicted of these things would not work very well at first. In 10 years after 695,000 people have died because of the new laws – I think it’d be working quite well. I think the threat of dying would appear very real in their twisted minds… but, right – there are people that believe they can get away with anything. There are those that are unafraid of dying too. It’s impossible to come up with a perfect solution.
I don’t want to look up the term you mentioned… Owen, if the term means something to your side of the story – you’ve gotta go the extra effort and look the term up yourself and enlighten us all. I could sit here and tap out words and phrases nobody understands either – but, that’s not getting my point across. Help us out – tell us what you’re talking about.
Re: your last paragraph. Right. Probability is operating in all circumstances. There will be those that get stung and those that go free… as I said, that’s the case now, whatever system is in place for prosecuting people to whatever degree. And, that’s the case as long as the world is operating under probability. I don’t see that going away.
Thanks for your reply, Vern.
To explain Einstein’s quote, I copied this from wikipedia for you in the article entitled “Eye for an Eye”
Mahatma Gandhi remarked: “An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.”
Even though it may be hard to do in practice, certain belief systems (such as Christianity) teach individuals to forgive those who wrong them, rather than seek retribution for a wrong. Other belief systems adhere to similar concepts, such as the Taoist wu wei which encourages a wronged individual to simply accept the infraction and to take the least “resistive” action to correct it, if any action need to be taken at all. Buddhism stresses the weight of karma: one can take retributive action, but that retributive action is not without its consequences, and living on a finite planet guarantees that the suffering incurred by a retributive action will return to the individual who was wronged (as well as the one who did the wrong-doing). Some subscribe to the Golden Rule of ethics rather than any law of retaliation.[citation needed]
It can also be seen as an extension of the informal logical fallacy, two wrongs make a right.
(end of article copy)
_____________________
To put it in another way “What you resist persists.”
These are vitally important concepts to understand for the world to evolve at a healthy rate.
As for the crime deterrance – I just added it there as I had heard of the studies and didnt research it. I dont have any studies to link to here. Intuitively I don’t feel that an abstract threat of punishment is really going to stop a child molestor from his actions or some other psychotic act.
To explain the nation v. the individual thing – you were alluding to foreign enemies and war. And that we need to make war against the killers on our own soil. No we don’t need to make war. We need to make peace.
The parallel for me here is that the only situation in which it is legitimate to kill another is to defend, not to make war. It is legitimate to defend oneself when a life is immediately threatened in clear and present danger. There was no clear and present danger in Iraq, nor is there with a guy locked up in a security facility.
When someone is of the belief and writes in their blog that “we have to make war,” I see a person’s thinking as part of the problem.
What Einstein said is brilliant. You just haven’t understood it.
I’ll look forward to your post about war. Thanks for the chance to exchange ideas.
Hi Jill,
I thought I’d put some controversial things up just to see what happened. I have some views which many people that enjoy Aim for Awesome don’t also have. I’m all for being all you can be – with whatever you’ve been given.
There are no good answers to whether or not to get rid of societal detritus by killing them or a lifelong imprisonment – which is more akin to torture than would be a mercy killing in my eyes. For me the main point is that we don’t just deal with major criminals once. If they go to jail – we have a lot of people dealing with them there. The whole country is paying for them to be there really. I don’t believe in that. Once they get out – and they will for most crimes, then you have a re-victimization of the victims and victims’ families. Is that a clear and present danger? If the guy that raped my sister was let out of jail after 5 – 15 years and he lived even in the same state as she did, or within 1,000 miles or any amount of miles- that to me is a clear and present danger and the problem is very real. The fear that victims feel when their perpetrator is let out – is entirely preventable with capital punishment.
We must be judged on our decisions – harshly when they affect others by causing loss of life, emotional and physical pain and trauma.
Right to live? Sure – they have a right to live as long as they never cross a couple of lines. Those lines are tough to get across, but if you do it – you lose the right to life. Game over so the rest of society can go back to doing the best we can.
What Einstein said might well be brilliant, and as I said – you provided no context for the statement. If you blindly believe everything someone says is brilliant because everybody else does – then that says something about you. If you don’t know the context he said that statement in – which I’m guessing you don’t because you didn’t even try to explain it, then it says even more.
Gandhi, Buddhism, Christianity, the “Golden Rule of ethics” wu wei and wang chun have nothing to do with me.
I find that by quoting other points of view I live someone else’s reality. Reality tells me that all of those resources provide bits of data that I can run through the vern-tester to see – does it float or sink?
Gandhi might have said some things that made sense. Buddhism has said a lot that makes sense to me – karma is a nice illusion that can be propagated by attributing everything that happens as a result of probability – to “karma”.
You say Christianity teaches forgiveness, yet the bible is full of acts of revenge, justice – however one wishes to term them, instigated by God and Jesus themselves (itself?). You’re choosing to ignore that part – so, when you say “Christianity teaches individuals to forgive those who wrong them, rather than seek retribution for a wrong.” You’ve left out huge numbers of verses in bible that talk about the other side of that.
Exodus 35:2 – 2 For six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a holy sabbath of solemn rest to the Lord; whoever does any work on it shall be put to death.
