PRISONER EXPRESS

I think America's obsession with atonement is more harmful than helpful because it alienates those individuals who are not responsible for whatever deficiency is being atoned. I don't think America can possibly make everything in the past better, so why even try at the risk of alienating our own people? With some it is easy to understand why our leaders would think that America owes them reparations, but many others are a much different story as America had little to do with their plight other than liberating them. Not only must American taxpayers, "pay" atonement but we must also be forced to feel guilty for acts we did not even commit.

I find it hard to believe that money can make an individual feel more content about their people's systematic persecution. What does the money do? It just give these alleged, "victims" the impression that if they come to America they will get a free ride. These "victims" use American's guilt and compassion to make more of themselves which is deceitful and despicable, and the government encourages them to think like this. The American government needs to realize that the only way history can be remedied is by not allowing it to repeat itself, not by playing on American's emotions and certainly not by providing them with monetary atonement.

This also leads those individuals to think that if and when they have a problem or feel persecuted, whether real or imagined, that they are entitled to reparations by those who have nothing to do with their problem. All of the reperating that the American government is doling out comes from American taxpayers. Is it fair that we must pay with our hard-work, our sweat and blood and tears, for others' mistakes? Americans will eventually recognize how they are being made into scapegoats and will grow very tired of it. There will always be some unrest because of things such as America's obsession with atonement. To quiet this unrest, everyone just needs to realize that we can't rely on others to move ourselves through this life, that sometimes we must suck it up, be accountable, take initiative and strive to become something more than a freeloader and user of human emotions. Anyone offended by this are the ones I'm most talking to. Your lack of intelligence and compassion is pathetic.

Crime and Punishment

A number of years ago, my fourteen year old nephew, whom I absolutely adored, was brutally murdered by a boy he considered to be a "close friend." No motive was ever revealed except for the possibility of jealousy. Needless to say, the tragedy of it has remained with me. Is murder wrong? I asked myself, or does it depend on who commits it and why?

In 1968, the Supreme Court found the death penalty to be cruel and unusual punishment. Hence, there were no executions in the U.S. from 68 to 77, when Utah but double murderer, Gary Gilmore to death by firing squad. That started the topes tightening again, and all but nine states hurriedly reinstituted the death penalty. There is a saying among those who believe in capital punishment, "The death penalty may not eliminate crime, but it stops the repeater."

The more serious and intelligent pro-death penalty people believe there is a humane line that must not be crossed. When an individual takes it upon himself to rape, torture, and ultimately murder someone, they have crossed that line and must be fully punished for it. And that punishment is loss of their own life. The pro-death penalty contingent quotes the Bible's, "eye for an eye" ethic: Once you take another person's life, you automatically forfeit the right to live your own.

But the people who are against capital punishment ask the age-old question, "Who really has the right to kill?" We all agree the criminal doesn't have that right, but most would say a soldier does. A hit-man doesn't have the right, but the state does. A doctor with a hopeless patient who is suffering constantly from an incurable and debilitating disease doesn't have the right to pull the plug, but a politician who rises to become governor or president has the discretion of giving your life "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" once you're on death row.

Then there is the revenge factor. Most of the people against executions believe vehemently that this is the one and only reason for the death penalty. I had to face my own feelings about the issue when my nephew was killed. The minute I heard the devastating news, I instantly wanted to seek revenge. I wanted to go after the little bastard that did it and chop him up. I was taught at a very early age that revenge is the most worthless of causes. It is exactly like hate. It eats at you from the inside. It destroys any love or forgiveness you may possess. But many of the relatives of murder victims find a great deal of solace in revenge when the perpetrators are put to death. Many claim that they cant finally sleep knowing the criminal is no longer alive.

Is it payback? Retaliation? Guilt? That last word, that last question opens up an entirely different situation. Do the relatives feel some sort of guilt about not having been able to protect or save the victim? Albert Camus said, "Let us call it by the name which, for the lack of any other nobility, will at least give the nobility of truth, and let us recognize it for what it essentially is: a revenge."

The death penalty has under no circumstances proven to be a deterrent to crime. Criminal after criminal has stated that the thought of dying for their crimes never entered their minds during the act. And if it is revenge- so what? The criminal shouldn't have committed the crime, say the proponents for the death penalty. They also ask why should they have to pay to keep the murderers alive. Unfortunately, the way the system is set up now, it costs more for the state to kill someone than to simply sentence them to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Why? Because the present appeal system which takes years, costs the states and the taxpayers thousands of dollars, much more than it does to place a man in a five-by-eight foot cell with a light bulb, and let him stay there until he dies.

One of the most tragic and horrifying things about executions is the fact that someone who is completely innocent could be put to death. It is estimated that of the last five hundred people killed by the death penalty, no less than seventeen could have been, and probably were, completely innocent. There is no reprieve for those ill-fated ones who paid the supreme price for something they didn't do. That's it, folks. Ramsey Clark, JFK's attorney general said, "Our emotions cry for vengeance in the wake of a horrible crime, but we know that killing the criminal cannot undo the crime, will not prevent similar crimes by others, does not benefit the victim, destroys human life, and brutalizes society. If we are to still violence, we must learn to cherish life."

Minorities, who make up the greater part of the less fortunate, quite often find themselves on death row. Of the 2,500 presently awaiting their fate, more than half are minorities. Camus also said, "Capital punishment has always been a religious punishment and should be irreconcilable with modern humanism." Camus wasn't far off. In the Massachusetts Colony in 1641, the capital laws stated, "If any man shall worship any other God, he shall be put to death. If any person shall blaspheme the name of God, the Father, the Holy Ghost, he or she shall be put to death."

How far have we progressed? Segregationists, after years of hatred and despicable treatment of blacks her in America, say now that they were wrong. Slavery was wrong. Segregation was wrong. Will they ever come to the conclusion that killing, not matter who does it, is wrong? Even though I speak out against it, I understand those who are in the favor of the death penalty -- because I have found it impossible to this point to forgive the murderer of my nephew. The killer spent a total of six years in prison for the crime. As far as I am concerned, that wasn't nearly enough.

The pros and cons of capital punishment are something each of us has to decide for ourselves. As you probably detected, I am against it for the many reasons I have stated. However, I completely understand those who are for it, and I only ask hat they give it a lot more thought.