In following online writings and comments this week touching on the investigation of the Boston Marathon bombings and charges against the younger Tsarnaev brother, it bothered me - a lot - to read so many demands for Dzhohkar Tsarnaev to receive the death penalty. Having spent most of my life in Britain, actually in England, where capital punishment was abolished for murder in 1965, it feels, for me, like a step back into the dark ages. Last time the subject came up here, in 2011, regarding a GOP primary debate when the audience gave a rousing ovation to Texas governor Rick Perry's stance on the death penalty, his record number of 234 executions, and his response that he "does not struggle" with the possibility of executing an innocent person, I wrote: "Ye gods!!!! Blood pressure rising......What is this, the New Old West or what? Don't these people evolve at all? They don't believe in evolution do they? That answers a lot." What shocks me, too, is that politicians I'd looked on as more evolved, such as Al Gore and Chuck Schumer, have voiced open support for retaining capital punishment in the USA. What is wrong with these people? It seems like some disease of which a symptom is chronic blood-lust.
There is no doubt at all that Dzhohkar Tsarnaev should be imprisoned for life. There would be some hope that during his imprisonment he could realise how evil his actions had been, and over the years he might possibly be in a position to, say, write a book or in other ways convince other young would-be terrorists against supporting further atrocities.
“Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?”
ReplyDeleteNational Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, 1992
Perhaps we should limit the death penalty to politicians, lobbyists, and corporate leaders who enact policies that lead to the death of innocent people.
ReplyDeletegood Post Annie.
Its a proven fact the death penalty DOES NOT deter crime. Plus, the struggle is in the Living, not the Dying.
I do have to say I wish there was a way to make imprisonment less costly for the taxpayer..
Personally I dont want them writing books and making a profit off their victims- that includes residuals from anything associated with their crime. like movies- tv.. all monies from such should go 100% to a victims fund.
Anonymous ~ Well - maybe not sentence the pols, lobbyists etc to death, but put them in an equivalent situation as afforded by the old stocks or pillories for several hours a day, state by state, so's we could take turns at throwing rotten veggies at 'em. ;-)
ReplyDeleteSonny ~~ Agreed - prisons are expensive to keep up. Perhaps in the US too many are imprisoned for too long for minor crimes, some tweaking there could help.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't want a prisoner to profit from any books/films etc either, whether connected to their crime or not Sonny.....A victims fund is a sound idea! But their experience and what they had learned from it could be helpful for other young people feeling disaffected in the future - whatever the reason.
I think there is a law to prevent criminals from profiting from their notoriety. It think it was passed in the 60's or 70's
ReplyDeleteanyjazz ~~ Is there? Good - then for once they got it right! ;-)
ReplyDeleteThis young man bothers me. His motive is unclear. Chechen family honour is held in great esteem and I believe it's likely he was strongly coerced by his older brother into assisting with this vile act. Nineteen is no age, and he has a look of almost haunting innocence. It's one of those situations that screams: 'there's more to this than meets the eye'.
ReplyDeleteRJ Adams ~ He certainly doesn't have the crazed look of some recent mass murderers, in the photographs frequently shown on the net anyway.
ReplyDeleteIt's likely his big brother was a kind of father figure to him - and his sisters, in the absence of his Dad, and from what we know his brother seemed to be of quite different and more belligerent temperament too.
If there's any kind of story running "under the radar" (I'd never discount that) it is something we'll never know now, because he who knew for sure is dead, and others who knew won't be telling.