U.S. should handle death penalty like China | VailDaily.com

U.S. should handle death penalty like China

Kyle Bradell
Vail, CO, Colorado
newsroom@vaildaily.com

In regard to the two gentlemen discussing the death penalty this past week, I would like to throw my two cents in, as well.

I am for the death penalty, and regretfully, mistakes will happen.

However, that is why the first gentleman (David Le Vine) stated that it should be used when there is not one iota of a doubt that whosoever deserves the death penalty deserves it.

Mr. Ayrault, you suggest that “the death penalty is reserved for the most heinous crimes.” Would you elaborate what a heinous crime is, please? Do one, two or five innocent people have to be murdered before the murderer’s actions reach “heinous crimes” in order to receive the death penalty?

Mr. Ayrault, you also bring up the topic of race. It is unfair for anyone, regardless of color, to receive a court sentence that is not fair.

However, statistically, there is a greater number of minorities that commit crimes.

So, if there are a greater number of minorities committing crimes than non-minorities, it would serve to reason that many of the sentences for minorities will be higher.

On a quick side note on race that you brought up regarding the unfair treatment for those who are more qualified than others: I do believe that it is in Hartford, Conn., where the city conducted a test with its firemen to see who would be a good candidate to be promoted to lieutenant.

Due to test results, the city threw it out because there were not enough minorities who passed the test. There were plenty of other firemen who passed the test; unfortunately, their skin color happens to be white. Even though they are more qualified than the other firemen who took the test and failed, the color of skin came into play and displayed the true colors of Hartford.

Were those men “treated less fairly and more harshly,” Mr. Ayrault?

Lastly, Mr. Ayrault, you wrote, “There is no evidence that the death penalty acts as a deterrent.” The reason it does not act as a deterrent is because once we find the criminal guilty, we, as a nation, decide to put them on death row for years. Then the criminal attempts to delay those years into decades.

If the courts said, “You, the murderer, are hereby found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt that you murdered this man or this woman or that child, and your sentence is the death penalty. You shall be executed tomorrow henceforth,” it would most certainly send a message across the entire nation that we will not put up with innocent spilled blood in the land.

Just look at communist China. Whenever it finds something damaging to society, like a murder, or its image abroad is disgraced – i.e., tainted pet food and lead in toys – it does not fool around. It will execute that Chinese if it believes it is the right punishment. It doesn’t lollygag around and let the criminal appeal for decades to come. It executes him the next day sometimes.

I hate to take examples from other countries regarding law, but if America is going to use the death penalty, it must be enforced swiftly for those criminals who are found guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt, and there are cases.

Kyle Bradell

Avon

Editor’s note: Statistically, minorities may be arrested and convicted disproportionately, as are people with lower incomes of all colors. But that doesn’t show that minorities and low-income people actually commit more crimes – only that they are more likely to be arrested and convicted. These statistics are used by both sides of this argument to bolster their conclusions.


News


See more