This article examines the death penalty in cases of murder, in particular, one case. Although many people support death penalty and have good reasons for dealing with such a controversial issue, I will present deep personal and convincing evidence to show why I do not support the death penalty.
Severe Murder and Effects
1982 On January 15, a 29-year-old man was killed in a nightclub parking lot at the birthplace of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and was thought to be his closest companion. A young man, brother, brother and another parent of the victim. A very talented man, he built and sold wooden furniture and played drums. He has worked on everything and he has many friends.
Her murderer twice shot in the breast and once in the abdomen, but does not stop simply to kill her. He broke into a 50-mile murder area where he was drowned in a well as a garbage bag. The road crew found the body five days later. The man was robbed and his clothes were partially removed. 1982 On January 30, the Oklahoma City Police Department informed the victim and her family of death.
The murder trial started in 1982. After April and 22 minutes of discussion, seven women, five-year jury, 27-year-old Dennis Ray Benton were found guilty of the first-class slaughter and later sentenced him to 70 years in prison.
Every three years, when the sentence of Benton is to take place, the victim's sister interrogates the Oklahoma Conditional Early Termination Committee so as to arrest him. Though he did not want his life to be taken as he took his brother's life, he felt that he had to serve his whole punishment. She is afraid she is suffering more for her crime, living in prison, where she will suffer for a short time. If Benton lives for a long time to release his sentence, which has been reduced to age 46, a person under 73 will be released from prison without income and is very worried about the survival.
My elder brother, Michael, should not die in that terrible and tragic way. However, it seems logical that the state of Oklahoma had to take Benton's life, and Michael could not afford to kill him.
Although I am still severely damaged by the death of my brother, I do not believe that I would like my family to be Beninton's death penalty or to help me. Yes, Bennett has taken us from Michael, but in any way, including the mandate of the government, human life is intentional, still killing.
Judgment of death
Since 1976, judicial death has killed 1,184 Americans with 20 deaths in 2011. As journalist William Boll asked, in 1977, countries in Western Europe and Cambodia abolished the death penalty, why the US still killed in order to show that the murder was wrong. When other nations are united in practice, the United States has a different position regardless of the consequences.
In 34 countries in the United States, practically, they use "eye-eye, toothpaste," for those who commit vile and barbaric crimes, such as murder. In addition to the satisfaction that every interested party observes when a person realizes that his death has come to an end, how can we justify the same offense that the offender has committed to administer justice and to close the victim? friends and families. How could the second man be killed correctly when the first person was killed when no one was killed but two or more lives?
Bedouin: Fantasy argument
I would like to serve as an example by Gary Colwell, a professor of philosophy, He presents the fantastic world of philosopher Hugo Bedouin, establishing the morality of death. And if each murderer's performance at the same time restored the victim, as did the murder ever.
Bedou, in his argument, said:
Think about … the imaginary world where the assassin will be constantly restoring the murder victim to life, integrity and inviolability, as if there was no murder. In such a wonderful world it is difficult to see how anyone can be executed on a moral basis to death. Why should not a murderer die if innocent the innocent victim will take his life? What can be the moral mistake of taking the life of a murderer in such circumstances?
If my brother's murder would return him to life, as if nothing had happened, my opposition to my death would not exist, because good would be good for misuse of evil. As a member of the family of the murder victim, the restoration that I will receive from the victim of the murderer's life, under Bedau, seemed not to be cruel because the "life for life" method of justice that some parts of our nation are using today.
The disadvantage of Bedouin's fantastic global argument makes it difficult to make a decision whether to take a murderer wrong if it were to be a crime, for the death penalty would represent the moral justice that we all know that the act can not kill itself. If Benton's life ended, and Michael and his life were restored, the expression "life for life" would no longer exist, since Michael will no longer kill a murderer and Benton is a longer murderer who performed Benton's immoral acts.
Why was he killed?
The point is that a person may be able to get out of another man without murder murders. To make a murderer, another murder must be committed, which forces the state to perform the performance, and the supporters of the execution have the same distressing tendencies as the murderer.
The majority of murderers feel that the murderer should receive the same treatment as the victim. When my family and I learned about Michael and the murder, we felt the same way. That way of thinking and feeling was perceived when we thought Benton should survive for his crime, and he would not pay what he did, if he had been executed.
Life vs. Death
In addition to my arguments against the death penalty, I have already filed for reasons, I also investigate the death penalty, the term of imprisonment without punishment, and why it is more punishable than the performance. Some people think that the life of a murderer in life, never seeing the outside world, does not provide a sufficient punishment. but I feel that without the verdict of the sentence of life, and in Benton, where he will punish almost life imprisonment, he is punishing me for my brother's sister.
Contrary to what many people think that convicts who face life sentences are not easy. Though they have a lot of things, such as television, access to the library, and educational opportunities, they actually have more worries than in just a minute, not the inmates, beaten by other detainees and constantly subjected to sexual violence.
The reality of the detention of prisoners differs mainly from what we, as non-prisoners, imagine. True life prisoners pay for their crimes, and in order to support my statements, I will present examples of why "livers" pay as a price to live a murder for an effective member of society. My illustration consists of seven side by side comparisons in our lives outside of our external life.
- Residential area. We can choose our living space and decorate it as we see it is appropriate. Lifton's living space usually consists of 6 & # 39; x 10 & # 39; cell with a toilet, a sink and bed. Decoration should correspond to prison policy.
- Time: We can spend our time in any way. The performer has to spend his time as he is buried through prison dynamics and governance. Time moves slowly and takes days.
- Work and education. We spent some of our time in our jobs, for which we receive not less than the minimum wage. If life deals, he earns every week from $ 1.00 to $ 20.00. We can spend our money in any way that we choose, but it does not have a real place to spend money, and now, in addition to the walls, to earn a degree.
