Recently, a poll about the hypothetical reintroduction of capital punishment showed that the majority of French people were in favor of death penalty. Even if, being a member of the EU, it could not be reinstated, it is interesting to see that most people consider that execution is a suitable legal answer. Personally, i don't think that it is viable - societies are built on ideals and should always try to concretize them. Being criminal as a response to criminality is below what a Nation ought to be. I know that this is debatble and that's why I wanted your views on the subject.
top of page
bottom of page
Well... why would we let a government decide on the faith of an individual, on behalf on the victims? Shouldn’t we ask the family’s victim ? I am sure that 99% wouldn’t be satisfied with death penalty or at least, not in the way it’s being administrated now. Electric chair or any other barbaric ways of giving death to an inmate could be satisfactory as you always want and expect the murderer or criminal to die in attrition’s circo, when you are a victim yourself. But an injection? What satisfa does that give? This looks like a sweet escape and a beautiful way to avoid rotting in a cell for decades. Instead, we should introduce or re-introduce Retaliation, within a specific scope. 10 years in isolation mandatory, after which the victims or immediate family are allowed to inflict on the inmate similar punishment tu the ones they have been victims from. He killed your sister with a bat? You do the same to him. Either daily does it or executioners are hired by government to carry on. The retaliation sentence. This would of course be filmed or audience would be in attendance. While the above might sound barbaric, what do we know if the pain collateral victims go through and how can we give them a sense of closure. Retaliation should be the way to go.
Different elements need to be highlighted when it comes to the question of capital punishment.
First, can a state inflict death ? What we have seen with COVID-19 is that a state's primary role is to protect its citizens. Therefore, it can not and should not practice capital punishment. In that case, who would be designated to "kill" the convicted ? In what capacity? Would he be a public servant or a private conctractor ? In the former case, what kind of curriculum/experience would lead you to eleminate fellow citizens ?
Second, it testifies the inability of the state to effectively deal with its citizens. Resorting to death is sign an explicit sign of failure.
Third, what does it tell about the nature and character of our society? Are we ready to be part of a framework that can, potentially, execute you ?
Other questions also show the issues implied by detah penalty (e.g. if proven innocent afterwards, how could the state "compensate" your death?)