If there is one thing that the US should have to think about and challenge, this would be undoubtedly the question on the death penalty. In fact, even if some states such as for instance Minnesota, Michigan, Vermont, Massachusetts, don’t support the capital punishment (by the way such as most countries of Europe, for example France, erased 27 years ago), the majority of the US states support it; therefore I was surprised when I heard that the governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, was supporting this form of death, because he seemed one of the “nouvelle vague” of governors that want to change the statements expressed by the federal government some centuries ago. Besides, some states like New York don’t really know if they should keep it, and the state government is still reflecting about it. So, I am asking you : what would you decide if you were governor, keep this quite brutal and rude kind of death, or would you make the revolution, and decision to get rid of it?
Because I am from France, you’ll probably think that I’ll choose the “con” side, because I was raised in the idea that no one should die of death penalty, etc. but it seems to be a difficult question, because there are a lot of reasons why we should eradicate this “tortured” end of life, but also some reasons why we should keep it.
If you are “pro”, you will probably think this is the best way to remove some bad people from this world. Think about Saddam Hussein, fifth president of Iraq, executed two years ago for being convicted of charges related to the executions of 148 Iraqi Shi’ites suspected of planning an assassination attempt against him. Anyway, a lot of people should have been relieved when they heard these news. Meanwhile, this can be funny (despite the circumstances) to think that we killed someone because he did the same thing to other people, whatever might be the number of people killed. In that way, we are not better than him, so why would we be happy for what we’ve done?
In the contrary, if you are “con”, like me, you might have a lot of reasons against execution actions, owing to the fact that above all this is against human nature to kill deliberately someone of your species. don’t you think? I frankly believe that whatever someone could have done in his/her life, errors are part of humanity, and we shouldn’t blame this someone with so much torture just to remain the past… besides, don’t you think that death penalty can be some kind of facilitation which would allow someone to go directly to heaven (or hell…) without passing by the case “think about our mistakes, and try to improve yourself, it’s never late to restart a new life” ? Even if sometimes it might not be possible, because of the huge importance of facts and an extrapolation to the entire world, in most cases, I think that this option with helps of specialists would be much more human and beneficial for death row people. Think about that: how many people have been killed in the death row, just because they did a mistake, somewhat irreparable i agree, but about they certainly would feel guilty for the rest of their life? Think about the waste of lives, just because governments decided to apply “zero tolerance” and not think about possible repents?
Besides, do you think about the possible mistakes coming this time from the government? about innocent people wrongly accused, about unfounded proofs, and even executions based on the ethnicity of prisoners? A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court of the US decided to put in the dock Troy Davis, a prisoner who should have been executed, but who arrived to have some extra time, in order to revise his case. Unfortunately, they decided very recently to reject his call, and we don’t know what is going to happen to this black prisoner who was accused a few decades ago of killing a white policeman. This could be another topic of debate : like I said, does the jury base his decision on the “race’ of the prisoner? In fact, we noticed that proportionally to the number of white and black prisoners in the US, Black people were more accused and sent to the death row than White people, especially when the victim was White, like in the case of Troy Davis. A lot of people and even celebrities, or the Europe council, expressed their desperate feelings in favor of Troy Davis, and strongly disapprove the Supreme Court decision. Therefore, does it worth to kill deliberately someone whom you are not sure of the guiltiness? Up to which level can you be sure about the testimonials, and all what can prove of the culpability of someone?
Besides, is it really living peacefully than thinking you can be someday on an electric chair, just because of potential past mistakes?
Sources: 20 minutes (french newspaper)
