‘Killing people is wrong’, a statement everyone can stand behind, however, in some arguments, would depend on who did the killing (Koch 483). The death penalty has been under the watchful eye of the United States population for some time now, and has developed an audience on both sides of the argument. Many believe the death penalty is morally wrong, alluding to scriptures from the Bible. Others would argue the death penalty is a way of justice for the murderers and ultimately for the victims. The light shed from opposing views could help reach a resolve and put the issue at rest, however, in the meantime, one must pull from both sides to decide for themselves. In an article written by David Bruck, “The Death Penalty”, the opposition’s voice
…show more content…
In a case involving Joseph Carl Shaw, Buck outlines the morality of condemning a man by the same means he was convicted, murder. Shaw was convicted of murdering two teen girls while employed at Fort Jackson and later sentenced to the electric chair. Shaw’s last words were, ‘Killing was wrong when I did it. It is wrong when you do it…’ (Buck 490). One can certainly notice the irony of such a situation. Why would the government of a state use murder to bring a murderer to justice? Buck shakes the room with the thought of a killer trying to teach the American people a moral lesson. Shaw might have had a point, but Koch seems to take a different approach. Koch admits that “life is indeed precious” and believes the law of the death penalty assists such a fact (483). “Had the death penalty been a real possibility in the minds of these murderers, they might well have stayed their hands” (Koch 483,484). To combat the morality of the penalty Koch, alludes the Torah. Sharing that the early teachings of Judaism did not condemn capital punishment. Koch goes continues to defend his stance by stating if the government strikes fear into criminals by the death penalty, there is a possibility they will not commit the murder. Koch also believes that if society denies harsh consequence to criminals, it is highly likely they will commit more crimes. Even though there are murderers who don’t receive the death penalty Koch rebuttals with a case involving Richard Biegenwald. Biegenwald served “eighteen years for murder” and after his sentence he committed four more murders (Koch 485). This doesn’t defend the entire system but is something to keep in
In a case involving Joseph Carl Shaw, Buck outlines the morality of condemning a man by the same means he was convicted, murder. Shaw was convicted of murdering two teen girls while employed at Fort Jackson and later sentenced to the electric chair. Shaw’s last words were, ‘Killing was wrong when I did it. It is wrong when you do it…’ (Buck 490). One can certainly notice the irony of such a situation. Why would the government of a state use murder to bring a murderer to justice? Buck shakes the room with the thought of a killer trying to teach the American people a moral lesson. Shaw might have had a point, but Koch seems to take a different approach. Koch admits that “life is indeed precious” and believes the law of the death penalty assists such a fact (483). “Had the death penalty been a real possibility in the minds of these murderers, they might well have stayed their hands” (Koch 483,484). To combat the morality of the penalty Koch, alludes the Torah. Sharing that the early teachings of Judaism did not condemn capital punishment. Koch goes continues to defend his stance by stating if the government strikes fear into criminals by the death penalty, there is a possibility they will not commit the murder. Koch also believes that if society denies harsh consequence to criminals, it is highly likely they will commit more crimes. Even though there are murderers who don’t receive the death penalty Koch rebuttals with a case involving Richard Biegenwald. Biegenwald served “eighteen years for murder” and after his sentence he committed four more murders (Koch 485). This doesn’t defend the entire system but is something to keep in