June 27
SOUTH AFRICA:
The Death Penalty - Let's Debate
The issue of the reinstatement of the death penalty is being raised more and
more in South African circles these days. It is a complex subject which can
consume many pages, but I will try my best to keep it as brief as possible. And
I know there is always 2 sides to a coin, so invite you to join the debate.
Here is my side:
In a society like ours, where violent crime is a daily part of life, people are
becoming increasingly concerned about these crimes. It is not just that crime
seems to be out of control, but the fact that the crimes are so brutal and
savage. It is not just murder, but murder of the most vial kind imaginable.
Take farm murders as just one example. Often only a few cellphones and some
money are stolen, yet the perpetrators find it necessary to first torture their
victims with hot irons, pour acid on them and smash their brains in with
hammers so that they lie there dying slowly.
This kind of savagery not only makes them murderers, but vile creatures who are
the epitome of evil and hatred itself. They contribute absolutely nothing to
society but are like parasites who feed off their hosts and suck the blood and
waste the oxygen of other good people.
They should be permanently removed from a law-abiding society like any parasite
or cancer.
These creatures are apparently protected under our Constitution. They have
"human" rights. A right to life. But why should such garbage have a right to
life or have any "human" rights whatsoever when they cannot possibly be seen as
human? Why should they have the right to permanently snuff the life from
another, yet retain their own right to life and various other rights?
I am willing to bet my car that should this ANC government call a referendum on
the reinstatement of death penalty today, the vast majority of citizens of all
races will vote in favour of it. However, this ANC government never will call
for such a referendum. Mostly due to our past history and often because some of
the current leaders themselves escaped the gallows.
I will never forget President Jacob Zuma's words in December 2011, when he
opened the Gallows Memorial at the Pretoria Central Prison. Zuma stated that
those advocating capital punishment did not understand how it felt to be on
death row.
His statements irked and disgusted me. I countered his comments by asking
whether he knows how the families of the victims must feel? The trauma and
depression they must go through after losing a loved one to brutality and
savagery? What about their feelings?
So once again a criminal's rights weigh more than the law-abiding victims'
rights. Absurd and shameful. Stuff the parasite's feelings. In fact, having to
await his execution should be part of the punishment so that he can reflect on
what he has done and the misery he has caused for the victims and families of
the victims.
Zuma also stated, as is the most common argument against the death penalty
goes, that there is no credible evidence to prove that re-introducing the death
penalty in South Africa will reduce crime.
With that I completely disagree.
In the USA there are studies which showed that capital punishment had no impact
on violent crime whilst other studies showed it in fact does have an impact.
From the fear-factor to simply removing garbage from our societies to never
re-offend again.
What is interesting to note is that those studies opposing the death penalty
cannot show us any positive results of not having the death penalty. They can
only speculate that there is no impact - therefore their argument remains
stagnant, with no movement either positive or negative in any direction.
In the USA, after almost 3 decades of studies, the National Research Council of
the National Academies could only conclude that "research to date on the effect
of capital punishment on homicide is not informative about whether capital
punishment decreases, increases, or has no effect on homicide rates. Therefore,
the committee recommends that these studies not be used to inform deliberations
requiring judgmentsabout the effect of the death penalty on homicide."
This does not tell me anything. They only recommended that the studies should
not guide judgements. Neither did they disprove the studies.
On the flip-side, the studies which shows there is an impact on crime, in fact
has positive results rather than no results at all.
Personally I believe they all miss the point. It is not so much about
deterrence (which is inconclusive). It is rather about permanently removing
human waste from our societies. Waste who should not have "human" rights to
start with.
Those who are convicted only end up in prison, leaching further off the
taxpayer. In fact they often come from backgrounds which make prison seem likea
free bed-and-breakfast rather than a punishment. Therefore they have nothing to
lose should they get caught and convicted. Not only do we suffer the terrible
consequences of their heinous crimes, but we are expected to also maintain
them. Is that "Justice"? No it is a comedy of the absurd.
There is also the question of wrongful conviction. The true innocents. However,
one has to start with looking at the severity and brutality of the crimes
first. Not all murderers or rapist should just be hanged willy-nilly. The
savagery and brutality should be the overwhelming factor. Raping a baby until
its intestines come out, torturing victims with acid or hot irons out of pure
hatred before bashing their heads in.
A full bench of judges must decide unanimously. They must be certain beyond all
doubt regarding the facts and the evidence. They must be utterly horrified by
the extremity of the brutality. Only then do they hand down the death sentence.
And then there will still be the right to appeal.
Even if one innocent might slip through the cracks, it will be sad yes, but the
chances of that will be minimal and unfortunately it is a lesser evil in the
greater scheme of things.
We also have to consider the possibility of the abuse of the system by the
Government. In the old days, high treason was punishable by death. In this
case, the so-called Boeremag members would all be hanging now. The point here
is that it is open to abuse by a Government with a political or hateful agenda.
