In 1846 Michigan banned capital punishment. This
legislation would set a unique precedence in legal punishment. Not only would
it put capital punish back into the law books, but it would discriminate which
murders could be considered for the death penalty.
I think this case fits into this week’s assigned
reading of chapter seven in our class text very well. Do we have the right to
take a person’s life? Would an individual that murders a police officer still
be considered a “person”? According to
Rosenstrand, (2013), "genetically as well as legally, serial killers are
still persons, and the very fact that we choose to hold them accountable in
court is proof of that" (p. 324).
I also believe one must consider the question of
equality and of equal rights with this type of law. I am not so sure that I
feel a murderer of a child is less of a person, or holds a smaller amount of responsibility
than a murderer of a police officer. Does
the killing of law enforcement officers constitute different punishment than
killing anyone else? The discussion in Rosenstrand, (2013), "Treat equal
equally and unequals unequally" (p. 339) explains how treating people
differently may keep the treatment as fundamentally equal.
The kind of punishment discussed here is several of the
five punishments listed in our class text. Rosenstrand, (2013) (pp. 357-359). If
people believed that could be put to death for killing a police officer that
would be a “deterrence”. Capital punishment would also permanently “incapacitate”
the criminal, and could be considered as “retribution” for the crime committed.
References:
Oosting, J., (February 06, 2015). Michigan Live. Death Penalty for Cop Killers. Retrieved from:
Rosenstrand, N. (2013) The Moral of the Story, pp. 324, 339,
357-359
Shaylen:
ReplyDeleteIn addition to your blog, to you think that lex talionis would apply in this case (murder of a police officer) since all things are not equal?