Something tragic just happened in Florida. During a family celebration on Thanksgiving, a man shot his twin sisters, aunt, and 6-year-old cousin to death. This is obviously not the first time that something like this has happened, and it is not a pleasant thing to think about. But after I hear about these events occurring time and time again, I think about the appropriate consequences of these evil deeds. Should there be a death penalty?
Personally, I believe that there should be a death penalty. Well, it should only be used for very SERIOUS crimes–which would involve the death of at least 1 person–and there must be absolute 100% evidence that the criminal is guilty. This "absolute evidence" would entitle the use of DNA, fingerprinting, video cameras, witnesses, etc.
Let's look at Saddam Hussein. The man killed his entire soccer team for losing. He put his own people into plastic shredders. He ended up killing a grand total of approximately 200,000 of his own people. Now, this man is the definition of evil. As we probably all know, Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death by the Iraqi court. I personally think that the death penalty in this case is well deserved, but some people disagree with me. I mean, after Hussein committed all of those evil crimes, why should we have to pay for his cable TV in prison? Why should we have to pay for the many meals he will be eating in prison? It just doesn't make sense to me. For one, I think that if you are truly as evil as Hussein you don't deserve to live. And even if you were to live, you shouldn't be given such luxuries as cable television.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents"
ReplyDeletehttp://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx
23 recent studies finding for deterrence, Criminal Justice Legal Foundation,
ohttp://www.cjlf.org/deathpenalty/DPDeterrence.htm
A Death Penalty Red Herring: The Inanity and Hypocrisy of Perfection, Lester Jackson Ph.D.,
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=102909A
"The Innocent Executed: Deception & Death Penalty Opponents"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/08/the-innocent-executed-deception--death-penalty-opponents--draft.aspx
"Cost Savings: The Death Penalty"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/05/07/cost-savings-the-death-penalty.aspx
"Death Penalty Sentencing: No Systemic Bias"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-sentencing-no-systemic.html
"Death Penalty Polls: Support Remains Very High - 80%"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-polls-support-remains.html
"Killing equals Killing: The Amoral Confusion of Death Penalty Opponents"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/02/01/murder-and-execution--very-distinct-moral-differences--new-mexico.aspx
"The Death Penalty: Neither Hatred nor Revenge"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/20/the-death-penalty-neither-hatred-nor-revenge.aspx
"Death Penalty Support: Modern Catholic Scholars"
http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/07/death-penalty-support-modern-catholic.html
"Sister Helen Prejean & the death penalty: A Critical Review"
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/05/04/sister-helen-prejean--the-death-penalty-a-critical-review.aspx
I agree with your stance on when there should be a death penalty, Nick. I think that when there is absolute evidence, then a person who commits as serious as a crime as that man did, should be sentenced to death. I think a lot of deciding of when there should be a death penalty depends on the circumstances though.
ReplyDelete