By now, even the people under the biggest and heaviest rocks know about the way an inmate was put to death in the "H" Unit at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary a week ago. In a state that has a reputation for so many different things we now have a legacy where we now disregard the humane dispatch of an offender sentenced to pay the ultimate penalty for his crimes. Like we need something else for the "enlightened" people to sneer at us about, but it is what it is.
The official word was that the offender died of a heart attack. It hasn't been determined as yet if the heart attack was caused by the drugs used in the execution, but regardless of what caused his death the offender is now deceased and the world is a better place now that the inmate is gone. The method by which the offender was to be executed essentially failed, because the offender's vein failed during the process and some "suffering" was involved. To me, this is no big deal but to the aforementioned "enlightened" people it's yet another excuse to try and talk down about the state of Oklahoma and sneer at the Governor.
Most of the time the armchair Constitutional scholars argue that the offender's execution did not follow the tenets of the 8th Amendment, which is intended to make sure that "cruel and unusual punishments" are not inflicted or imposed as the amendment was written. I question that for the simple reason that the inmate had his day in court, and the sentence of death conferred upon him. Thus, if the punishment was death it was carried out the sentence was upheld and so was his Constitutional rights, albeit in an inelegant fashion.
See the offender was accused of a murder in 1999 that involved him raping, then beating and shooting his victim twice before having her buried alive by an accomplice. Now vengeance aside...and believe me, there is a LOT of vengeance with this one...the argument that the OFFENDER suffered is taking precedence with the people who argue against capital punishment, and that, to me, disrespects the memory of the victim, especially in this case. I cannot think of a more horrific death than one where you are buried alive. That on top of all the things the offender did to his victim, who was only 19 when she was killed.
Another argument is that by supporting capital punishment people who do are no better than the people who commit murder, because in supporting capital punishment you are murdering someone who committed murder. To that, I argue that I am better. I don't murder people. I don't rape, then murder people. They also argue that no one it totally innocent of crime in our society, because on occasion people go over the posted speed limit, or jaywalk, or run stop signs and that to me is also an asinine comparison because last time I checked you can't lose your like...or forfeit it, for crossing against a life, not can you be imprisoned for double parking.
Well, you can if it's your 10th offense but that's beside the point.
Eitehr way the death penalty SHOULD continue, despite the row going on. I am a strong supporter of capital punishment and I do believe it will deter crime, if it is applied correctly and more frequently. In the case of the offender in this case was allowed 15 more years of life than his victim was, and the fact that is was thought to have given him pain, then it should be widely publicized as something that might happen if you commit murder instead of it being put out there as a bad thing by the media.
It's just too bad that SkyNet wants us to hold last weeks execution casualty as a martyr instead of justice being carried out on someone who deserved to die, but again it is what it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment