Justice by definition means:
Just behavior or treatment : a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people.
• the quality of being fair and reasonable : the justice of his case.
• the administration of the law or authority in maintaining this : a tragic miscarriage of justice.
• ( Justice) the personification of justice, usually a blindfolded woman holding scales and a sword.
In no part of that does it say "equal" or "punishment". This is a concept much like the words "liberal" and "conservative" that for the most part are largely misunderstood by most people. In the case of death wherein murder was the crime, there is no equality. Now people might argue against me on this but I am ready to take a stance that "taking a persons life does not equal the crime committed".
First of all: the fact that killing a person does not bring the other person back to life. Therefore what is being done is not equal as far as give and take. In fact it is another murder which in turn causes more pain then relief.
Lets put this in perspective. Say the individual that was killed has a family and friends. Each one of these people are impacted by the persons death. Now we look at the person who committed the crime. The individual that committed the crime also has a family and friends. Upon execution, each one of those people are affected by the persons death. So often we think that by enacting "equal punishment" we are only doing it to the person who committed the crime but the fact is we are enacting punishment upon every person that knows them as well. People that have not committed a crime are being punished for a person that did commit the crime. This is not justice as justice is not "vengeance with no regard to others".
Which brings us to the second point: If it is against the law to take a life then if the "law" takes a life it breaks the law. Killing someone is against the law. So, if the death penalty is there then it ignores its own rule and is no longer upholding justice.
Putting it into perspective. If you tell someone not to do something and then do it yourself why should they not do it as well? I view this as an adult who says "don't swear its bad" to their child and then goes and swears because they have "authority" to do so. If you give directive then you should also follow that directive. If people from the IRS started not paying their taxes and short changing people, there would be several people that figure "If they can do it so can I". The law must be the law no matter who it is. Even if you are part of that law.
The third point is: The death penalty is not a deterrent. This is often an argument that "if there is equal punishment for the crime then people won't want to do the crime."
Putting it into perspective. This works only if you have a small crimes for people that are not desperate or in need. Speeding is illegal but lets face it, people are going to speed no matter what. However if they have a good reason not to like punishment for doing so they are less likely to do so. Does this stop people from speeding? No. Will it stop people from speeding? Maybe a few but say they are late for work and will get fired if they don't make it, not a chance.
How does this equate to murder? Throughout history we have had public executions and has that ever deterred a person from killing another person? Not really. People who are willing to kill are most often desperate and not actually thinking with logic. They are not thinking about the consequences until afterwards. A person can plan it out and think that "maybe" they can get away with it however our bodies fill with adrenaline. This makes it difficult to think or act rationally.
How does this equate to murder? Throughout history we have had public executions and has that ever deterred a person from killing another person? Not really. People who are willing to kill are most often desperate and not actually thinking with logic. They are not thinking about the consequences until afterwards. A person can plan it out and think that "maybe" they can get away with it however our bodies fill with adrenaline. This makes it difficult to think or act rationally.
Its like being in line for your first roller coster. You know its going to be scary and maybe you don't really want to go on to it. The line is crowded with people so its hard to turn back. You are anticipating it and hearing other people scream so at this point your body starts to get "excited". People are getting off so it must be safe. Your heart rate speeds up just thinking about it and now you are strapped in and you didn't even notice that you got into the seat. Its now or never and even if you were hesitant to go forward at first your body and brain trick you into believing you can get off alive. The ride starts to move by itself and its no longer in your control. Getting off you are on a high. But do you remember what you did while on the ride? Maybe you screamed? Did you raise your hands? What did you say? Your head might hurt did it bang against the side of the seat holding you on? Or was it whiplash from the turns?
I could equate it to other events. Kissing going too far, before you know it you went further then you wanted. Or drinking too much even though you didn't want to drink as much as you did. My point is you are not thinking anymore when you are at the edge of murder. So why would you even consider the consequences at that point?
Forth point: It doesn't bring closure. By killing the person who killed someone close to us it doesn't change the fact that the person died. The pain is still there the questions still burning in your mind. But hey, the person that killed them is gone right?
Perspective, life still goes on. You don't gain anything by the other person dying. You might feel better on a superficial level but that person you loved is still dead. The emptiness will not go away. Vengeance gives us a momentary relief maybe but really does nothing to change anything that happened. Instead what you get is another person dead, another family mourning, and another loss with nothing gained. Justice means more and is more then a thirst for vengeance. Revenge is bitter and produces no fruit but poison. Revenge is not the point of justice.
Justice is a desire for peace, not a thirst for punishment. It is requiring a person to admit the wrong doing and change themselves. It is seeking a betterment from what has been done. It does not mean that the other person will suffer as much as the suffering they inflicted. You can not fight evil with evil. It doesn't work because you are just left with evil at the end. Justice does seek payment and payment in full however that payment is not gained or collected when we take a life. If life is valuable then we are destroying a priceless individual when we kill. We devalue life in general when we do not respect it.
People are not owned like property. They can not be claimed in equity. Its not like when property has been damaged or stolen. So to say we have any right to another persons life is false. You can not replace people.
We thirst for justice though, for everything to become right again. So what is the proper payment? I am not sure I have an answer for this... It assuredly is not death. I am not sure its even prison. I am at a loss because the price is so high. There is no easy answer to this and nor should there be.
My way of justice may be a little strange but would it not be fair for the murderer to serve the family of whom suffered the loss. Maybe I am young and naive, (I already know I am idealistic) however this might be true justice. Let me be clear I am not talking slavery because we are not entitled to another persons life. I am saying that the murderer and the victims family should look upon each other. The murderer would have to serve and support the family for the rest of their life. To understand grief one must be in the vicinity of grief. To find healing, forgiveness is the best solution. To forgive someone they must look upon them. To understand loss you must see it. Its an impossible scenario and, by my own admission, a little half baked. But I believe its closer to justice then what we have so far.
We thirst for justice though, for everything to become right again. So what is the proper payment? I am not sure I have an answer for this... It assuredly is not death. I am not sure its even prison. I am at a loss because the price is so high. There is no easy answer to this and nor should there be.
My way of justice may be a little strange but would it not be fair for the murderer to serve the family of whom suffered the loss. Maybe I am young and naive, (I already know I am idealistic) however this might be true justice. Let me be clear I am not talking slavery because we are not entitled to another persons life. I am saying that the murderer and the victims family should look upon each other. The murderer would have to serve and support the family for the rest of their life. To understand grief one must be in the vicinity of grief. To find healing, forgiveness is the best solution. To forgive someone they must look upon them. To understand loss you must see it. Its an impossible scenario and, by my own admission, a little half baked. But I believe its closer to justice then what we have so far.