Yeah, that’s forgiving as hell!
Here’s another one – there’s scores of these examples…
Deut 21:18-21Rebellious Children? Stone them to death.
18 If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, 19then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town at the gate of that place. 20They shall say to the elders of his town, This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. So you shall purge the evil from your midst; and all Israel will hear, and be afraid.
People that choose to believe only the parts of the bible they WANT to believe are not Christian… and aren’t spreading the truth about Christianity and what the bible actually says. Attempts to make someone see the wisdom of the bible by quoting one thing and not telling all that is said in relation to the subject is dishonest, unfair, and – isn’t it a sin? :|
OK – I really don’t enjoy arguing much, it’s bringing me down – so this will be my last comment about it. If you want to have the last word – you’re welcome to have it.
Vern,
Jesus called us to forgive, and that’s what I will perpetuate…not hate, not fear, not killing to serve”justice,” or anything else that goes against love. I love you too, Vern. If you want to change the world, it isn’t done by doing things the way we’ve always done them.
Hi Theresa,
Thanks for loving me! I think that the world is unfixable. There’s no way to fix things because these things were part of the rules of the game. They’re here for us to deal with – whether you believe we are forced to deal with them because it serves as a way to take us to a new level – closer to what Jesus was teaching. Or, whether you believe there was a malevolent intent to creating this game and that any of our lives really, truly mean nothing in the big picture. I’m leaning toward the latter. :P
“No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.”
Albert Einstein
Period. You are not at the level of consciousness to solve this, in my opinion. You do not solve a problem like this by eliminating a life. You are perpetuating the problem.
A side point is that I have read studies that prove that the threat of punishment does not curtail crime.
Another is that the difference between an individual and a threatening nation is that the individual can be contained and therefore society is protected from that threat. In dealing with nations, killing in an act of war has to be accepted. There’s your difference.
Anyway, good that you are thinking this through and sharing your thoughts. I just think your thoughts are on the same plane as the source of the problem.
Hi Jill –
Thanks for writing… Your comment bothered me on a number of points – well, all of them truthfully.
Your quote from Einstein, if it’s really from him – shows that everything Einstein said wasn’t brilliant. It’s anyone’s guess what he means by “same level of consciousness” so I won’t go any further into that. For myself I’m not sure – what is a higher level of consciousness? Is consciousness a steady attribute within people that can be compared person to person? Or, is it based on some moral perspective? I’m not at all sure. Impossible to for him or anyone to say no problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it unless he defines what he means – the quote, without context doesn’t mean anything at all.
Period. Heh-heh – like, “Einstein said it… it must be true for the world!” OK…hmmm, “Period.” OK…
“You are not at the level of consciousness to solve this, in my opinion. You do not solve a problem like this by eliminating a life. You are perpetuating the problem.”
What level of consciousness am I at then – I’m unclear on the various levels… could you name and explain for me which level I’m at?
The problem – people that make horrible decisions that affect the lives of other people, is perpetuating itself. There’s no solution Jill. Everything we do to help eliminate the problem causes some other problems. I think the best way to eliminate any future bad decision making is to have them die for having destroyed someone else’s life. How would any other decision eliminate any more problems than that?
“A side point is that I have read studies that prove that the threat of punishment does not curtail crime.”
I don’t think you mean that – if you do, I’d be really curious where those studies are… punishment does not curtail crime… hmm. Why does every country in the world have it then? Why do we punish our kids for doing something wrong so they don’t do it again? I think it works quite well Jill – you’re generalizing some small finding in a study you read to include a gross statement, “punishment does not curtail crime,” and that’s absurd.
In this paragraph, I don’t understand what you’re saying. Somehow you’re allowing for the possibility of war being an acceptible way to kill others. Which to me is not acceptable, but that’s the topic for another post that’s coming shortly.
I couldn’t disagree more. Pro-life means being pro-lie across the board, and forgiveness is something we are called to do in all situations.
I used to subscribe to your blog via Google reader, but this is not the kind of reading that inspires me to be a better person.
Aim for Awesome?
Hi Theresa,
Thanks for commenting. I’m not sure you were suggesting that I was pro-life or not, but I assure you I am pro-choice. Similarly, I am pro-choice for everything in life… we all have a choice in every situation we find ourselves in. Someone that kidnaps another person – made a choice. My choice would be – eliminate that person from the gene pool and from the planet so nobody else can be affected by their choices. If someone kills a child – in a heinous way or with a simple bullet to the head that person made a choice. My choice would be the same as for the kidnapper. Get rid of these people once and for all with a very strict capital punishment program that is enforced quickly.
A funny thing would happen to this amazing country we live in… a lot less people would be making horrible choices that affect others negatively. There would be a lot less murder, rapes, kidnappings, torture cases and anything else that could be punished by capital punishment. The threat of dying for your stupid decisions would become much more real in the minds of criminals today. They’d think twice before shooting someone in the leg, hacking someone’s arms off, or similar…
Get rid of the detritus… let someone’s god sort it out.
