A continuously controversial debate, Capital Punishment, is something that is always being addressed. Some contest that it is no better than murder, while others claim it is the fairest solution to capital crime. How is some act – like revengeful or mindless murder - equivalent to serving justice? If a person commits a horrendous crime, they should be sentenced to Capital Punishment. This allows some conclusive action to be completed. Capital Punishment is not “cruel and unusual”. That is only a sour criticism to such a time-tested function of justice. It is, however, something that was ‘earned’ by the offender. Despite the fact that it has never really, in my opinion, been implemented in the correct fashion, I believe that it is the best solution to handle capital crimes.
While I am speaking extremely vaguely on the subject, I still understand that there are particulars to every circumstance. In some instances, I may actually sway my decision on the issue. This is because my opinions are never so cemented that I have a closed mind. But, nevertheless, I feel that capital felons deserve Capital Punishment. One reason this is so is because of its intentional impact. When something is dealt with so permanently and firmly, it shocks the rest of the citizens and instills some fear in them. It makes people more wary to commit a crime and, if used in correct moderation, does not worry the innocent individuals. Another thing that is undeniable about Capital Punishment is that it ensures that the offender will not be back in society anytime soon. The opposing side suggests that they should rot in jail, but what they are not doing is thinking ahead. What if they get, as often happens, on parole or escape? With Capital Punishment there is no chance for escape to hurt even more members of society. Lastly, this safety that is being spoken of is something that is the government’s role to uphold. People depend on the government to protect them whenever possible, so why should they not prevent a few extra transgressions?
The reason why it has not been efficient in the past is because of its incorrect implementations. It was overused, then rarely used, and this flux creates immense fear of wrongful accusation (because it is so prevalent) but then, in the lull, laxity. There needs to be a healthy balance of power consistently shown in order for it to be effective.
I am saying that I want people to face fatality for their deeds; I am not saying at all that one should take a life lightly. Every life is still important, no matter how corroded, and should be treated with equality. I think one should follow the ‘Golden Rule’ and consider what impact they will have on others by what they are doing. If these criminals are so bent on retaliation and refusal to live decently and take lives- then they clearly do not cherish the privilege of their own. And, therefore, should not have it.
9 comments:
I claim this! =)
Though I do not necessarily agree with your view on capital punishment I think you did a good job of defending your opinion! I do agree with the obvious issues in our current jail system in which criminals can fairly easily gain parole and definitely think that reform is necessary.
Now for the fallacies: You say that 'it makes people more wary to commit a crime and, if used in correct moderation, does not worry the innocent individuals'. Though this may be true in some cases it is a hasty generalization because not all innocent individuals are not worried about the death penalty. I know it concerns me and I like to think of myself as fairly innocent of any capital crimes =p. It is also a hasty generalization to say that capital criminals clearly do not cherish life and a slippery slope to say that therefore they should not have life. It may seem like a murderer does not cherish life but that is not necessarily so, circumstances vary and there is too much gray area to make that generalization.
Overall, good job on your blog. I completely agree that the current jailing system is inconsistent and would be much more effective if kept more stable.
You owned me haha
I thought that the way you broke-down the fallacies I made, while inserting your own position, was very insightful as well as educational. It just shows how much people use these crutches called falacies and don't even realize it!
(and I liked the full circle ending of your response too :] )
And yes, more stability is what I'm after for jail systems. In actuality, I don't 100% agree with capital punishment. That's the kind of thing where I'd really like to be there to decide. But since that's not plausible AT ALL (haha) I figure between the judge and jury there has got to be some decent decicion-makers out there.
But anyway, now that I'm done with my irrelevant tangent, thank you for your well-written comment of awesome.
You write:
Capital Punishment is not “cruel and unusual”.
I doubt we ever will reach an unanimous conclusion about capital punishment. It always will be debated.
I wonder if prison life is the greater punishment. Prisons are communities unto themselves. Is it more cruel to sentence someone to a community of confinement than to terminate his/her life?
Throughout the history of all societies and cultures, has the death penalty really stopped crime? Perhaps a few people may think, "If I get caught, I could die, so I better not kill." But, how many people are so persuaded?
Did murder rates drop when we revived the death penalty? Why do we feel the need to destroy a life because that person has committed murder? Do we think we somehow are more safe?
I agree, this issue will most likely always reamain without a conclusion.
I also often wonder if prision life is worse. For the purpose of my "argument blog", I had to be rather staunch about a side and not really entertain a qualification. And I don't think I quite honestly could have written one reguardless - I mean, without sounding wish-washy. As I had said in my previous response to ME, "In actuality, I don't 100% agree with capital punishment,". There is a big gray area on the topic for me, and I've always had an internal battle with what my personal stance is.
Do you think that it is more 'cruel and unusual' to be sentenced to the types of communities that jails generally retain?
I'm not a History Buff, so I won't use any absolute-statments, but from what I've been exposed to: No, the death penalty has not been effective, or as effective as it was meant to be (both in how it effected socities and who it affected). In addition, I think that the people who are less-likely to kill, or what have you, are in most cases the ones who are more-likely to worry. I think that capital punishment was never enstated correctly (or advertized and used correctly) and it might just be another one of those things that seems like a good idea, but only 'on paper'.
I think that destroying a life for the price of taking another one goes along with the concept of the 'Golden Rule'. It seems kind of like retaliation and a revenge cycle- but at the same time, it also kind of ends one by elliminating the couterpart of an obvious debacle. In some cases, I feel that the safety of others is ensured a little more by capital punishment. It's kind of a not-really-thinking-the-circumstances-over-and-just-taking-action thing sometimes, and that - in my opinion - is wrong. If used, it should be used for a reason other than convience.
And as for if murder rates dropped when we revived the death penalty, for the most part there was a lull. And from the small amount of research I did after reading your comment, I noticed that murder-rate was on the rise and that the death penalty is slowly rising too.
Below is one of the best websites I was able to find:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-1996-2007
Juno, you write:
Do you think that it is more 'cruel and unusual' to be sentenced to the types of communities that jails generally retain?
I think it depends upon whether or not the individual can pass the "entrance test" and learn how to work within the community. Each prison has its hierarchy, its leaders and the followers. Prisoners create their own rules among themselves. There are gangs within prisons that are networked throughout the country--an amazing network.
For some who must live most if not all their life in prison, it is a safe and acceptable place. I have read that some people are repeat offenders so that they can return to prison.
I know of a group of prisoners who had a fundraiser for a child suffering with leukemia.
You may find these sites interesting. There are other sources that are more analytical, but I think these two give the human perspective.
The Insideprison is a collection of articles and stories.
http://www.insideprison.com/
Prisoners.com is a nonprofit group in Pennsylvania. More information is on the website.
http://www.prisoners.com/homepg2.html#main
You mention the Golden Rule. Which translation do you use?
"I have read that some people are repeat offenders so that they can return to prison."
I would have never guessed that! Thank you so much for giving me another perspective. I'll look at the cites you've listed to educate myself further on the topic - it seems interesting.
And as for the Golden Rule:
I'm not necessarily a religious person, but I've always been told that I should 'Do unto others as you'd do unto yourself'. It's just another one of those things like 'If you don't have anything noce to say, don't say anything at all.'
**nice
Post a Comment