Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Embrace the Death Penalty

Here's a little story about 2 ex-cons who allegedly pulled a home invasion in Cheshire early Monday.

The details aren't out yet, but the man of the house was beaten up pretty severely, and the man's wife and 2 daughters are dead and his house lit on fire.

Authorities have not yet disclosed if the wife and children died in the fire or before, or if they were assaulted physically and/or sexually.

Cops caught 2 suspects a short time later.

So, I guess their stint(s) in prison didn't rehabilitate them the way everyone keeps saying prison is supposed to?

"Home invasion" is probably my biggest fear, because you're taken off guard. I hope and pray that if it ever happens I'll be able to kill the people who break in before they harm my family or me.

Every one of you out there should want these 2 guys -- if, of course, they're the right guys -- to swing from the end of a rope.

If you don't think people that can do this kind of stuff should be eliminated, then there's something wrong with you.

Some criminals are just silly wankers, so I believe the death penalty should be used judiciously, but I believe we should use it. And, I'm tired of the arguments that some of these people whine about, even when there is no doubt that the suspect is guilty of a heinous crime:

"It's not punishment, it's revenge" - Yeah? So what? What exactly is wrong with revenge? Maybe if the country embraced revenge a little more, there'd be fewer crimes because you know if you get caught, someone will extract revenge.

"It's not a deterrent" - How do you figure? I can tell you for certain that it deters that criminal from doing it again. Whether or not it deters other people from committing crime is something that I don't think you can gauge, other than asking people who don't commit heinous crimes -- but want to -- why they don't commit them. Even if you could prove it isn't a deterrent, so what? The goal of the death penalty is not to scare would-be criminals, it's to get rid of the actual criminals.

"It makes us no better than the criminal" - Actually, this argument is just a load of crap. Yes, we are better than the criminal because we're not criminals. Apples and oranges, just a diversion. Again, the goal is not moral superiority, the goal is elimination of the threat. Execution is the result of their action, not a comparable act.

"You could execute an innocent person" - Thanks to DNA testing, if we use the death penalty sparingly and carefully, I think we're OK on this one, too.

Look, it's simple. Some people are really, really bad. Nothing will ever change them. So, before you lock them up and make the rest of society pay for everything they need for the rest of their lives, just spend the $50 to off them. Limit the appeals, cut the crap with the conniving lawyers, and just do it.

I have a whole spiel about how much I hate lawyers, but that will have to wait.

I'll leave you with this: What do you have when you have 10,000 lawyers buried up to their necks in sand?

Not enough sand.

1 comment:

Al said...

NOTE - The 2 suspects have been identified, and the charges include 1st degree sexual assault - rape - so that reinforces my belief that, if proven guilty, society should behead these 2 in the public square.