- Text smaller
- Text bigger
Last week I saw a bumper sticker that asked: “Why do we kill people who kill people to show people that killing people is wrong?” At its heart, this question equates the execution of a murderer after a trial, endless appeals and millions of tax payers dollars with the cold-blooded killing of an innocent citizen. The whole debate about the death penalty turns on whether you believe the murderer or the murderer’s victim is more important.
It is time to reaffirm the most basic contract in life: that those who murder others forfeit their right to live once we have proven their guilt. It is time to protect people from becoming victims by declaring war on victimizers.
Death penalty opponents warn that wholesale executions will result in the death of innocent people. Do you ever notice that they never talk about the tens of thousands of innocent Americans criminals murder every year?
I don’t see why our legitimate desire to protect the innocent requires us to keep murderers alive. If we can send people to the moon and back, surely we can guarantee that we won’t execute people for murders they did not commit.
Today, criminal lovers have perverted our criminal “justice” system so it insures justice for criminals instead of protection for the
rest of us. Our system of justice has become a cynical and cruel game run for the benefit of social deviants and criminal defense lawyers.
Liberals tell us that our legal system is so racist that we are more likely to execute poor blacks and Latinos. That’s a legitimate issue, but our fear of repeating the errors of the past should not demand that we do nothing in the present. We must not condemn law-abiding Americans to lives of fear. We must not force law-abiding Americans to hide behind the bars that cover the windows and door of their homes.
No, my friend, we can and must do better than that. It’s time to guarantee every American that they will be safe from crime. But that will require us to change the rules of the game to favor those of use who do the right thing.
If someone sues you in a civil case, you have to testify in court under oath. If it is important to hear both sides of a dog bite case, isn’t it important to hear both sides of a murder case?
Let’s force defendants in criminal cases to testify under oath. What purpose is served by allowing an O. J. Simpson or anyone else to refuse to take the stand and testify under oath? If we have not coerced their testimony and if we have not tortured them, the accused should be forced to testify. Let’s stop playing legal games and seek instead, truth and justice.
If I cause damage to your automobile because a cell phone call distracted me, I didn’t do it on purpose. That’s why it’s called an accident. Nevertheless, I still have to pay for the damage that I do to you and your car.
It’s time to eliminate the “Not Guilty because of Insanity” defense. What purpose is served by allowing people to murder others and then get off because they didn’t know that what they were doing was wrong? Is someone less dead because the murderer was insane? Is murder ever the act of a “sane” person?
In Scandinavia, drunk driving is rare because they do not play games with people who drive drunk. If the police stop you for being a drunk driver, you will go to jail, they will prosecute you, they will convict you and you will spend a long time behind bars. In Scandinavia, you don’t have to worry about being killed on the roads by a drunk. Can’t we do the same in America?
Let’s treat deaths caused while Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) and Driving Under the Influence of Drugs (DUI) the same as any other type of murder. Are you less dead if a car kills you instead of a bullet?
Finally, it is past time to develop a fast track system for murders. When criminals kill someone, let’s give the police and the district attorney’s office the resources they need to fully investigate every murder until the murderer is found. Why should O. J. be able to spend more to get away with murder than the people can spend to protect themselves from murderers?
When we arrest a murder suspect, let’s give him or her first class legal representation. None of this $30 an hour “I only talked to you 10 minutes before trial” rent-a-lawyer stuff. Let’s give them the best … and give our side the best also.
Murders take place very quickly. However, it can take years or decades before we execute murderers. Let’s change this also. Let’s develop, and pay for, a system that guarantees that we will execute anyone we convict of murder within six months after the conviction. Six months for all appeals and then the firing squad or the gas chamber.
Now murderer lovers say that electrocution and lethal injection are “cruel and unusual” forms of punishment that are banned by our constitution. I have a solution for that also. Let’s execute the murderer the same way he or she killed their victim(s). After all, “turnabout is fair play” is an ancient American tradition.
If a murderer stabbed the victim 74 times, then it’s 74 stabs of the knife for the murderer. If they followed Karla Faye Tucker’s lead and used a pick axe, then it’s pick axe time for them. If they ran their victim over with a car, poisoned them, burned them, dismembered them, raped and suffocated them, then let’s send these murderers to hell feeling the same pain that their victims suffered.
Can any sane person argue that executing a murderer would be cruel and unusual punishment if we used the same method that the murderer used to kill their victim? If a murderer doesn’t want to be executed, all they have to do is not murder someone. I simply have no tolerance for murderer lovers who want us to forget the pain and suffering, the cruel and unusual punishment, that scores of murder victims suffer every day in this country.
Murderer lovers argue that the death penalty is a fraud because it does not deter murders. However, we don’t have a real death penalty system in America. What we have is a lawyer run roulette table where they stack the odds against the law-abiding citizen.
In many American cities, they never find a suspect for 50% of the murders. That means that people are literally getting away with murder. Often, when the police arrest a murder suspect, the grand jury never charges the suspect with capital murder. Of those charged with capital murder, many plea bargain for a lesser offense. Of those who go to trial, we convict many of a lesser charge. Of those we convict of capital murder, many get life without parole. Of those we sentence to death, most prolong the process for years or decades. When, finally, we execute a murderer, it is likely that he or she represents less than 2 percent of the people who murdered an American. Less than 2 percent!
What type of deterrent is that? Who is safe in a country where you are twenty times more likely to get arrested, convicted and sent to prison for killing a stray cat than for killing another human being? No, the reason the death penalty is not an effective deterrent is because of all of the lawyer-created loopholes. Close the loopholes, speed up the process, guarantee that we will execute 99% of all murderers in six months, and I promise you that the death penalty will become a really big deterrent.
I have no doubt that murderers can repent, but how does their repentance help the person they killed? The victim is still dead. How does their repentance help the children, relatives and friends of the deceased? They won’t get their mother, father, son, daughter, gramps or friend back. What about their repentance guarantees that the murderer won’t kill again?
No, my friend, it is time to tell all potential murderers that “if you murder someone, we are going to find you, arrest you, prosecute you, convict you and execute you as quickly and as legally as possible.” Now what, pray tell, is wrong with that?