This is such a loaded topic and was one I hesitated entering in to as I want to avoid losing the respect of my friends here....
As a rule I don't agree with state imposed punishments. I don't believe that prisons work as a form of rehabilitation and I certainly don't agree with the concept of some form of communal vengeance in the form of execution being meted out under the masquerade of justice against those who cannot afford the best legal representation.
BUT
I don't see the execution of serial killers as being a matter of justice or vengeance or punishment, rather than the killing (and I'm not shying away from the term - it's not execution, which I don't support and it's not euthanasia which I do support) of a sick and dangerous animal - the rabid dog analogy I used before was purposeful.
I don't necessarily hold with a concept of the "sanctity of human life" - above other life at least. I do believe that the definition of human cannot be contained in merely the biological or genetic definition. And while I can't pretend to know where "humanity" starts, I would suggest that the killing of others to fulfill an essentially sexual desire or need is well past where it ends. So I guess I view the killing of sexually motivated serial murderers as being self defence on a communal level.
Solutions such as chemical castration generally don't work - in fact there is some evidence to suggest that it might make a bad situation much worse in that chemical castration doesn't remove the "desire" it only inhibits the ability. A situation which can lead to deep frustration that may only be "relieved" in more violent and dangerous ways.
(and in cases such as John Wayne Gacy, Fred West, Dennis Nillsen, Jeffrey Dahmer etc, there was ZERO doubt that they had committed these murders)
This is such a difficult subject and like the rest of life, I don't think it can be dealt with in purely black and white terms.
As a rule I don't agree with state imposed punishments. I don't believe that prisons work as a form of rehabilitation and I certainly don't agree with the concept of some form of communal vengeance in the form of execution being meted out under the masquerade of justice against those who cannot afford the best legal representation.
BUT
I don't see the execution of serial killers as being a matter of justice or vengeance or punishment, rather than the killing (and I'm not shying away from the term - it's not execution, which I don't support and it's not euthanasia which I do support) of a sick and dangerous animal - the rabid dog analogy I used before was purposeful.
I don't necessarily hold with a concept of the "sanctity of human life" - above other life at least. I do believe that the definition of human cannot be contained in merely the biological or genetic definition. And while I can't pretend to know where "humanity" starts, I would suggest that the killing of others to fulfill an essentially sexual desire or need is well past where it ends. So I guess I view the killing of sexually motivated serial murderers as being self defence on a communal level.
Solutions such as chemical castration generally don't work - in fact there is some evidence to suggest that it might make a bad situation much worse in that chemical castration doesn't remove the "desire" it only inhibits the ability. A situation which can lead to deep frustration that may only be "relieved" in more violent and dangerous ways.
(and in cases such as John Wayne Gacy, Fred West, Dennis Nillsen, Jeffrey Dahmer etc, there was ZERO doubt that they had committed these murders)
This is such a difficult subject and like the rest of life, I don't think it can be dealt with in purely black and white terms.
Comment