- Family and friends. We can choose the time we spend with our family and friends, and we participate in the activities if we lose a friend or family member, we can attend the funeral. An entire life can not choose a family and a time spent with friends, and most of the survivors will stop visiting. If a relative loses a friend or family member, the prison rules and policies prohibit the prisoner from being present at the funeral.
- Freedom. We have freedom, coming and going, choosing freedom of speech and control in everyday life. The performer has very limited freedom. Prisoners who practice freedom of expression in such an unstable environment often get severe injuries or lose their lives.
- Thoughts. We have our possessions that we enjoy. Lifers do not have many subjects, and they have stolen a little. For convicts who struggle for their possessions, sometimes they become brutally wounded or killed.
- Conscience: We have not committed a murder, so we should not live by sin. We should not live with the terrible fact that we have taken another person's life. Some animals have no conscience or soul, but those who do every day should look in their mirror and live with what they do. Innocence can physically and emotionally overnight for a person, and many people's lives suffer from health problems and die prematurely.
Even everything that I have already demonstrated, some will always defend the death penalty and still feel that punishment for "life for life" is moral, which is their right. 2005 In an interview with Sister Helen Prenzan, how the applicants often treat family members of the killings, editor of the American magazine George. M. Anderson presented the story of Prejean that criminals with their sights of judges often look for death penalties to raise their political career.
How can we justify the victim of human life, even the cold assassin as a means of professional advancement? How do we learn our children and grandchildren about the importance of human life and then show the opposition using the judicial system as a weapon of murder?
When we consider the death penalty and imprisonment without punishment, we must take into account the values that should be overwhelming in the determination of the penalty for the offense. What a public purpose, except for the eternal absence of a murderer, is a death penalty. If the court makes a verdict after passing a verdict, the murderer family punishes the punishment as the murderer can no longer be harmed. Why should we punish innocent families?
Since 1994, lawyer Richard S. To refer to the comments. "Assuming that the death penalty is morally acceptable, and even theoretically constitutional, there is neglect, practical burden, which is punishable by society, its negative consequences prefer personal satisfaction, use it."
As a society, if we disagree with taking human life, why do we support the murder of the judge? What makes this murder less immoral than the crime of the person who committed it?
Innocent people are doing
We must also take into account the fact that, despite strong evidence of winning convictions, the life of innocent people has been executed. 1999 The "Christian Diary" shows an incident when Antony Porter was sentenced to death and 16 years after the death sentence when the journalist professor of the Northwestern University and his students reviewed his case and the police led the real murderer who confessed the murders. If Porter could not hear the news of his intellectual jurisdiction through judicial proceedings, and the help of the professor and his students, he would have committed an offense he did not. His verdict was only two days before it was scheduled for execution.
In 2001, he referred to the Christian Science Monitor in Illinois State Governor George Ryan to stop the assassination attempt in Illinois to prevent sanctions against innocent people. He also pointed out that unlawful convictions occur when police and offenders report evidence of fraud, and when advocates have been miserable for judicial representation.
The innocent person who executed the death is considered terrible as a crime of murder. When a person takes another person's life, it is a murder. and when the state is an innocent person, it is still a murder. How can there be any difference when two victims of the murders are innocent?
2007 Western correspondent Lora Saggins describes innocent people who have been convicted and executed for violent crime. He stated that law professor Brian A. Stevenson, representing the United States of the Deprived of Independent and Death Penalty, has received 125 deaths since the prisoners were found innocent.
The fact that many innocent people get death penalty is deeply troubling. No word can ever express grief for their families and friends if they have died for the crimes they have not done.
Advisors to the death penalty may think of how one of their friends or relatives was convicted and executed for murder, and five years later, the real murderer grabbed and confessed that his friend or relative died. Writer Mark Doow, who authored executions and commentaries on death penalty in 2005, has strongly condemned the death penalty when he states that the court can lift the verdict but can not cancel the verdict.
I know how I can feel if my brother Michael died for the murder that he did not fulfill instead of his death. In any case, he has gone, but the court trial does not convince people to kill. An example of a death sentence for trial judges is the basis for a condemned judicial system to get rich from the blood of others.
Additional Death Crimes
Writer Roth Morgan, author of numerous books and articles on criminal justice and criminal law, has supported the death penalty on the ground that violates human rights and fundamental freedoms. He pointed to something that should worry everyone. Many of the countries that have been executed in recent years have adopted laws that supplement crimes as qualifying as the capital, such as the murder of the president and the major drug trafficking.
If a friend or relative performs one of these additional crimes, even though it is a terrible offense, that person must be executed, or if he / she does not have a valid ratification, he / she will get a better solution so that he / she is really a crime.
The final thoughts
We should look deep inside and ask ourselves this question. If we were in judicial instances, we could, without taking into consideration the general public, condemn another person to die. Professor James S. Leeben asked the same question in 2007. "Why is the Court's position on death penalty for both detachments and deployments? Why is not the other, why she dances The court has interrupted a neighborhood and escaping. "
Now I'm back to my brother, Dennis Ray Benton. My family and I did not ask the court to look for death penalty, as in reality she would not suffer to take the life of our beloved. Bennett's murder would not be a mistake he did for our family.
The fact that Michael and the murderer live and suffer every day from the consequences of his actions comfort me. I see his suffering and the physical symptoms of his sufferings, which are more for me than his dead body lay on the ground.
Մայքլ Ջեքսոնի դեպքում, արդարությունը արդարացիորեն գերազանցեց առանց մահապատժի կիրառման:
* Անունը փոխվել է կեղծանուն `պաշտպանելու ընտանիքի գաղտնիությունը
Հեղինակային իրավունք 2011 Patti McMann. Բոլոր իրավունքները պաշտպանված են.