The Death Penalty- by Faathima Khan
Jeffrey Dahlmer raped, ripped apart and ate the body-parts of at least thirteen men. As punishment, the government was planning to feed, clothe, educate, medicate, entertain, and legally represent him for the rest of his life. On the other side of town, bedecked in her bridal grandeur, Indian bride Priya Virwani is forced to the ground, doused in kerosene petrol and set on fire to be left in a charred heap simply because some sick-minded miscreant thought that he was "above the law".
Alas, these macabre stories are rife. We witness victims and their families ravaged by the horrifying after-effects of injustice. Their dignity and family repute, burnt to dust...
In this entire fiasco, what becomes of Jack the Ripper? The Accused is subjected to "endure" a prison-life that seems more like a paid vacation than a correctional institute. Is this justice?
The Death Penalty was previously enforced to put the condemned to death for murder and molestation as a recompense, by right . Today, there is more sympathy for criminals than for their victims. Activists and Amnesty International are outrageously demanding that the Death Penalty be abolished because it violates the 8th Amendment's prohibition against cruel punishment and discriminates against racial minorities. They assert that it does little to deter crime and the inevitability of factual, legal and moral errors could result in the killing of innocent defendants.
I say, if the Justice Courts are really fighting for people who are innocent, then half the world, including the court judges themselves, should be put to death.
As an individual passionately au fait about Capital Punishment, I stand to declare that the death penalty should be enforced, definitely. The death penalty is regarded by many as an act of wanton cruelty on people that deserve a chance to "make it right". Morally it is believed that granting criminals respite is a virtuous act. The famous Hindu Prince Satyavan once argued the very same point, saying that killing an individual could never be virtuous, but sparing his life would be. And in response to that King Dyumatsena replied that if the sparing of those who deserved death was virtuous, all distinction between virtue and vice would disappear.
However, I believe that humanity is not given the right to inflict torture on another human. Scientists today have engineered all types of drugs that could put a person painlessly to death in a matter of seconds, thus driving back the advocates who press that Capital Punishment is inhumane. More subdued forms of death could be administered to silently put away murderers, at the same time it will prevent any future killing from that person, grant closure to his victims and serve as a deterrent to others who want to follow in his footsteps.
Could legal and factual errors result in killing an innocent man for a crime he did not commit? I should think not. Today DNA testing, taken from as little as a strand of hair, can eliminate almost all uncertainty of a persons conviction. Methods of modern science on a crime-scene proves almost 99% percent effective to test if the person was in fact in contact with his victim. It can further depict the extent of the violence inflicted. In addition to this, a jury of 12 members must unanimously decide a persons conviction through in-depth research, questioning and referencing. What are the odds?
Enforcing the death penalty will also completely strike out another worldwide dilemma - overpopulated prisons. In fact the French prisons have become so overcrowded that their government recently began releasing hundreds of thousands of inmates. The prisons do not have enough resources, space, food, clothing or guards, which is mandatory in a prison-house. And where does the money to "accommodate" these prisoners come from? The working mans pocket of course!
Another point argued is that killing the murderers does not deter crime. This is a ludicrous statement. Take a state like Saudi Arabia with a criminal justice system based on a hardline and literal form of Islamic Law. The Arab Government exercises zero tolerance for murder. Today Saudi Arabia is rated by Time magazine as being among the "Top Ten Countries with the Lowest Murder Rates" in the world!
This rating included countries like Monaco and Singapore - and would you be surprised to know that each of these countries are also hardline enforcers of The Death Penalty? Probably not.
Now contrast these rated low-murder regions to places that have abolished the death penalty; South Africa, Columbia and most European countries ; which are currently competing with the highest rates for homicide. The statistics speaks for itself. Fear is the ultimate driving factor to deter crime, and the death penalty does just that.
Whether you are ferociously opposed to the Death Penalty or not, you (the opposition) are definitely entitled to your own opinion, but you can't change facts. There's no question about it.
To my adversaries I do not regret to inform you that you have no feet to stand on, your argument in baseless in the face of the naked reality. A reality that points out that the Death Penalty has taken leaps and bounds to deter crime. To furthur endorse my claim the economic Professor at the University of Colarado, who co-authored the study on Death Penalty related statistics, finally relinquished by saying: "I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty deters crime - what am I going to do, hide them?'
There is a right way to deter criminals and to end the crime epidemic. Do it. Enforce the Death Penalty.