|
Jewish World Review June 26, 2000 / 23 Sivan, 5760
Chris Matthews
But how do we deal with the cruel, heartless or even
joyous taker of another person's life? What should we do
when one of our own, a human being, is robbed of life by
another's moment of calculated pleasure?
I speak of the murder committed without regret and
without pity.
For the first time in memory, the question of what to do
with these people may rise this fall to the level of
presidential debate. During George W. Bush's tenure as
Texas governor, 131 convicted murderers have been put
to death. Bush has declared his confidence that in each
case the condemned earned his or her fate.
Thanks to modern science, we now have a check on such
declarations of perfection. Analyzing blood or other
human material, we can ascertain if the evidence used to
convict matches with the convicted.
The question even the most advanced science cannot
answer is whether society has the right to kill those whom
science proves guilty. That query is for us resolve.
By that, I mean we Americans. We can argue for decades over the root causes
but ours is a violent culture. Last year, 17,000 of us were murdered. Americans
were the victims. Americans were the killers.
It does no good to shift the debate to that related, but different, question of gun
control. While it's true that guns can be used to kill people, people without guns
find other ways to kill. Ten thousand of those American killings last year were
by firearms. Seven thousand were achieved by other means.
Also thanks to Scheck and his colleagues on the legal "dream team" who
defended O.J. Simpson, we have the stark evidence of how a rich, glamorous
celebrity gets a different kind of prosecution. The pre-trial decision to exempt
Simpson from capital punishment in this case of double-murder was an early
signal to both jury and country that this defendant warranted special treatment.
But neither concern, the possibility of executing an innocent person or the
difficulty of executing even a guilty community hero, exempts us from the stark
question of what to do when we confront the opportunity to render punishment
where punishment is clearly due.
What do we do when a gunman plans the robbery of a fast-food restaurant,
plans the systematic execution of its low-paid workers, then carries out the
crime without hesitation, error or mercy? What do we do when we catch this
assassin dead to rights?
Do we hesitate? Do we fear error? Do we show mercy?
"There are many who bring an understandable passion to the new debate over
capital punishment that arises from their fundamental moral opposition to the
penalty itself," Vice President Al Gore said recently. "I deeply respect that
position. I do not share it."
Whether Gore or Bush wins in November, I expect that one resolution of the
2000 presidential election will be to re-endorse capital
06/21/00: Jerry Brown tells AlGore how to 'wage' campaign
|