Revenge is not Justice

 

1C57B62B-0C21-42E3-8155-4C954C3EF334

 

I used to be in favor of the death penalty. It was years, no, decades ago. What was it that made me anti-death penalty, today I can’t say other than I came to a conclusion that the death penalty was not about justice for victims, but rather revenge from society.  It’s shameful to have to say that even today, the majority of Americans still support this barbaric punishment.

There are people that have committed horrific crimes, but does putting them to death resolve anything for society in general or for the families that have suffered? I argue no. I say that as a conservtive, someone most believe would absolutely support executions. Murdering a murderer though, is not justice. There’s no such thing as “closure” for those familiy members who’ve lost someone, who are themselves victims, because some evil person  has decided that even robbing a convenience store requires killing the clerk.  How does killing the killer ever provide closure for those family members? It doesn’t. Their loved one is gone, forever, and  nothing the state can do, even sentencing the perpetrator to death, will ever bring them peace.

Revenge is not an appropriate way for the justice system to work. Yes, we all want revenge, there  are heinous crimes that have occurred in our lifetime and it’s appropriate for those victims, as well as the rest of society to demand that justice be done; Bring the perpetrator to trial, place the convicted in prision, for life if it’s justified. How does killing the same resolve anything? Of course it doesn’t. Bad people are bad people and because we execute numerous people every year,  and the rate of those going to the death chamber has not declined.

Many anti-death penalty advocates bring up the cost to execute someone, and yes, they’re all true, but that’s only one part of the whole picture. What about those that have been sentenced that are actually innocent? In this country, many have been retried based on new evodence, or just released based on prosecutorial malfensense (keeping possible exculpatory evidence away from the defense).  How is it we may rush to judgement on a flawed legal system?  We can’t and shoudn’t.

But what about those where there is absolutely no doubt that they committed the crime? Every piece of evidence, including DNA, shows that yes, they committed the crime. Why not put those same to death? I again come back and ask, to what purpose? Will executing one killer prevent someone else from committing a similar crime? Statistics (from the Department of Justice) show that it doesn’t. It may make you – a random person in society – feel better, but it does nothing to prevent the same crimes occurring over and over again.

I could go on and on, cite statistics, quote personal stories from victims, and more; But I wont here.  An incredible resource is my good friend  Godless_Mom whos written a series about the death penalty that should raise anyone’s eyebrows., It’s a compelling series and I encourage everyone reafing here to take the time. You may discover something you didn;t know before (In fact, /i guarntee you will). She’s also updating the series here, but strt with the original. If you’re still an advocate for the death penalty after reading the original series, well, nothing any of us could say would change your mind.

It doesn’t make you a bad person for supporting the death penalty, I think it’s really about being uninformed. The more we all know about this practice, the better, and the more minds that can be changed. Let’s end this now.

 

 

 

8 thoughts on “Revenge is not Justice

  1. The Criminal just-ice System in the US is shameful from beginning to end. It is like a long death for the criminals sucked into that system. To kill ones own kind is the height of immorality. It is a waste of human lives and admission that we are not as human as we like to believe we are. GROG

  2. Executions are justice. Incarcerations are justice. Both are revenge against those who acted outside the bounds of our social contract.

    When heinous crimes are committed against other human beings and there is full evidence that the perpetrator is guilty, then I support a death penalty. The Guillotine worked well. Allow one appeal with a change of venue. For those on death row, who were convicted before DNA evidence was possible, alter the sentence to life.

    Human life is not sacred; it is biological. In the animal kingdoms, aberrant individuals are dealt with accordingly. Just as they do not allow monsters to live among them, neither should human beings. We are animals, not children of a vengeful, yet loving God. And, we kill each other all the time, in wars, in rage, in defense. Justified killing is part of our evolutionary instincts. We are as human as we should be and to suggest that executions are the height of immorality is absurd. For those slightly twisted humans worth saving, we should try do so, but there is no reason for humanity to save monsters.

    If you would prefer to not kill monsters, then isolate them on an island, fortify the area surrounding the island, set them free, let them make their own community with whatever provisions needed and leave them alone to fend for themselves after that.

    • You must be willing to sacrifice your own life in a death chamber to support capital punishment. By supporting it, you are dooming innocent people to state sponsored killing. Mistakes WILL happen. If you are for the death penalty, you are forced to accept innocent people will die as a result. If you arent willing to sacrifice your own life, it just means you want the product without the price, which is pathetic.

      • Conner, your suggestion that I must be willing to sacrifice my life to support the death penalty is the same as suggesting that I, who am anti-abortion, must sacrifice my womb to carry to term another woman’s “mistake” that she wants to abort.

        Why should I do either?

        If I or a member of my family commits heinous crimes against others and it is proved with all evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt, then the sentence should be the same.

        Remember the Va. Tech. mass shooter? If that had been my son, I would have killed him myself. I would grieve over the person he might have been, but not the monster he had become and would not have allowed him to continue with his life after his crimes, no matter what issues or mental derangement he had. That is how I felt then and that is how I feel now.

        That would be my duty to my society. My son, my monster, my fault. I might kill myself, as well. Christ, how does a parent come back from that?

  3. I support the death penalty in specific cases, wherein the person charged of heinous crimes is proved absolutely guilty by full evidence.

    • “Human life is not sacred; it is biological. In the animal kingdoms, aberrant individuals are dealt with accordingly.” Life may not be sacred, but it is precious. To kill is to eliminate any possibility of correcting a mistake. And there have been many. Imagine being the one who pushes the button on another person’s life. Life sentences are cruel enough, I feel.

  4. The society that refuses to eliminate aberrant individuals, who have demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt their aberrations through heinous crimes and have been found guilty with all evidence, is abrogating a moral obligation to protect its members.

    Society had no obligation to keep monsters alive.

    Mistakes cost innocent lives all the time, which is unfortunate. But there are certain cases in which it is known without doubt that a monster has been among us and should be eliminated. Fortunately, most monsters have a tendency to eliminate themselves after their rampage, but for those who do not and when the proof is positive for guilt, there is no need to act with any compassion towards those who had none for their victims.

    If there is no manner to decide positive guilt, then no person should be incarcerated or punished for any crime against society. Is this what you mean to submit? To do so would be extremely cruel, would it not?

    How, then would you suppose our society should handle those who act against our laws? Can nobody be proven guilty?

    I understand that death is final, but I only support that penalty for those whose guilt is absolutely proven with all evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt. You know who they are and what monsters they are and how heinous were their crimes upon their victims.

  5. Aberrant! Yes, there are people who a forced by their malfunctioning mind and inabilities, to do terrible things. They should never have been allowed to become that way. Parenting has a lot to do with it too.

Leave a Reply