Theresa, what you may have missed about “Aim for Awesome” is that this blog is focused on reality above all. Reality to me means that people that do horrible things to others – receive a similar treatment. I’m not for a world where punishment for raping a child consists of living in jail for twenty years with basic needs taken care of. Bad decisions – really bad decisions deserve death in my ideal world – not second chances.
Ironically I was coming to flesh out my comment. In my defense, I was actually shocked to see someone still holding to what in my opinion is a barbaric ideology. I basically posted without thinking, except to tone it down to something civil.
There are a number of arguments about wrongful convictions, and about silly laws that allow people not directly involved to be convicted of crimes. You can release some one jailed incorrectly, you can’t dig them up and let them go.
My main reason for opposing the death penalty is something that was inferred yourself. A human life is precious simply for being a human life. A life of a alcoholic hobo is no less precious then that of a 15 year old girl, but the same extends to the person that tried to kill the girl.
In my opinion, to believe otherwise is dangerous. Once you start valuing the life of people differently, then human life becomes relative. Is the life of the 15 year old victim in this story worth more then yours? How about an alcoholic drug user?
Where do you draw the line? You consider someone who maims someone else worthy of the death penalty. Do you include some one who deliberately causes a car accident that causes some one to lose a limb. How about a drunk driver? someone who uses a cell phone while driving? someone who hasn’t gotten around to replacing some bald tires? These people could easily be considered to have maimed someone else.
In the other direction you can talk about not contributing to society. How about the mentally retarded people that will require ongoing care for the rest of their lives? Or people that are just selfish and socially obnoxious.
What is a human life worth? You seem to be saying “it depends”.
To: Anonymous above…
Why do people post anonymously to issues that mean something? I thought about whether or not to post this for a while before deciding I can use it as a way to bring more out about what I feel toward this topic. If this person responds back and doesn’t hide behind an anonymous label and I can verify that the IP addresses are the same – or very close, then I’ll publish the reply… Otherwise, no. Is this Owen posting this – the guy that posted prior? The IP is way off… I don’t know… anonymous comments are lame.
Anyway…
Our justice system is far from perfect. What we can change is to make the law regarding certain crimes – murder, rape, maiming, kidnapping, and others… torture of course, punishable by death. Doesn’t even have to be a painless death in my mind – but, that’s going a step beyond and maybe that’s another post entirely.
Yes, there will be people wrongfully prosecuted – welcome to reality. It happens today, and, it will happen if the death penalty goes nationwide for the crimes I suggested. However, as I said – since the jury will be deciding – not whether the accused will spend 1 year in prison versus 10 yrs versus life… and only deciding – DEATH or go Free – there will be quite a few cases that get thrown out entirely because the jury just can’t come to a unanimous conclusion that the person in front of them committed the crime and should die. As I said – false negatives will be high. That’s a good thing in my mind because better that an innocent person is not killed by this new law… and under this new law I believe less would be.
You said that I inferred that a human life is precious simply for being a human life. No. If I said that, or inferred that – let me correct it. No. There are plenty of people alive today that have committed crimes like I mentioned that aren’t worth the spit in a dog’s throat. Yes, their lives are less precious than that of a 15 year old innocent girl OR an alcoholic hobo or an alcoholic drug user.
I don’t value people based on their contribution to society. I quite don’t care. I completely understand those that want to do nothing at all for society, for their country… for anyone else. Nationalism and the idea of basing someone’s intrinsic worth on what they can ‘add’ to society is a ridiculous notion that I don’t support at all. I understand that there are many people that just can’t and so many that just don’t want to be bothered. That’s reality.
Where I draw the line at – is with people that make bad decisions that horribly affect ANYONE else. If a doctor who volunteers 60 hours a week at a homeless shelter treating men, women and children for free drives drunk and kills an alcoholic hobo crossing the street – he can die for that in my book. I’m OK with that. He made a really horrible decision to drive drunk, which adversely affected the hobo and his family and friends. Pretty substantially affected them I think you’d agree.
If someone deliberately causes a car accident that causes someone to lose a limb – should they die? Yes, I’d be fine with that.
Each case would be decided as it pops up… society would need to decide what is worth death. I was speaking about deliberate acts – not acts of ignorance, that directly affected someone else. There was cause – effect. It’s clear, crystal clear what happened. I don’t believe people should be killed for sneezing on a butterfly that flew into a child’s hair, that scared the mother who was driving the child to school and who inadvertently steered into a busload of toddlers, killing 4.
If driving with a cell phone were illegal then a person driving and using a cell phone – is making a really bad choice not just for herself – but for anyone that may die as a result of her stupidity. Should she die for that? In my mind – I’m OK with that.
Why? Because it would stop people cold – from making stupid and selfish decisions that have the power to affect someone else’s life – and the lives of everyone that knows that person.
Keep in mind – I’m not OK with that now… the laws would need to change first… people would need to understand the gravity of their decisions and actually think a whole lot before breaking a law that could lead to the death, disfigurement, maiming, or otherwise severely harming another individual.
I’m guessing the level of stupid in the country would drop dramatically.
Good post, well writen, catchy title and designed to draw people in to reading it.
Too bad I completely disagree with this point of view.
Nice comment, short, gets to the point and designed to have people skip right over it. Do you want to talk about your point of view?