What is to stop them from now simply labelling and framing a certain segment of
society to purely get rid of them?
This is a very real danger and should be carefully considered. So called "high
treason" should be excluded as a safety measure against this. One will also
have to do careful studies on crimes such as "terrorism" and exactly how it is
defined. But once again, the brutality should be the overwhelming factor in my
opinion. Where is the brutality in treason for example? It does not exist.
To conclude (especially for those who are so arduously pro-life):
When a criminal makes the conscious decision to commit a brutal crime, he also
should consciously and knowingly give up his "human" rights when he makes that
decision to commit his despicable crime. Just as it includes having to give up
his right to freedom (jail term) when caught, so it must include knowingly
giving up his right to life. Or just as he knows he might be shot and killed by
his victim or by the police.
If you do not behave like a law-abiding human being, then you do not deserve
human rights. A criminal's rights should never trump the rights of his victims
or their families who must now suffer the consequences of losing a loved one
for the rest of their lives. These families are forever traumatised and the
victims were forever stripped of their own rights - their rights to life, their
rights to safety, their rights to dignity, their rights to freedom.
All these rights forever snuffed out by a savage parasite.
How can these criminals' "human" rights ever weigh more? How come should they
have any rights whatsoever when they have just completely and permanently
destroyed and infringed upon the rights of a law-abiding person?
The emphasis should not be on whether the death penalty is a deterrent. The
emphasis should be on ridding our society of sub-human garbage parasites who
serve no purpose other than to cause misery for the rest of us. They contribute
nothing to our society other than pain and suffering. They only take up space
and steal our oxygen.
In short - We should not have to maintain them in bead-and-breakfast prisons
with 3 square meals a day. They should be removed from human society -
PERMANENTLY.
(source: John Smith, News24.com)
BAHAMAS:
Double Murderer Awaits Sentencing
Justine Roy Jones will decide next week whether a man convicted of a double
murder will be sentenced to death, life imprisonment or a fixed jail term.
The judge received reports from a probation officer and a psychiatrist
yesterday while also hearing submissions from defence and Crown counsel
concerning the sentencing of George Williams for the April 23, 2008 murders of
Andy Weekes and Terrel Mingo.
Weekes, 32, and Mingo, 29, were both shot in the head behind a house on
Adventurer's Way. Weekes died at the scene and Mingo died the following day.
Prosecutor Neil Braithwaite submitted to the court that the death penalty was a
fitting punishment in this case because Weekes was simply a witness in the
wrong place and time when Williams and Mingo were in a dispute over proceeds
from crime.
The prosecutor submitted that murdering a witness counted in the category of
"worst of the worst" set out by Parliament's amendment to the death penalty
laws in 2011.
While highlighting that Williams had shown no remorse for the crimes, the
prosecutor also noted that Williams, according to the probation report, had a
number of infractions while on remand in prison.
The prosecutor said that given this information and the fact that he has a
previous conviction for manslaughter, his prospects for reform were slim to
none.
In response, Williams' lawyer Jiaram Mangra, argued that a determinant sentence
was appropriate in his client's case.
While acknowledging that the law now allows for the court to consider the death
penalty in certain circumstances of murder, he submitted the law for that
circumstance only applied to witnesses in pending cases before the court.
He also noted that while his client was not unblemished, the psychiatric
evaluation did not rule out any prospects for Williams' reform.
Justice Jones said he would decide on a sentence in 6 days time on July 2.
(source: Tribune 242)
SAUDI ARABIA----executions
Saudi beheads 2 for raping minors
Saudi authorities beheaded Wednesday 2 nationals convicted of raping minors in
2 separate cases, in 1 of which the culprit killed the victim, the interior
ministry said.
HB was found guilty of kidnapping and raping a 7-year-old boy before throwing
him into a well and killing him, the ministry said in a statement carried by
SPA state news agency.
HB was executed in Qassim province, north of Riyadh.
In the other case, IB was condemned of kidnapping and raping a minor, and
attempting to kidnap another. He was executed in the northern Hail province.
The beheadings bring to 15 the number of death sentences carried out this year
in the ultra-conservative kingdom.
Saudi Arabia beheaded 78 people in 2013, according to an AFP count.
Last year, the UN High Commission for Human Rights denounced a "sharp increase
in the use of capital punishment" there since 2011.
According to figures from rights group Amnesty International, the number of
executions rose from 27 in 2010, including 5, to 82 in 2011, including 28
foreigners.
In 2012, the number of executions dipped to 79, among them 27 foreigners.
Rape, murder, apostasy, armed robbery and drug trafficking are all punishable
by death under Saudi Arabia law.
(source: emirates247.com)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
DeathPenalty@lists.washlaw.edu
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/deathpenalty@lists.washlaw.edu/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
