stardustcboy's Diaryland Diary
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wanted to bounce an idea off of everyone...
it's funny, fluffykitty and i were discussing the death penalty, amongst other things, just last week on the ride into work.
i won't get into the full details of our debate or discussion for the sake of brevity, but i will outline solution that i presented to her during our conversation.
i basically said that i feel the death penalty is sort of hypocritical and archaic (to which she agreed). i feel that if we're going to uphold the idea that life is sacred, and that the greatest crime against humankind one can commit is the willful murder of another human being; then using murder as punishment sort of defeats the purpose of the original idea. it's contradictory.
i would really LOVE to believe that everyone can be rehabilitated and saved. that someone who murdered and raped women could one day see the light and repent; but i'm a realist, and i understand that it is rarely the case with these sorts of crimes.
i also feel that taking care of them for the rest of their natural lives is burdensome and that society receives nothing save a sense of "security" that the murderous boogeyman won't get them while they sleep because he's locked up. that and maybe the tiniest sense that justice has been served. but then what? nothing. just tax dollars being siphoned away to feed them and clothe them and keep them locked away. it really is nothing more than a fancy zoo for people in my mind. as much as people would cry that prisoners should be treated humanely, the truth of the matter is that they are NOT. the truth is that BECAUSE they are removed from society and placed in cages, they are ANIMALIZED. people just don't view criminals the same way as non-criminals. "so what to do?" i wondered.
this is my solution.
that all violent criminals - murderers, child murderers, rapists, child rapists, sociopaths, psychopaths, and those who WILLFULLY, MALICIOUSLY, and VIOLENTLY take the lives of more than one person should be submitted to X number of years of medical testing.
instead of putting said murderer to death by lethal injection or what not, i say we put them under the knife. get inside them, really see what makes them tick. let's run some tests on them, see what stimulus they respond to, what happens in their brains and where and penultimately learn how to prevent others like them from harming those around them. this can come in the form of medication, therapies, treatments or whatever else. maybe we'll also try out other drugs on them. cancer treatments, vaccines, gene therapies, restorative or curative treatments, and other such possible medical researches. the prisoner would still have rights like any other lab animal. papers would be necessary, various forms would have to be filled out, certain procedures would have to be observed, and a basic level of fair and considerate treatment would be enforced.
no testing term can last longer than 10 years and no less than 2 years. no prisoner can undergo more than 1 testing term. so a criminal who is sentanced to a life in prison, would also be assessed for a possible testing term that if judged appropriate for the level of the crime, would happen alongside his life sentance. no testing term can outlast or exceed the primary sentance given. so a testing term happens simultaneously with the primary sentance. once their term of testing is over, they remain in prison until the end of their lives (in the case of a life sentance) or serve the remainder of their prison term. in the case of parole, a prisoner is not eligable for parole until his/her testing term is complete. once completed the prisoner undergoes the parole process as normal.
i feel that this serves to benefit the rest of humanity by supplying a limited number of human test subjects for medical purposes. medicine is at an extreme disadvantage due to the lack of human subjects. testing drugs and treatments on mammals is a close approximation, but the data gleaned from this type of research still must be refined for the human metabolism and physiology, a process which can add several years to R&D time. having human subjects available may expediate cures and treatments that might otherwise have taken decades to fully develop and test. this also reduces the number of animal subjects that are used to test various drugs and substances. it also negotiates the tricky logic behind capitol punishment. the prisoner's life is spared, but at the same time his right is forfeit until his terms are served.
i feel that every conscious, free-willed human has the right to live and enjoy a fruitful life. thus, i feel that those who willfully steal that right FORFEIT their same right as a human being. to me, a murderer - especially a sociopathic or psychopathic murderer - is much like a rabid dog or a squirrel with bubonic plague. it is a serious threat to itself and the healthy population around it. unlike a rabid dog or a diseased squirrel, a murderer is not contagious per se, but neither is he "curable". so what to do? i say do what you would do with the dog or the squirrel and take it to a lab and see what processes are making it sick and how to prevent those processes, perhaps even cure them. otherwise, do some other tests that will aide the community at large - vaccines, therapies, drug treatments, etc.
well, needless to say people didn't really like this idea AT ALL. in fact, they found it more vile and disturbing than just plain capitol punishment. here are the main reasons why...
1) - if this ends up being a possible sentance for criminals, what is to stop it from being applied to all criminals? where does it stop? who regulates?
2) - the last thing you want is a released prisoner going back into society after years of medical testing.
3) - testing on human subjects is considered "cruel and unusual punishment".
4) - it's better to rehabilitate and put money into social programs than to do expirements on criminals.
to me the logic seems fair...but to those i've proposed this idea too, they look at me like i'm hitler. so obviously i think that i can streamline this idea a bit more, find a sort of comprimise. one idea is to set up medical testing as a choice the prisoner can make. like, a life in prison, OR 25 years with 10 years medical testing. or maybe as a choice to capitol punishment, death by lethal injection or 10 years medical testing and life in prison? that sort of thing.
in answer to the various counter-points above i would say...
1) - the sentance is for murderers, child murderers, rapists, child rapists, sociopaths, psychopaths, and those who WILLFULLY, MALICIOUSLY, and VIOLENTLY take the lives of more than one person. how can that be misconstrued? in cases of self-defense, accidental murder, "crimes of passion" and such there's 1st/2nd degree manslaughter. i'm talking about 1st degree, pre-meditated murder...on MORE THAN ONE COUNT. i feel that pretty much narrows it down to a small group of people. i just don't see the judicial system as being THAT inneffective for something like this to be misused, as in "all gay people" or "all people with bi-polar disorder" just because "they're crazy too." gay people aren't committing 1st degree murder. bi-polar people (in general) aren't committing 1st degree murder. ONE 1st degree murder charge...it's a stretch...but i can see that some poor bastard might end up in the wrong place at the wrong time and accidentally get the charges pinned on his ass and have to do the time, obviously this has happened before. but TWO charges? THREE? what about Jeffrey Dahmer? all of that was an accident? i don't think so, and THOSE are the kind of people i'm talking about, and it's THOSE kind of people that this sentance would be reserved for.
2) - the last thing you want is a criminal who deserved the medical testing sentance in the first place going back out into society. it happens all the time right now. rapists and murderers are let out on the streets every day. some don't ever do it again, others just can't help themselves. to me this is a moot arguement because it already happens this way. so what? keep them locked away? kill them? that's what we're contending with.
3) - only if it's torturous. i think people liken medical testing with the "medical testing" done by the nazis in WWII (even though most modern medicine is a result of said testing, sadly enough). this simply is not the case. i'm not talking about prisoners in dank cells, chained to rusty gurneys while mad scientists hack away at them with no anesthetic, poking at their exposed brains with long accupuncture needles to see what makes them twitch. i'm talking about a clean, nicely stocked, protected, secured medical facility with up-to-date equipment and technology and labs to do the research. the prisoners would be well cared for and testing would be done under the same guidelines as testing outside of the prison system.
4) - obviously rehabilitation works. that's why all violent crime and other such crime has completely ceased to exist. i'm sorry, i just don't believe in the rehabilitation of certain types of people. it can work on certain criminals, but how do you fix someone who likes to eat prostitutes while they're still alive? someone who has no compunction, no remorse, no guilt when they flay the skin of their victims and make lamps and furniture out of it? it's madness. it is the cold, calculating depths of the most darkest and unfathomable parts of the human mind. i just can't see a way to fix them. but MAYBE, if we study them, monitor their brainwaves and their neurochemical processes we might be able to better understand what processes occurred that made them this way. refine the ways we use to find others like them. or find ways to actually help those that are this way.
i don't know. like i said, i think the idea needs a bit more refinement. what do you think? is it inhuman to do medical testing on violent criminals rather than just pump them full of morphine and a megadose of cyanide? what about the bunnies? wouldn't testing humans save more bunnies and monkeys? what about not having capitol punishment? we'd just do some research, no one would have to die. what about the long term benefits to humanity? think of the cures and treatments that could come out of testing on humans. doesn't the benefit of the masses mean more overall? especially when weighed with the life of a murderer and violent criminal?
thoughts, suggestions, ideas, critiques?
i guess i just started thinking about it again because of this guy here...
i mean...what do you do with someone like that? people screaming for his death, his stoic and emotionless face, the bloody, hacked up corpse of a little girl, the families...what is justice in a case such as this? is justice the fact that he was caught THIS time and didn't manage to perfect his methods over a period of victims? is the justice in his possible death penalty? what does it serve? what purpose? to quench the desire for revenge? to satisfy the loss of a loved one? no matter how i look at it it seems that the end result is so...gratuitous and indulgent. i mean, so this guy gets the death penalty and he's killed. how has it benefitted anyone? sure you could say that he's off the streets forever, and that the life lost has been paid by his life lost; but then what? then that's it. the world goes on, and more like him pop up, and more little girls and little boys are butchered and eaten. more women are raped, tortured and murdered. more people get cancer. more people die of AIDS. more people are born with disease...and on and on and on...
what is the long term benefit of capitol punishment?
what is the long term benefit of life-imprisonment?
what is the long term benefit of medical testing?
can you see my logic? i'd love to know what people think about this.
~B-)
2:48 p.m. - 2006-04-17
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
other diaries: |