Sunday, April 29, 2007
1 comments
Question 1: George Orwell has used illustration through words from a sympathetic point of view, to show readers his views towards capital punishment.
Question 2 and 3:
Before we can fully appreciate the topic of capital punishment, we first need to understand the reason why it stands.
In most places that practice capital punishment today, the death penalty is reserved as punishment for premeditated murder, espionage, treason, or as part of military justice. In some countries, sexual crimes, such as adultery and sodomy, carry the death penalty, as do religious crimes such as apostasy, the formal renunciation of one's religion. In many retentionist countries (countries that use the death penalty), drug trafficking is also a capital offense. In China human trafficking and serious cases of corruption are also punished by the death penalty. In militaries around the world courts-martial have imposed death sentences for offenses such as cowardice, desertion, insubordination, and mutiny.[1]
-extracted from Wikipedia-
And after a tiring two hours worth of research on the arguments for and against capital punishments, I have finally managed to summarize them in a simplistic manner for all to see. Let us begin with support for capital punishment. Do take note, that the bulk of information you’re about to be saddled with contains a mixture of Internet information as well as my own personal opinion, for easy reading.
1) The Death Penalty is the only punishment for violent criminals and murderers if justice will be administered. What other justifiable punishment is there for a person who has robbed an innocent life, who has held disrespect towards the value of life?
2) Through the Death Penalty the respect for man's inviolable value is kept.
3) The Death Penalty defends human dignity in the strongest way. There is no reason no matter what the person has done, for someone to dictate what kind of ending that person should face. Who are we to play God, and decide whether someone lives or dies? The culprit took things into his or her own hands, and now she has to pay the price.
4) Only the Death Penalty can fully confirm man’s natural sense of justice. Other punishments such as sending the accused into jail doesn’t exactly work out, because they deserve so much more for the pain and loss they’ve inflicted on their victims and their families.
5) The Death Penalty expresses society’s compassion towards the affected victims of crime. We have to think about this from the victims’ point of view. When we think and sympathise too much with the murderers, we tend to often forget the victims. Who bothers about them if we care so much about the murderers? This is clearly shown by the fact that people remember the names of killers more than they can remember the names of the victims. Why do we hear so much about the killers and so little about the victims and their loved ones who are left behind to pick up the pieces? If not the death penalty, then what will justify their death? We must think about the lives that the victims affected. . Every one had families, friends, relatives, co-workers, neighbors. The combined loss is incalculable.
6) The Death Penalty gives peace of mind to the victims and their relatives and puts an end to the crime. Let’s take it that we’re looking at every case as a separate issue. Crime X has finally been put to an end because the guilty, X, has been finally executed. Don Feder once said that "Executing a murderer is the only way to adequately express our horror at the taking of an innocent life. Nothing else suffices. To equate the lives of killers with those of victims is the worst kind of moral equivalency. If capital punishment is state murder, then imprisonment is state kidnapping and restitution is state theft."
7) The Death Penalty means the greatest mark from the State that it defends the ordinary citizen’s "right to life". If the guilty aren’t punished, then how can others believe that human life is respected? Once again, this is all when we consider the victims. In order to rightly value the death penalty it is necessary to have empathy and understanding for all the victims and their relatives.
8) The Death Penalty prevent with 100% efficiency the perpetrator from committing more crimes. As in case X, X has been gotten rid of from the world and we know that we can no longer fear him. Sure enough, there may be future copycat Xs coming out in the future with similar cases, but one by one the Death Penalty will eradicate them all. Dead killers cannot kill again.
9) The Death Penalty deters some people from committing heinous crimes and thereby human lives are saved. Responsible people who consider the consequences of what they are planning to carry out then realize that it is not worth their life to pay for such an act. We often talk and criticize the justice system for not being able to handle all the guilty people, yet there are cases of success that we cannot see. Surely no one will confess that one previously contemplated dire action which would have resulted in one’s death by law straight after. We tend to forget these small cases that do exist among us, though they are miniature and almost impossible to see.
10) The Death Penalty creates a somewhat safer society. People sleep peacefully at night because they trust that the law will bring justice to whatever crime is committed, and this somewhat deters crime from happening. Again, note the word “somewhat”.
11) The Death Penalty shows in the strongest way the seriousness with which the State views violent crimes and murder. Sending the guilty straight to jail with a life sentence simply doesn’t suffice as serious enough for the extent of the crime committed. There is a debt to the victim, to the relatives of the victim, and a debt to the world, to be paid by the criminal.
12) The Death Penalty, more than anything else, testifies of high moral and righteousness in the society. It is the perfect example that actions come with consequences, and if we defy this, we have to pay the price with our own blood. It’s that simple enough. Justice is about enforcing consequences for one's own actions to endorse personal responsibility. They already know the consequences of their actions, and should be prepared to accept responsibility for it.
13) The Death Penalty means retribution which belongs to a civilized state. There is a thin line between revenge and justice, one might argue. But can you tell me what other way there is apart from the Death Penalty to give fairness back to the victims and their families?
