Killing a Baby to Save a Puppy, Or: Missing the point
A released criminal recently brutally murdered his daughter and her friend because he felt she was misbehaving and needed to be taught a lesson. I should avoid labels. A man with a LONG criminal history was released on parole and moved back in with his family and proceeded to kill his daughter and her friend. Apparently he was upset with his wife going easy on the girl on a matter of discipline and followed her to the park to drag her home. She resisted, he beat her, and according to him, her friend pulled a knife on him and he stabbed them both to death. How many little girls carry knives? Yep.
I’m sure at this point some lawyer is salivating over the opportunity to show his moral superiority by defending this guy. It shows our amazing morality, doesn’t it, to defend criminals to the point of gaining their release at any cost, at any confusing flurry of words aimed at a jury, or exploiting every loophole in the legal code to give people who commit crimes as many rights as possible. The man who recently murdered Jessica Lunsford was a convicted sex offender living, without notice, in her neighborhood. He didn’t get found out because he was simply boarding with a relative, not owning any property in the neighborhood. Some lawyer defended him. Others debated, afterwards, whether it was alright to demand that convicted sex offenders wear locator bracelets. It shows our morality as a society to defend criminals to the point of freeing them on technicalities and allowing them to roam free and demanding parole for them, right? Especially if they are a minority. Then it’s just plain racist to demand justice for their crimes. Well, what is justice? Here’s my idea of justice: Not giving them the chance to hurt anyone else. Now, we can certainly debate the severity of crimes. Murder and rape should be #1. I don’t really give a rats ass about potheads or drug possession or financial crimes, compared to those. As far as I’m concerned marijuana should be legal, as this would remove potheads from general society since they’d be too high to remember to eat and they’d all wipe themselves out and stop singing crappy music. Sorry, tangent.
So why is it so important to defend murderers and rapists? Why do lawyers jump at the chance to defend these people? Because a moral society protects the weakest of their citizens, and people who commit crimes must be weak since they’ve given in to their animalistic nature. So, on the 1% chance that they might go out and commit another horrible crime, we press for their release, mistrials, appeals, parole, and their “rights”. They’re still human beings, right? Yes. Human beings who show a penchant for harming other human beings. It’d be immoral to lock them up and throw away the key, wouldn’t it? I’d say for this to not be a debate, we’d need some kind of average on the number of murderers who go on to murder again once out of jail. If it’s so much as 1%, then you’re sacrificing at least one human life for the “rights” of another. The harsh decision that has to be made is to imprison one person to protect another who wouldn’t commit these types of crimes. Our society simply lacks the stomach for it. So we flip to the other side and cry every time another victim is made but rush to defend whoever committed the crimes. We want to help. We want to *heal* them. To hell with the victims. Two little girls are dead because of one man’s “rights”. This should sicken you enough to give you the stomach to support jailing violent criminals for life.
And guess what? You’re going to be running a risk. A great example explaining the normal distribution shows the criminal system and shows a conservative approach to crime compared to a liberal approach to crime. The liberal approach to crime has 1% of people who are innocent being imprisoned and 5% of people who are guilty walking free (not actual figures, don’t start debating statistics with me, I’m too lazy to worry about the math). The conservative approach to crime has 5% of people who are innocent being imprisoned and 1% of people who are guilty walking free.
Which do we choose? What do you worry about more at night: Men with tortured souls crying in jail at night, and possibly innocent men being imprisoned, or two dead little girls? If you worry about the men with tortured souls, then your morality would lead you to kill a baby to save a puppy.