Friday, December 10, 2004

Will there be one less Californian?

Only because the case involves a sensitive subject for many Americans do I mention it again, but I'm wondering what Scott Peterson's eventual sentencing will mean. Although I thought at the time that capital punishment was already ruled out, I advertised my idea of justice here.

I don't necessarily like the idea of stopping a man's heart as punishment for a double-murder, but even less, I dislike sending the message that killing your wife and unborn child because you have a new girlfriend will get you a free place to live and 3 hot squares a day. The Capital Punishment argument will never be won. Both sides of politics and both sides of religion can all come to different, resonable conclusions. I happen to support it and understand and appreciate why some don't.

The whole "eye for an eye" in the Bible required the punishment to fit the crime. As much as I'd like to resuscitate Scott Peterson after he spends 5 minutes at the bottom of the sea - only to do it again for an eternal period, you can't kill him twice. And what will punishing Scott Peterson with death accomplish? If you believe the threat of death is a deterrent to capital crimes, it acts as incentive for other malcontents to reconsider their larceny of human life - mainly the pre-meditated variety.

Even if Peterson is sentenced to death [I think he will be], he may never die by I.V. Either his fellow inmates will save taxpayers the $35K cost of lethal injection by making sure he falls on a sharp object, or years of appeals will allow Scott Peterson the comparably generous death brought by old age.

I don't hope the jury sentences Scott Peterson to death for my sake, but rather for the sake of all the other devoted, loving wives and mothers-to-be who couldn't possibly know they're living with a monster.

free web counters
Blue Nile Diamonds