State Sanctioned Murder?
The Independent is reporting on the execution of Robert Sparks who killed his family 22 years ago. The crime sounds horrific, but I cannot help to think that the state sanctioned murder of this man will not do anything to mitigate the death of his family. Obviously, I come from a nation that moved away from the death penalty more than half a century ago.
As a rational outside observer, I cannot help but think the reasoning behind retaining the death penalty is more than somewhat muddled…
Is it to help the victims’ family with the grieving process? Grief is grief. I cannot see that the taking of another life will really offer any comfort at all. Maybe to a few, but not to the majority.
Is to punish the perpetrator of the crime? I am not sure. Dead is dead. Is dead worse than spending your life in a cage? Probably not I would have thought.
Is its purpose to offer a deterrent to violent criminals, to stop them taking a life? If it is it apparently does not work, does it?
So what is the death penalty for?
It rather takes away the possibility of redemption doesn’t it? People talk about and eye for eye, but do we truly want public policy on incarceration and punishment to be dictated by a verse in the bible written 5000 years ago?
It seems to me that the death penalty is all about vengeance. A state sanctioned policy of vengeance. A policy based on anger and emotion, used with a holier than thou sanctimonious smugness to sanction state murder. In my humble opinion that is never a good look for policy decision making, policy, after all, should look to the best impulses in us, not the worst.
Link to article on the Execution https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/robert-sparks-death-sentence-murder-rape-lethal-injection-execution-texas-a9120956.html