Many years ago I was listening to a television account of a brutal rape of a young girl in our community. I said in the presence of my eldest son: “If that ever happened to our daughter, I would certainly want to see the offender die.” Knowing my aversion to violence of any kind, my son responded to my comment by saying: “But, Mom, that would go against everything you believe in.” He was right, of course, and I had to admit I was not using good judgment when I temporarily imagined our daughter being in the place of the one who had been hurt.
The recent tragic killing of Aliahna Lemmon has left our community saddened and angry. It is not uncommon at a time like this to lash out at the alleged perpetrator and quickly call for the death penalty as the only answer that will bring justice in this situation. As a mother, I can identify with this feeling.
But is the death penalty the only answer? A recent letter to The Journal Gazette suggested that dealing harshly (aka, the death penalty) might act as a deterrent to future crimes. However, this opinion has never been proven accurate. In fact, the FBI Crime Reports Division publication “Crime in the U.S.” shows that recent the murder rate in states that have abolished the death penalty averaged 5.1 murders per 100,000 of population; states still using the death penalty averaged 9.1 murders per 100,000.
The fear of a confessed murderer or rapist being set free to commit another crime has no validity when you know that a sentence of life without parole is available. This type of sentencing can protect society and give the perpetrator more time to reflect on the pain caused by his or her actions and perhaps experience remorse and redemption.
Does execution grant peace or closure to victims’ families? Testimony to that experience is sketchy at best. Victims’ families often express their feelings that “two wrongs do not make a right.” It was Coretta Scott King, widow of Martin Luther King, who stated: “ I have always opposed the death penalty. Although both my husband and mother-in-law were murdered, I refuse to accept the cynical notion that their killers deserve the death penalty.” Many families belonging to an organization called Murder Victims’ Families for Reconciliation report having found real peace in striving to forgive the person who harmed their loved one.
I am obviously a strong opponent of the death penalty. There are so many reasons why this form of punishment should be abolished. It has been proven that the expense of keeping a suspect on death row and the trials involved cost much more than imprisonment for life. Why should our tax dollars be used to kill people to supposedly teach others not to kill? And morally, how can we, as citizens of a state and nation that still authorizes the death penalty, conscientiously support killing another person in our name?
It is easy to believe in the death penalty – if you ignore the facts. I dream of the time when we wake up and find other ways to protect our society than the barbaric practice of killing our fellow citizens. Michael Plumadore is not a “poster child” for a letter against the death penalty, but in this case a sentence of life without parole would protect this community from any future violence by him, and would, I believe, be a fair and just punishment.
ANN FRELLICK
Fort Wayne
