|
who's Justice? mine? you don't agree with mine. yours? i don't agree with your definition either. therein lies the problem. we, as a culture, cannot agree upon the definition, let alone the vehicle for justice.
i personally believe that once properly convicted (with room for appropriate appeal) the individual has given up many of their rights. i don't have a problem with the death penalty when carried out in measured, consistant manner. my goal isn't to teach that person a lesson, it is to remove them from society. why lock them up forever? if the crime was heinous enough to justify removing them from society permanently, why keep them alive? to teach them a lesson so they won't repeat their crimes in another life? i believe locking someone in a cell, a new criminal-only society to contend with, with no hope for eventual release is more cruel and unusual than death. if such a policy deters someone from committing a crime, so be it - but that isn't the intention. you broke the rules, you were found guilty of doing so, you pay the price, you are no longer a burden upon society in any way.
also, important to note - i don't believe sitting on death row for years should be an option. run through the appeal system which should be streamlined and when you are done, you are either acquitted, or taken in to have your arm swabbed.
__________________
Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin
|