14) The Death Penalty defends the punishment as such, and confirms that certain criminals deserve death. Once again, please refer to argument 12. Also, with a yearly average of 15,000 murders, the fact that we are reaching 1,000 executions in only a little more than 30 years is proof that capital punishment has been reserved for the worst of the worst.
15) A wide opinion among the people supporting the Death Penalty is also a reason for its introduction. The Death Penalty didn’t just appear overnight, it was put into place after deliberate contemplation and analysis. There are flaws, we have to admit, but it is trying its best to be perfect.
16) The alternative to the Death Penalty, i.e. prison, means that the taxpayer’s money goes to support the living of the murderer and the violent criminal. This is offensive! Does the criminal really deserve this?
For people who oppose the Death Penalty, their main argument is that that it does not deter criminals more than life imprisonment, violates human rights, leads to executions of some who are wrongfully convicted, and discriminates against minorities and the poor. Families of murder victims undergo severe trauma and loss which no one should minimize. But, there are many family members that feel executions will not heal their wounds nor will they end their pain. For many, the extended process prior to executions prolongs the agony of the family.
They argue that it isn’t the fault of the criminal in entirety. They claim that it is society and family that has resulted in who he or she is today, and that if that person have been given chances and brought up well, none of these crimes would be happening. They say these criminals are innocent, and that by sentencing them the Death Penalty, we are being unfair to them. That the Death Penalty is “applied in an inhumane, unjust, anti-poor and racist manner...."
I’ve read on a website about the three lies supporting the reasons to oppose the Death Penalty. Lie number one is that people on death row have had a fair trial. The other lie is that people on death row have ample time and opportunity through the appellate process to prove their innocence. They say it turns out that the way our criminal justice system is set up is that once a person is found guilty, innocence is irrelevant. Innocence is irrelevant in the way our system works. The last lie is that when it is time for death row prisoners, they are going to be executed in a humane and peaceful way that is far better than what they subjected their victims to.
Because when you have money, you get a good lawyer, and you don’t get the death penalty. And when you don’t have money, you get stuck with lousy lawyers who do not care as much about their jobs and increase your initial chances of losing the case.
The question "Why do we kill people to show that killing people is wrong?" is often asked to justify the rationale against capital punishment. Indeed, this was the question that truly stumped me, and changed me from agreement to neutrality. This, I shall elaborate as my conclusion to this entry.
My Conclusion:
The world is split into three different groups of people. The first group consist of the people whose hearts rule their heads, who use their instincts and personal emotions to decide where they stand. The second group contains people who are the exact opposite- that is, they let their head decide more than what they feel towards the issues. And the very last group has the people who use an equal mix of the two, therefore achieving a balanced view.
Certain rules like people who kill out of defense and people who kill under influence of alcohol are exempted from the death penalty. Depending on which group you fall under, you tend to have different opinions towards this. Some may argue that the above stands true while others protest that these people should also be convicted. At the end of the day, it all boils down to our personal opinion. But we should try to lean towards a more balanced stand, and understand that the judicial system has its flaws and perfections. Perhaps we just need to trust that our justice officers are trying their best into working out a system as fair as it judicial systems go, but we have to bear in mind that it will never be a totally flawless system because of this existence of the three very different groups of people. The capital punishment should be viewed as one instrument among many in the fight for a more righteous and better world.
However, personally, I am more towards supporting capital punishment. Perhaps it is due to the way I was brought up to believe that the law is fair and just, or maybe it's just because I let my heart rule my head too often. But I, for one, sympathise deeply with the victims and their families. I feel that there is no reason for anyone to take a life or inflict any harm on any life. I strongly believe that if the criminal has had the courage to commit such terrible crimes, then he or she should be willing to accept the punishment for his or her actions. But even if the criminal's life is taken away, it still doesn't measure up to the loss in the world brought about by his (or her) selfish actions. Let's refer back to the case of Virginia Tech killings. Cho killed many innocents and eventually killed himself after he was done. But is that enough to make it up to the victims? The pain that their families have to go through, the loss of wonderful futures they would have had and the loss of such wonderful leaders belongs to society... What can truly repay the price? Yet if Cho had gotten scot-free and continued his life, he would have simply killed even more people and cause even more harm. Yes, capital punishment is cruel when you see it from the criminal's point of view, but when we look at the bigger picture it is obvious that the killer is prevented from commiting more crimes, thus lessening the impact of his future actions. All these are cut short by the killer's death.
Yet even all this is not enough to pay the price of the crime. But then, what is?
I credit most of my supporting arguments to a very resourceful website from which I collated the list of arguments for capital punishment before I went on to offer my views. http://www.yesdeathpenalty.com/Labels: capital punishment, death penalty, human rights
-when are you
coming back? ;
Sunday, April 22, 2007
1 comments
Article Title: US College Massacre: Killer was S. Korean Student
Dated 18 April 2007
Source: The STs
And also its follow-up articles in the days thereafter.
The largest massacre in modern US history was carried out only recently last week, whereby the killer, a South Korean student, carried out his work at a US university and killed 22 people, before killing himself.
It is a mystery the actual cause behind his actions. Spectulations include a love triangle and anger, just to say the least.
