Angela Long Long 1 ENGL 1213 Sec. 902 08 Mar 2012 Final Draft A2 An Eye For An Eye There is an ongoing debate about capital punishment versus life in prison. I am in favor of capital punishment because it totally removes the possibility of an offender repeating his or her crimes and possibly saves the lives of others. The main purpose of the death penalty is to protect the right of other Americans to live.
In his book, “The Law”, Frederic Bastiat writes, “Humans have an inalienable right to exist outside of and before government. These right's are life, liberty, and property. When one erson infringe on another persons rights, he must be punished. To do this, the punishment must be harsh enough to deter potential criminals. ” This punishment is the harshest form, but it is necessary to maintain order (Bastiat). Life in prison does not always mean for a persons entire life.
There are many states in the U. S. Where a convict can be released on parole after a decade or more has passed. For example, sentences of “15 years to life” or “25 years to life” may be given; this is called a “indeterminate life sentence” while ” life without the possibility of parole” is called a “determinant life sentence” (Lowe).With the death penalty used for all murderer's you would always be certain the convict would not kill again.
There would be no chance of ever putting another innocent victim in harms way. “If we execute murderers and there is then in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and in doing so would have in fact deterred other murderers, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would rather risk the former.
This to me is not a tough call” (McAdams). It is really appalling to me how many convicted murderers have been released, some after only short stay in prison, and went on to murder more innocent unsuspecting people. To name a few, Robert Lee Massie was convicted on one count of first degree murder in the January 3rd, 1979 death of Boris G. Naumoff.
Massie shot and killed Naumoff during a liquor store robbery, and wounded Charles Harris, another store employee. This crime occurred while Massie was on parole for a murder he committed in Los Angeles County in 1965. He had been given a death sentence for that crime, but it was overturned in 1972 when the California Supreme Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional (Lowe).Another instance of this happening was in 1985, 13 year old Karen Patterson was shot to death in her bed in North Charleston, S. C.
Her killer was a neighbor who had already served 10 years of a life sentence for murdering his half brother Charles in 1970. Joe Atkins cut the Pattersons' phone lines then entered bearing a machette, a sawed off shotgun, and pistol. Karen's parents were chased out of their home by Atkins. Karen's mom ran to the Atkins home nearby where Joe then murdered his adoptive father Benjamin Atkins, 75 who had worked to persuade parole authorities to release Joe from the life entence. There are also cases of murderer's given only life sentences instead of the death penalty that kill other inmates or prison guards such as the case of Martsay Boulder of Illinois who murdered two in a robbery and was sentenced to 1000 to 3000 years, and then killed another inmate in the prison in 1982. This is only a short list from the Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty web page (2012).
This goes to show you that a life sentence is not a deterrent to murder and given the chance many murderers will repeat the crime. Those who oppose the death penalty say that it is unjust.By committing the crime the criminal volunteered to assume the right to receive a legal punishment he could have avoided by not committing the crime. Thus the death penalty cannot be unjust to the guilty criminal. It is punishment as a device for controlling the crime rate (Haag). It is truly ridiculous to me that anyone would oppose someone receiving a punishment equal to the crime they commited.
Some abolitionists say the death penalty is not a deterrence for murder. I believe in the death penalty because its finality is more feared and does deter some prospective murderers not deterred y thoughts of imprisonment. According to John M. Olin, Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Policy at Fordham University, “Sparing the lives of even a few prospective victims is more important than preserving the life of the convicted murderer because of the probability that executing them will not deter others. ” Most of us continue to believe that those who show utter contempt for human life by committing remorseless, premeditated murder justly forfeit the right to their own life.
Arguing for capital punishment the Clark County Prosecutor writes, “There are some defendants who have earned he ultimate punishment our society has to offer by committing murder with aggravating circumstances present. ” I myself believe that if a person will kill once they probably would do it again if they felt so inclined. If the death penalty is enforced, they don't have that option anymore. It cheapens the life of an innocent victim to say society has no right to keep the murderers from ever killing again. In my view we have not only the right, but the duty to act in self defense to protect the innocent.
If it was your family member that was murdered in cold blood you would probably feel the same.
