Another controversial one! Feel free to blast, but be prepared to discuss!A dozen years ago and more now, a young man named Robert beat another young man to death with a baseball bat and, at 17 years old, was charged with murder and sentenced to life in prison. He claimed to have had connections to the Chinese mafia and the black market sales of some computer parts allowed him an introduction to the boy he murdered; he promised the youth a gun, and when he came to retrieve it, Robert stuffed an alcohol-soaked rag into his mouth, beat him severely with a baseball bat, and buried him, still semi-conscious, in another teen's backyard. He aspirated his own vomit and died of that and his injuries; whether or not he lived through the terror of burial was not ever, to my knowledge, able to be ascertained. Other teens were involved, but Robert "masterminded" the murder and was treated as an adult in court.
This week a 35 year-old named David, separated from his wife and recently informed that she sought divorce, shot his wife numerous times at point-blank range in front of her mother and various other adults and children arriving for church. His wife had just climbed out of her car and was headed into her house of worship on that, her 30th birthday, when he murdered the mother of his two children, 3 years and 18 months, respectively. He has just yesterday been charged with murder and is currently in residence at the Utah County Jail waiting for further proceedings. His tiny children are with family. Sentencing will not occur for some time -- perhaps years.
As a Christian, it is my belief that recompense must be made for sin. As a citizen of these United States, it is my conviction that those who break the law owe a debt to society. In both of the above-mentioned cases, and in both the aforementioned realms of my personal credo, penance is required and reparations must be made. Biblically, there are a few ways to make amends for the shedding of innocent blood (and both an Old and New Testament method of so doing) and all are required from the guilty: monetary compensation, sincere apology made before God and those offended or injured by the loss, and the sacrifice of one's own life as partial atonement. Even then, complete reparations cannot be made, but these things -- if entirely sincere and offered willingly -- qualify the murderer for at least a semblance of "forgiveness" in the life to come. According to the laws of the land, reparations are similar: often a fine is involved, an admission of guilt is made (with the opportunity offered for the guilty to speak, requesting forgiveness as they desire), and time is served in a penitentiary, or the life of the guilty is required, both principles being the same -- that the guilty is removed from normal life and the possibility of that person endangering others is nullified.
In both cases discussed above, witnesses to the murders were present. People were at the scene and watched as these men murdered their victims, albeit in one case those watching were active or passive participants, and in the other were innocent bystanders. There are, however, in both cases, individuals who can attest to the circumstances of the murders as firsthand witnesses. There is no question that these two men are the very individuals who ended the lives of their victims. Whether, as in Robert's case, the defense blames an existentialist novel by Camus as the reason for Robert's skewed line of thinking or, as will potentially be the case with David, the defense questions David's sanity, both men extinguished human lives. They did not kill as a matter of self-defense; they did not take lives of wartime foes. Robert killed a fellow teen, and David a mother of two.
In situations such as these it is my belief that sanity, that mental state, that reason is always a moot point. These people -- people who have witnesses to their murders who can confirm that they are indeed at fault -- owe a debt both to God and to society. Other religious individuals would generally agree, thanks to scripturally-based beliefs, that the guilty must give their own life to repay, at least in part, their debt to God. The most effective way to pay one's debt to society, on the other hand, is not to create for John Q. Taxpayer any further debt. Google the cost of life in prison; you'll find all sorts of things, but generally speaking, authorities agree that 50 years in a high security prison costs us $805,000.00 per criminal. True, capital crimes cost into the millions, thanks to court costs, but we're not talking about just any old murder cases. We're talking about cases were there are witnesses to the murders proving that the accused is truly guilty. And outside of the costs associated with needing to hold a brief trial to confirm that, "yes, he's guilty," the cost of half a dozen men for a firing squad paid for 15 minutes of their time and the cost of bullets for the guns they own, plus a bit more for the use of their weapons, and even the cost of funeral services for the executed...we'll still come in WELL under over 3/4's of a million dollars. Why the prolonged court cases? Fine, so-and-so is insane. They should be removed from society. For what? For me to feed 3 squares a day, dress in regs, house and provide utilities and mattresses and toilets? How about we empty our prisons of these particular criminals, allow them to pay their debt to God and remove their burden on society and just execute them?
Am I being cruel? Am I calling for execution as revenge? No. Don't believe me?
Robert is my old best friend's elder brother. I spent time in his home and with his parents, and have many happy memories of my friendship with her. David's family is also good. I have known his family as long as I can remember, and was quite fond of his younger brother. I feel no malice or hatred toward either of these men, and have the greatest of sympathy for their families, who did not, as people would leap to claim, raise them poorly. Quite the opposite: we as parents are required to teach our children correct principles and allow them to govern themselves. There are, then, consequences to their self-governance, but we cannot inflict our ideals and standards on them, only teach those standards to our children and the reasons behind those standards and watch as they are accepted or declined, the consequences of either following closely. This is just as true for my 3 year-old as it is for a 30 year-old; I teach my son not to hit his sister and do my best to protect my little girl, but when my 3 year-old, who has been taught not to hit his sister then decides to do so anyway then does, consequences follow and he is sent to time out and required to make reparations. Time out for a 30 year-old who is a confirmed murderer is, in turn, permanent removal from the situation: the death penalty. The punishment fits the crime, society is spared the cost of housing and caring for one who does not belong to and cannot be part of society, and God receives home the spirit of one with whom He can then do as He sees fit.
This is not revenge. I am not suggesting that Robert be dragged into an executioner's back yard and disposed of in the same fashion he disposed of another young man. I am not requesting that David be shot repeatedly with a 9mm handgun in the parking lot of a church until dead. I request instead that they be given the opportunity to make proper recompense for their sins and lawlessness: require that their lives be sacrificed in turn. For those who are atheist and argue morality (or for those who are religious and argue Christ's doctrine of forgiveness) as reason not to institute the death penalty, visit http://www.theologyonline.com/DEATH.HTML. Though long, this treatise is quite brilliant from a Biblical perspective, and answers the moral atheist argument, as well.
What is the solution? When there are three or more witnesses to the crime of murder and guilt has been proven in a court of law, the sentence must be death, and must be carried out within 24 hours with no possibility of reversal. Possibility of rehabilitation or no, these individuals have proved an inability to live as part of society, and society should not be required to furnish their living arrangements at our expense. Execution must be immediate and inexpensively performed. Those who without a shadow of a doubt are guilty must receive the consequences of their actions, and that consequence must be death.
So, what can we do? Write to your senators! Call up your house reps! Make your opinion known: ask that those convicted of murder in the 1st degree by the testimony of three or more witnesses be sentenced to immediate execution. Period, the end, no questions asked, no possibility of appeals. It seems harsh to some, I'm sure, but when we consider the circumstances -- a cold-blooded murderer of an innocent victim repaying a debt to God and man by sacrificing their own lives as penance -- it is the reasonable, logical, charitable thing to do.
Problem solved,
Mommy
Mommy
No comments:
Post a Comment