I came to my anti death penalty stance after a pretty long struggle. My reasoning for my previous stance went like this:
If i committed or was accused of a horrible crime and my options were to spend the rest of my life in prison with all that entails or death, i'd rather have death. In my naiveté, i assumed that most people would also make that choice.
I'm not sure when my mind changed on this, but i think my basic belief is that it's not for the rest of us to decide. Sure, serious crimes come with serious penalties. But eye-for-an-eye does exactly what you're suggesting: it punishes the loved ones of the deceased. They're not around to "rue the day" as it were.
As i told my friend gorey_ballerina earlier (i pointed her to this post, btw, as i thought she'd be interested), i'm trying to hold on to the nice thought that The West Memphis Three (i'll assume you know who they are unless you ask) were all exonerated and set free a few weeks ago. Some justice exists, but then again, the WM3 had several documentaries about them and a team of
( ... )
I think the moral objection is more compelling than the "execution of the innocent" argument. The latter is important because if you kill one innocent person, you have gone too far.
Thing is, the follow up question is always "what if you know for absolute certain they did it" and my answer is that I still think it is wrong - but for different reasons.
Agreed. The idea of executing anyone (guilty or not) doesn't sit well with me, but the possibility of killing someone who didn't do it when everyone knows (should know?) that the system is imperfect is just appalling.
I also think death is too easy an out for the guilty.. (have blogged semi-coherently on it already over at ickletayto.com)
I think we should be more imaginative with sentencing people.. Like I sentence you to life in a pink jumpsuit.. Or from this day forth you shall only eat porridge.. Deny them their liberty.. Don't kill them..
Yes, it is not as if I think someone guilty of cold blooded murder should live but so many people have been proven innocent after a conviction that I would rather play it safe and not have them killed.
Comments 6
If i committed or was accused of a horrible crime and my options were to spend the rest of my life in prison with all that entails or death, i'd rather have death. In my naiveté, i assumed that most people would also make that choice.
I'm not sure when my mind changed on this, but i think my basic belief is that it's not for the rest of us to decide. Sure, serious crimes come with serious penalties. But eye-for-an-eye does exactly what you're suggesting: it punishes the loved ones of the deceased. They're not around to "rue the day" as it were.
As i told my friend gorey_ballerina earlier (i pointed her to this post, btw, as i thought she'd be interested), i'm trying to hold on to the nice thought that The West Memphis Three (i'll assume you know who they are unless you ask) were all exonerated and set free a few weeks ago. Some justice exists, but then again, the WM3 had several documentaries about them and a team of ( ... )
Reply
Thing is, the follow up question is always "what if you know for absolute certain they did it" and my answer is that I still think it is wrong - but for different reasons.
Reply
Reply
I think we should be more imaginative with sentencing people.. Like I sentence you to life in a pink jumpsuit.. Or from this day forth you shall only eat porridge.. Deny them their liberty.. Don't kill them..
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment