417. Death Penalty Revisited
Back on January 20 of this year, I entered a post explaining my opposition to the Death Penalty. Kentucky observes capital punishment for certain crimes. My involvement with and oppostion to the Death Penalty is explained in that entry as well as one on April 16.
Marco Chapman is scheduled to be executed by the Commonwealth of Kentucky later tonight for the murders of Cody and Chelbi Sharon, children of a woman he raped and brutally stabbed. He also attempted to kill another sister, Courtney. There is nothing good about the story of Marco Chapman. There is probably nothing good about Marco Chapman. Punishing him by death will not reverse the crimes he committed. He deserves, as punishment, to live a long life of incarceration, with three meals a day and only so much medical attention as to keep him naturally alive. This should be his punishment for the horrible crimes he committed - not death, but the deprivation of life, a deprivation of the living of a life of any comfort or convenience, of any meaning or measure. His acts took the lives of others. The Commonwealth should reward him not with death, but with the worst of lives, wholly and fully incarcerated, with no parole or probation, no visits, no friends, no family, in short no life.
I oppose the taking of anyone's life in my name by the Commonwealth. I strongly support the idea of Life without Parole as a more deserving sentence.
Labels:
Laws,
Lives and Deaths
1 comment:
I'd be fine with that based on moral implication, other than the fact it gives him more chances to escape or stab someone else in prison. It leads into a completely different discussion on my train of thought, though, which is overcrowding in prison. It's a serious concern. No, I'm not suggesting we kill them off, it's just a thought branching off of prison discussion. Really, the only way I can see to deal with the issue for many decades to come would be to legalize marijuana. Everyone has such a cow about it, but it's not nearly as dangerous as alcohol. People just sweep that under the rug though... besides, look how prohibition turned out.
Think of it: organized crime would take a huge hit, Kentucky's cash crop could start being taxed, and we'd follow essentially the same laws as intoxication for its use. Am I being a devil's advocate in this debate? Yes, but sometimes I like prodding people to get them thinking. So... what do you think?
Post a Comment