Too many Liberals believe that executing a dangerous criminal who has killed an innocent person is the same as killing an innocent person. To show how ridiculous this Liberal idea is, let us change the thing to be destroyed from a heinous criminal to a general problem like the absence of a traffic light. The presence or absence of a stop light at an intersection is something Liberals understand.
If a dangerous intersection does not have a traffic light, the Liberals are out in force to protect society from the danger of accidents. The cry often goes up: "How many more people have to die before we do something about it?"
If a premeditated murderer of innocent people exists, the Liberals are out in force to protect the premeditated murderer from the consequences of his own actions. Liberals believe that the murderer should have as many, if not more, rights than their victims and regular citizens. Liberals also seem to believe that the murder victim and subsequent potential victims should not be protected from the known criminal if it involves enforcing the capital laws that the known criminal intentionally violated.
If the threat to society was from auto accidents that may be prevented by traffic lights, then the Liberals are all in favor of protecting people from accidents. If the threat is from a murderer, however, the Liberals seem to have no regard for the innocent victims whose demise was not even an accident. Liberals want to protect innocent people from the risk of death by traffic accident, but refuse to protect innocent people from the risk of death by known killers.
There are laws to inform people of the consequences of their actions. By killing an innocent person, you also bring upon yourself the consequences of those actions. Why should murderers be protected from the consequences of their actions? When a murderer is put to death, it is a result of his actions, not the murder of an innocent victim. When a murderer is condemned to death, it is a form of suicide that results from his own premeditated actions.
Having a mechanism where murderers virtually commit suicide when they murder is a deterrent to the repeat victimization of other innocent people. No criminal who receives capital punishment has ever created another innocent victim. That is 100% rehabilitation. That is 100% protection of the innocent from repeat offenders.
Having a mechanism where the murderer commits suicide is by no means sinking to the same level as the murderer. The murderer, by his own actions, killed an innocent person. Society, because of the murder, has a mechanism in which the murderer also chose to participate.
In this mechanism, one death is that of an innocent victim who did nothing to deserve it. The other death is the consequential mechanism brought upon the guilty by his own decision and actions. Putting to death a murderer protects society. Killing an innocent victim does not protect society. These two actions are as different as the victim being murdered or left alone.
Society should put a convicted murderer to death to protect society from repeat crimes and to demonstrate the mechanism that other potential criminals should also consider before murdering other innocent people. With this mechanism, you are in no way being as irresponsible as the criminal. By not adequately protecting society from known hazards, you are more like the irresponsible criminal.
The way society sinks to the level of the criminal is by not adequately considering the rights of the innocent victims, and by not protecting innocent victims from crime.
In many other countries, capital punishment is prohibited to protect the people from oppressive government. In such countries, the murderers of innocent people were often released after short prison terms. The people who were promptly put to death were the people who publicly mentioned some of the white collar crimes committed by the government and the people in the government. The law was not used to protect the people but to execute those trying to protect the people from the crimes of the government.
Not putting capital criminals to death is only needed in countries where the government is run by white collar criminals. Based on this criterion, maybe we should ban the death penalty in America after all.
This page was last updated 07/02/00 01:51 PM