“For centuries the death penalty, often accompanied by barbarous refinements, has been trying to hold crime in check; yet crime persists,” (Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion and Death).
These words of Albert Camus, an Algerian-French author and philosopher, best sum up my position on the death penalty and the prison system. The death penalty is one of the most controversial issues of our time and it garners opinions from people in all walks of life. I say it with a little hesitation that I am against the death penalty. The death penalty and the prison system are both intrinsically flawed.
The old adage “two wrongs do not make a right,” is the first thing that comes to mind when I think of the death penalty. As sad as it is to say, when someone is murdered, nothing will ever bring that person back. I do not believe that seeing the murderer die by lethal injection or any other method will bring closure to the family of the victim. Anyone who says that it does is either lying or trying to fool themselves. The hole will always be there if a family member is taken away violently. Nothing will ever make things right again.
According to the Web site http://www.balancedpolitics.org, there are some legitimate reasons to ban the death penalty in the United States. It clogs our legal system with appeals for inmates who have received the death sentence.
The financial cost of capital punishment is several times greater than that of locking the inmate up for life. The death penalty has been in place for about as long as our nation has existed and it still has not scared potential criminals straight. This may be because the method of execution has become more humane as time has gone on. Life in prison is a more severe punishment and it is also a more effective deterrent.
The death penalty sends contradictory messages in several different ways. First of all, it sends the wrong message that it is all right to kill a person who has murdered someone else to prove that killing is wrong. It does not take an Ivy League graduate to figure out that there is no logic in that. Second, it takes sympathy away from the victim and the victim’s family and places it on the perpetrator of the crime.
Here is where the hesitation comes in on my part and I really could spend many sleepless nights pondering on the situation. How would I feel if someone murdered a member of my family? Honestly, I cannot answer that question. Perhaps I would want to see him pay for the crime he has committed by watching him hang from the tallest tree in the world. Or maybe I would want him to have the rest of his life to think about his crime in prison.
That being said, I believe there is another factor that should be taken into consideration. The prison system is flawed in our country. In Texas, there is not even the option of life without parole. The prison system has gone too soft. With all the human rights activists getting prisoners equal treatment, prison is not as scary anymore. It has lost a little of the intimidation. I am not condoning beat-downs of prisoners like those that occurred in the movie “Shawshank Redemption,” but maybe if they mess up again in prison, give them a few days in solitary confinement and see if it gives them a new lease on life. They are already in prison for crimes on the outside. Misbehavior inside the walls should be punished a little more severely.
Some criminals might even find that they would have a better life inside the prison than outside of it. Think about it, inside prison they will always have, clean clothes, shelter, three meals a day, some form of employment and the possibility of education. These are things that are no guarantees on the outside, especially for potential criminals.
It has been proven that some innocent men and women have been put to death under capital punishment. It might help the United States gain more respect in the international community if the nation moves away from the “eye for an eye” revenge approach. Who are we, as a nation, to judge whether other men should live or die? Some are truly apologetic for their crimes, and others feel no remorse or deny that they committed the crime. When we sentence a guilty man or woman to die, perhaps, we are no better than they are.
“For centuries the death penalty, often accompanied by barbarous refinements, has been trying to hold crime in check; yet crime persists,” (Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion and Death).
These words of Albert Camus, an Algerian-French author and philosopher, best sum up my position on the death penalty and the prison system. The death penalty is one of the most controversial issues of our time and it garners opinions from people in all walks of life. I say it with a little hesitation that I am against the death penalty. The death penalty and the prison system are both intrinsically flawed.
The old adage “two wrongs do not make a right,” is the first thing that comes to mind when I think of the death penalty. As sad as it is to say, when someone is murdered, nothing will ever bring that person back. I do not believe that seeing the murderer die by lethal injection or any other method will bring closure to the family of the victim. Anyone who says that it does is either lying or trying to fool themselves. The hole will always be there if a family member is taken away violently. Nothing will ever make things right again.
According to the Web site http://www.balancedpolitics.org, there are some legitimate reasons to ban the death penalty in the United States. It clogs our legal system with appeals for inmates who have received the death sentence.
The financial cost of capital punishment is several times greater than that of locking the inmate up for life. The death penalty has been in place for about as long as our nation has existed and it still has not scared potential criminals straight. This may be because the method of execution has become more humane as time has gone on. Life in prison is a more severe punishment and it is also a more effective deterrent.
The death penalty sends contradictory messages in several different ways. First of all, it sends the wrong message that it is all right to kill a person who has murdered someone else to prove that killing is wrong. It does not take an Ivy League graduate to figure out that there is no logic in that. Second, it takes sympathy away from the victim and the victim’s family and places it on the perpetrator of the crime.
Here is where the hesitation comes in on my part and I really could spend many sleepless nights pondering on the situation. How would I feel if someone murdered a member of my family? Honestly, I cannot answer that question. Perhaps I would want to see him pay for the crime he has committed by watching him hang from the tallest tree in the world. Or maybe I would want him to have the rest of his life to think about his crime in prison.
That being said, I believe there is another factor that should be taken into consideration. The prison system is flawed in our country. In Texas, there is not even the option of life without parole. The prison system has gone too soft. With all the human rights activists getting prisoners equal treatment, prison is not as scary anymore. It has lost a little of the intimidation. I am not condoning beat-downs of prisoners like those that occurred in the movie “Shawshank Redemption,” but maybe if they mess up again in prison, give them a few days in solitary confinement and see if it gives them a new lease on life. They are already in prison for crimes on the outside. Misbehavior inside the walls should be punished a little more severely.
Some criminals might even find that they would have a better life inside the prison than outside of it. Think about it, inside prison they will always have, clean clothes, shelter, three meals a day, some form of employment and the possibility of education. These are things that are no guarantees on the outside, especially for potential criminals.
It has been proven that some innocent men and women have been put to death under capital punishment. It might help the United States gain more respect in the international community if the nation moves away from the “eye for an eye” revenge approach. Who are we, as a nation, to judge whether other men should live or die? Some are truly apologetic for their crimes, and others feel no remorse or deny that they committed the crime. When we sentence a guilty man or woman to die, perhaps, we are no better than they are.