The issue of the death penalty is a still very debatable amongst US citizens, although from a supreme court level it is illegal except in cases of murder and those who commit crimes against the state. Recently the supreme court ruled that it is illegal to sentence someone to the death penalty for the crime of raping a child.
As if the issue of taking someones life due to a crime they committed is not enough, now many people who are in support of the death penalty must also ask themselves upon what grounds is it justified.
Is it reasonable to execute someone who committed murder , but let the child rapist off the hook? These are the questions people must ask themselves after the announcement of the 5 to 4 decision made by the court yesterday stating that it is unconstitutional to execute a child rapist.
Even the supreme court Justices seemed to be almost divided upon the issue, with arguments from Justice Kennedy stating that "When the law punishes by death, it risks its own sudden descent into brutality, transgressing the constitutional commitment to decency and restraint."
Maybe it is the fact that I have grown up in Texas, a state with a very high execution rate, but I feel that crime as heinous as raping a child under the age of 12 should be no less tolerable than murder, and therefore they should receive the same punishment.
2 comments:
I see no fault with the death penalty. I think that it is appropriate and superior then paying tax dollars for a murdering convict to live out their life with three squares and a cot while programs like education go under funded. In my opinion, if the death penalty is on the table for a possible punishment, then it should be used. And for that reason I find myself in full agreeing with your article “Death Penalty?”. Child molestation has is a devastating for the child. Their lives are changed by the psychological damage done and their trust of adults can be shattered. The changes that the child goes through effectively kill the person they were before the event, making molestation like murder. But unlike murder, the victim needs to live with the knowledge of their being violated and have an increased chance to commit suicide. You’re right that these criminals should receive the same punishment as murderers and it’s a pity that the Supreme Court doesn’t see it that way.
I can see the sense in the old saying 'an eye for an eye,' which is why I must agree with the death penalty in the case of a murder. However, if no life is taken, then how could you justify taking a life? Somehow I find myself conflicted in opinion in response to your article. In the case of child molestation, the child would still be alive. But with all the terrible images they would have in their head for the rest of their life, their emotional hurt and newfound inability to trust, I am not sure I would call it living. In that way, I must agree that it should be a feasible punishment. It's a touchy subject, and it is a difficult decision to make when it comes to opinion. As far the Supreme Court's decision goes, they subconsiously bring personal morals into it, even though they're not supposed to. Although it might be a perfectly feasible thing to use the death penalty for child molestation cases, a judge might not see it that way because of their personal beliefs.
Post a Comment