People Who Kill People

As of August 2009, there are over 3,000 people in the United States, counting days until their scheduled deaths. Nearly each and everyone of those people has been deemed responsible for taking someone else’s life. Whether it was the life of a helpless infant, an agonized woman, or even a powerful grown man, one thing is for certain: we, as a public, believe beyond a reasonable doubt, that those 3,000 people have committed some of the most torturous, gruesome actions we could ever imagine. These individuals all have different stories to tell, but there is one thing they all have in common: they wear an old solid color suit, and will likely never have a change of clothing. The suit has the letters ‘DR’ on the back, and it doesn’t stand for Dominican Republic.
Capital punishment — one of the most controversial topics of all time. Since before the common era, we’ve been asking ourselves one question: to kill or not to kill. In the 1600′s, men would get beheaded for speaking out against the king, and women would get hung or burned for potential witchcraft. Murders, on the other hand, were a more common practice and considered to be one’s personal business. Think of duels for instance. A man placed another life (along with his own) at stake, as a form of revenge for unjust or disrespectful actions. The idea of eye for eye was not only allowed, it was highly respected and even encouraged. Today, the theory of “kill or be killed” transformed to “kill to be killed.”
Thirty-nine out of fifty states practice capital punishment. Texas, California, and Floria at the top of the list for most executions, partially due to their large population, but mainly due to their state-spread strong support of capital punishment. But since everything is bigger in Texas, why would the execution rate be an exception? So if one does decide to brutally murder someone in cold blood, there must few applicable conditions envolved in order for the crime to qualify for capital punishment. However, here’s the trick: even if charged with capital murder, one is likely to land a plea bargain — life in prison without the possibility of parole. While opposers of the death penalty may say that such a sentence is perfectly just, perhaps even appropriate, I beg to differ. For starters, the entire idea of a “bargain” when referring to a life that was involunterally taken, appears too political for my liking. For instance, take the Matthew Shepard case. In 1998, the 21-year-old man was robbed, tortured, tied to a fence in a remote area and left to die all because of his sexual orientation. His brutal killers were able to obtain a plea bargain and received two consecutive life sentences. Although it’s safe to say they will never see the light of day, where is the fairness to the devasted mother who lost the person she loved the most? She will always live with the images of her viciously beaten son, while the two homophobes get the luxury of cable television and fully equipped gyms? Now there’s a “good bargain.”
Unfortunately, Matthew Shepard is not the only case. Brutal tortures and murders are under-punished each and every day. In some states, murder-related convictions (in lesser than first degree, or when the defendant is a minor) result in short sentencing, with as little as 5.5 years, 4.4 after “good time,” according to Crime Victrims United. But where’s the justice? One can take part in a murder — the single act of taking a life — and receive a shabby five year sentence as a slap of on the wrist? Ever since children went to grade school, they learned that their actions had consequences; why is it that our criminal justice system may at times forget the importance of setting an appropriate consequence for a particular action, especially when it comes to brutal killings. The way I see it is simple — Action: Murder, Consequence: Murder. Seems fair to me. Period.
However, many would say that the major problem with the practice of capital punishment remains unfixed — possible executions of the innocent. Unfortunately, our jurors are easily brainwashed, prosecutors and district attorneys are too convincing, and legal aids aren’t determined enough to win a case. Mix that up in a pot and it can result in an innocent person being put to death for a crime he or she did not commit. Essentially, there’s nothing unjust about the theory and idea of the death penalty in America. It is an appropriate punishment fitted for its’ crime in the eyes of justice. I acknowledge that the institution and practice of our criminal justice system is not perfect when it comes to investigations and procedures performed by officials after a crime. However, with the help of latest technology and DNA, forensic science and crime-related evidence is becoming nearly error-proof. As for the argument that executing the killer won’t bring back the victim and that we shouldn’t kill people who kill people to show that killing is wrong, we all know that two wrongs don’t make a right, but it sure as hell makes us feel better when justice is served.

Advertisement