Sunday, May 2, 2010

Does anyone have the right to take another’s life? This key question is the basis for many controversial topics. Capital punishment is one of the most hotly debated topics within our country today. It’s even right up there with abortion, universal health care and oil. However, it seems this one is more important seeing as how it directly relates to the giving and taking of life. It seems the central argument is whether it can be deemed “right or just” to take a murderer’s life.
In my personal opinion, I completely agree with the death penalty. No one has the right to take another’s life, however I believe this right is forfeited when the murder is committed. If the government shows weakness in this area, then there will be nothing deterring people from committing murder everyday. We already have enough killing as it is. If the perpetrators have very insignificant consequences to face due to the murder, then they will most likely see it as an open call to do whatever they want.
The life sentence is a weak way out. I personally do not agree with this. If the individual enacted the most terrible act of taking another’s life, there is no excuse; this person should not be given the privilege to live out the remainder of their life. I find it’s only fair that they should pay the ultimate price for their deeds. Although many, more liberal, individuals would argue that if the murderer doesn’t have the right to take a life then neither does the justice system. This idea, however, is inconceivably childish. This would be like letting a child go unpunished for an act they committed. People have to learn their lesson the hard way. If that means paying for murder with your life, so be it. This is the only way to keep people from feeling they have the freedom to do whatever they want. If the death penalty was abolished, many more murders would be ensured. Our prison systems would be over-run with the murderers; our nation would waste copious amounts of tax-payers’ money to take care of the scum that decides to perform such atrocious actions. This is ridiculous. What would anyone have to fear then? A disregard for the laws would overwhelm the nation. The only thing the murderers would have to fear is sitting in a cozy little jail cell, not having to work for anything or even do anything for the remainder of their lives. This is so clearly not fair, while their victims are rotting in the ground.
I can understand if there was a solid logical reason for the murder, such as self-defense. This is the only excuse for committing such an act as murder. This still has a consequence attached to the act because, most likely, the individual would be tortured by the thought that they have taken another human life.
Unless the murder falls under the only acceptable branch of self-defense, all murderers should be put to death regardless of the magnitude of the death. Texas has the right idea of an express lane for the death penalty. If three or more people witnessed the murder, the individual automatically jumps straight to death. This is completely reasonable. Capital punishment needs to remain strong within our country.

1 comment:

  1. I agree with everything CIara said in this blog. Capital punishment is basically stating Hammurabi's Code. Why should the government allow these murderers to live the rest of their life? Sure, they would be in a jail, but they till have their life. I like the fact that Ciara looked up what some state governments are doing with capital punishment. I think that this helped back up Ciara's main point.