This article led me to contemplate the results and consequences of our actions. Unknowingly, the students at the university may have offended the killer. We ought to rethink our actions and how we have treated others. A kind word goes a long way, but so does a mean retort. A simple or seemingly harmless retort can change the live of a person forever. Peronally, I believe that one of the main causes for the killer's outbreak was due to him being ostracised by his fellow peers. He was a quiet boy since young, but perhaps if someone was willing to stay by him and listen he would have opened up, and none of this would have happened. Perhaps because he felt outcasted by his peers and their jeering at him led him to an inner explosion of feelings, therefore leading to him taking so many innocent lives.
Till now, police are still trying to find clues and links that may perhaps explain the rationale behind his actions.
Yet in the midst of adversity, stories of true hope and courage emerge. I was deeply touched when I read about how a professor guarded his classroom door with his own body against the killer in a bid to earn some time so that his students may escape unscathed. He could have chosen to flee the moment he heard the gunshots, but he chose instead to stay and protect his students, despite his age. Now, this is what I call true courage. Thanks to his selflessness, many lives were saved. I am filled with deep respect for this professor, who put his students' lives above his own. Needless to say, he was brutally shot by the killer and did not survive. But his work and legacy, I believe, will stay on for generations to come.
This incident also led to the question of how reliable blogs are in providing news to the public. During the killings, students were told to stay in their rooms and hide for safety (announced via email and the public loudspeakers). Throughout this time when they were enclosed in their rooms, many went online and blogged about the entire event. One student even posted video clips that he had taken about the chaos in the school on his blog. This leads us to ponder- the media did not provide us with such detailed information, yet all these can be found on the blogs of the students present there and then during the killings. And this links back to another issue concerning blogging. If the mainstream media cannot be trusted to provide us with accurate information, can we approach blogs for more information?
It is quite obvious that there is a lot to learn from this incident. Hopefully we may all learn our lesson. The moral of the story? Treat others as you would want to be treated. I believe this is the essence of every action that we do.Labels: crime, media
-when are you
coming back? ;
Saturday, April 14, 2007
0 comments
Article Title: Einstein: The patron saint of distracted schoolkids
Date: 13 April 2007
Source: The STs
Is society placing too much emphasis on paper qualifications instead of training students to think creatively and challenge theories? This is what the writer of the article believes, as well as what I feel too. Paper qualifications are the norm nowadays, and as kids, we were constantly told by our parents and teachers that if we do not study hard, we will not do well in our exams, and then we won't be able to get a good job. Everytime we tried to protest against an idea that our teachers was trying to teach us during lessons, we were chided for being rude and clearly not listening. Thus, we grew up thinking that lessons from our textbooks will always be correct and we should never challenge them, because they will never be wrong. How can society expect us to grow up and "think creatively", then?
Here in Singapore, where education is given high priority, many new introductions have been made to our education system. But are we growing at too fast a pace? Year after year the syllabus for the various levels changes, and more content is always added in. Then they tried making some changes after getting feedback that our creativity was being held back. I am sure everyone will remember the time when new subjects such as Theatre Studies and Drama were introduced in secondary schools and at Junior College level, so that students may choose to pursue their field of interest, as well as to promote creativity among the students. But is this working? Small attempts here and there by the schools and teachers on their own to nurture creativity and critical thinking and observation skills in the students have not been very successful. It is inevitable that after so many years (ten years for students my age) of the old way of teaching, we are met with problems whenever the teacher tells us to "think out of the box". Many students look up with blank looks on their faces, and require the teacher to elaborate (with relevant examples) what the instruction means. Is this what we want to see continue on?
Einstein was a genius of his time because he challenged ideas that were taken to be truths and solid facts. He is a classic example of how one can still succeed in life despite not having excellent paper qualifications. He was not afraid to go against ideas everyone thought to be true, and despite not doing well academically, he was able to see things in a different light from everyone else. Can you imagine if he had been like the rest of the students and just listened to everything his teacher told him, without questioning for fear of being scolded? Where would that leave modern physics?
He made a breakthrough because he dared to be different. And this is what society needs to focus on when considering the training of its future generations to lead the country in the future. We are encaged in our own beliefs and ideas taught to us by our elders, and we remain quiet, accepting everything they tell us. Perhaps you will remember the heated debate between the standards of local and international schools after the finals of the television debate show, The Arena. The Singapore education system was criticised for focusing too much on paper qualifications, which was why they felt local students were unable to think well on their feet.
There is a need for us to break out of our shell and explore new opportunities we never thought possible. But the major change that needs to be implemented is to move away from paper qualifications and encourage critical thinking, observation, as well as creaitivity, too. The paper qualifications may be the first key factor for most employers when they are looking for potential candidates, but what happens next? Someone with outstanding academic results does not necessarily equate someone who can do a good job at work. We may be at the frontier for outstanding academic results on the whole as a nation, but if we do not match up when it comes to these crucial skills that can be applied to any job, any circurmstance, any person, what really is the point?
Labels: education system, einstein
-when are you
coming back? ;
