Just a Thought on Justice

One of the beautiful things about blogging is you can express yourself to an audience.  In my case a rather small audience, but one that will, on occasion, let me know they agree.  Although I really welcome a dissenting opinion as well, it just seems no one is willing to do so. 

I was drawn to a NY Times piece today (9/10/11) by Ann Althouse, writing at Althouse on the last Republican debate where, when questioned about Texas willingness to execute those convicted of capital murder the audience applauded.  The mediator, Brian Williams, was caught by surprise by Mr. Perry’s confidence the state had done the right thing, but more so by the public response of applause.

Of course the liberal commentators writing in the NY Times were completely aghast the audience, or the Governor, would take such a view and wrote or tweeted amongst themselves at how base and savage the Republicans are.  I find this to be hilarious.  These are the self-same people who have no problem vilifying the candidates and suggesting that someone should “take them out,” or “they should be shot” and that they should be “removed from the picture.”  This is also the same group that has absolutely no qualms with sanctioning the killing of the unborn, including those in the last trimester where life is obviously sustainable.  Yet the idea of Capital Punishment in a formal process is wrong?  The perverse stupidity of this is unfortunately real.

I accompany my wife to Roman Catholic Mass every week and I’ve got to tell you the Roman Church seems to be consistent in the view of life.  At least here in the South they condemn the killing of any human being, whether they are unborn, or a murder.  This seems, to me, to be an appropriate and legitimate position for the church.  Any church that supports abortion, but condemns execution should perhaps look inward towards their understanding of God and his will.

But the decision of life and death, at least here in the United States, is not one for the Church to make.  It is a responsibility of the State or the Federal governments in the courts. The legislature, acting on behalf of its citizens, determines what is justice, and how it should be metered out.   The lower courts exercise that authority and the higher court’s roll in this process is to insure due process is served, and the rights of the convicted have not been violated.  The liberals do not seem to accept this process and attempt to subvert it with emotionally irrational words like revenge.  I believe they do this to reflect a not so subtle message that what the state is doing is controlled by the same emotions they resort to so often.

Justice and Revenge are not synonyms are they?  Wait let me check the Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus.  Justice – 1) just conduct, 2) fairness, 3) the exercise of authority in the maintenance of right, 4) judicial proceedings….  Lets go with definition 3.  So what are some synonyms, evenhandedness, impartiality, and neutrality?  These all seem to be good synonyms, and I didn’t see revenge mentioned once.  So I am going out on a limb here but I don’t think revenge is the same as justice.  That is not to say that in carrying out justice there may be emotional issues, but they are not the controlling force as they are in revenge.

The US Constitution and, as far as I know, the states make the process of execution a long and laborious process, defense attorneys can appeal and appeal and appeal.  It is so laborious the average time a convicted murder waits for execution is about 14 years.  Since some states have decided execution is barbaric their murderers may spend 70+ years in prison.

There are a lot of arguments for, and a lot of arguments against executing someone for killing another human being.  Each of us must come to our own position, but our position doesn’t really matter a hill of beans, it is what our elected officials have agreed to that matters.  That is what a republic form of government does, it vest power in representatives to decide for us.  If you don’t like what they’ve decided then vote their sorry butts out, but for me execution is justified for the following reasons.

Ø  First, I don’t think if you are convicted of murder there is a high percentage chance of rehabilitation.  I believe the odds of convicting an innocent is relatively small, and the odds of convicting an undeserving individual of capital murder is smaller.  The jail systems being as they are we see an unfortunately high recidivism rate for common criminals, do we really want to accept that same rate for murderers?  The counter argument is what if an innocent man/woman is put to death?  First I don’t think they would be there if they were completely innocent, next we err on the side of release and I am good with that, and finally, innocent people die everyday that is life. 

Ø  What is more inhuman, a quick resolution of the sentence or rotting in jail for 70+ years?  There are those who make the case that execution will reduce murder rates.  I would say to them, show me!  I’ve not seen anything to suggest the murders consider the consequences of their act when they kill someone.  Doesn’t matter if it is life in prison or a death penalty, if someone wants to kill some one he/she will.  So let’s move through the process as quickly as possible and save the murderer the pain and suffering of a life in prison.

Ø  A belief in a just God.   If, on the off chance the State made a mistake, and you were completely innocent, don’t you end up in heaven early?  How is that bad?  I know this is probably out of touch with the fact we shouldn't make a mistake, the government shouldn't make mistakes and a life is lost.  Far more lives are lost by mistakes made elsewhere.  To say humans will get it right 100% of the time is nonsensical.

Ø  There is a lot of talk about the number of black men on death row.  There is also a lot of debate about how black men who kill whites are more likely to face the death penalty.  Maybe if all people stopped killing people this wouldn’t be an issue?  Actually Black on Black crime is higher than interracial crime so what is the point?