Friday 27 January 2006

Defend 'till death

My adrenaline has been flowing today. Just like the good old times when as a junky I had my overdose on most days. A poster whose work generally intrigues or otherwise attracts me had just had her eyes opened to serial killers. Most particularly, Ted Bundy who practically caused the term to be invented. I knew of Bundy from some way back having spoken to a FBI guy who had had dealings with him. He described the guy as pure evil and that interested me enough to read about Bundy and other serial killers. There could well be a lack of knowledge in England of what constitutes a serial killer. One needs to realise that they are not some form of Dr Shipman offing little old ladies with a comfy helping of pain-killer. There is as much resemblance as next door’s Tom bears to a hungry lion. My friend Gemmak went on to abhor the idea of the death sentence. In the manner typical for her, she presented a cogent opposition to this form of legal stricture. I bit it then, I still bite it now and I suspect I’ll bite it until my dying day.
My support for execution is not based upon long out of date biblical exhortations of eye for an eye. To me, the clinical end of a life by injection, electrocution, gas or whatever in accordance with a legal finding is in no way retribution for a death that was associated with terror, humiliation and pain. I consider that some people exhibit conduct that puts them beyond the pale. They are outlaws. They have rejected our morality. They lack that speck of whatever it is that distinguishes us from mere animals.
Yes – OK I hear you say. They are not very nice people but why kill them? Cannot they be confined in some way? Is there no form of treatment? Does our executing them not constitute some sort of two wrongs do not make one right? Does not their death demean us? Lot of questions there eh? My short answer is really that I do not have any appreciation for these reservations and objections. Debating these is, to me, as productive as questioning why I do not walk about indoors with dog mess on the sole of my shoes.
I do feel that the way these matters are handled in America is less than perfect. But then, they do have a large problem on their hands. Their legal system means that executions may take place some score or so years after the crimes were committed. As medical practitioners refuse to have anything to do with judicial executions, some are bungled. Electrocutions go wrong. The fact that these errors take place in front of a panel of witnesses gives them widespread publicity and doubtless some witnesses embroider their accounts anyway. However, these lawful terminations are part of the law in most states. Public opinion is freely expressed and widely available
We here in UK seem to have a strange attitude to capital punishment. Time and again, the media report public support for it’s reintroduction in the wake of a particular crime. It does figure in governmental debate but is always overwhelmingly defeated when it comes to a vote. I accept that that is right and proper. I’ve looked at what happened at Rillington Place and on the roof with Craig and Bentley Ruth Ellis did the case for capital punishment little benefit It would appear that we had our history of wrong and bungled executions just as have the Americans but we took a different path.
Anyway, that has been my day. Enlivened by a few words in a blog. Good. Oh, and if there is anyone who wants more of this pro and con stuff, have a look at what must be the definitive page of links.

No comments:

Post a Comment