KILL THE RAPIST, KILL THE TERRORIST, HANG THEM ALL!! Sounds like the cries of a 19th century lynch mob showing their superiority over a "lower" caste or race. But these are the voices of a 21st century populace, the only difference being that they expect the law and lawmakers to do the lynching and killing now.
Capital Punishment or the Death Penalty, although on the decline, is still alive in the world, and not only in countries that are run under the Sharia law or those run by communist or fascist governments, but also democratic countries like US and India. That is because it is the people from these liberal nations that support and want capital punishment alive.
From a survey conducted by me with a small uncontrolled group of people, 60% of the individuals prefer and support capital punishment. Of these, 70% + affirm that the death penalty makes them feel safer in society and they believe that the death penalty can be used to deter even those crimes that are impulsive. Those that support the death penalty do so to first incapacitate the criminal, prevent him perpetrating a crime again. Following incapacitation, as the reason to support capital punishment, is to deter future criminals and as retribution or punishment for the criminal. Terrorism, rape and murder are the dominant crimes that the supporters argue beseech capital punishment along with crimes on children, minors and teens.
Of the 40% that do not support capital punishment, 40% do so because of the lack of evidence that the death penalty can deter or reduce future crimes and the remaining are equally divided between human rights violation and that capital punishment could kill innocent people. 60-70% of these would not change their minds if it were proved that capital punishment could reduce crime rates or if the crimes were of a gruesome nature or even if the criminal/s were proven guilty without any doubt.
Let's get to my views on capital punishment, I am strongly against it for two reasons, I believe that the death penalty in no shape or form can act as a deterrent since most criminals function with the illusion of not getting caught in the first place. If a criminal can get intimidated by the death penalty then I think a life sentence will work just as well. Apart from the statistics, which show that capital punishment does not act as a crime inhibitor, I am of the view that most criminals have a distorted sense of morals brought on by situation/s or in rare cases their nurturing and the idea of punishment by death, a decade or more later will, not deter them. In cases where the criminal has planned his/her crime ,they will do so, so as not to get caught in the first place, making the deterrence of capital punishment a moot point.
Getting on to a higher ground, the question of human rights and the fact that the death penalty is a violation, I wouldn’t go so far as to endorse the rights of a criminal but I feel that, in a civilized society, the act of the death penalty is uncivilized and barbaric. I see capital punishment akin to war, both killing the guilty and leading to collateral damage in terms of killing the innocent. Why do we abhor and avoid war these days? Because we know it is a means to no end and that it is all but a cry of superiority, an act to show ‘who’s the boss’, an act of retribution and this is exactly what I see capital punishment as. It is nothing but a display of power and retribution, it serves no purpose. It will not help reduce crime nor will it provide comfort (maybe momentary) to those victimized, it only provides a sense of momentary relief to the lawmakers that they’re making the world a better place and to those victimized a fleeting sense of retribution.
In lieu of capital punishment, I propose we strive to improve our judicial systems to ensure those that are guilty get what they deserve (in terms of sentencing) and are impeded from committing the same crime again. We need to improve our prisons to accommodate more prisoners and ensure that the prisoners are detached from all types of luxury and conveniences. Solitary confinement and life imprisonment are viable options for those criminals who would otherwise be given the death penalty.
The advancement of society is as important as the advancement of science & technology, so let us learn to be more civilized and not kill for the sake of killing, break our pre-conceived notions and learn to be more effective and efficient without relying on the mediocrity of capital punishment.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Capital murder
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Against Indian Culture
How often have we heard or read these words. From what or whom are we trying to "protect" our fragile Indian culture? And are we really protecting the accurate form/s of Indian culture? Let's retrospect.
First of all, is our Indian culture (whichever form) so fragile that it needs protection in the first place? The best part about culture is that it can and should evolve and expand to capture the sensibilities of the current/living generation. Just as our understanding of the universe has progressed over generations so has our understanding of human emotion and psyche. That's what has led to the abolition of slavery, sati, child marriages, child labour etc. Our culture has evolved to accept that these acts were wrong and against humanity. So the protection of culture could be termed an oxymoron, as protection is against the very definition of a culture.
Now that we know that culture shouldn't be protected but allowed to grow let's question whether the culture that most Indians claim to be protecting are really indicative of Indian culture. On the forefront of the so called protectionists are Indian women and their behaviour in society. It is claimed that, according to Indian culture, women are supposed to be suppressed and have less freedom than Indian men. This includes draping their body with "decent" attire, no drinking or smoking in public and worst of all blaming the rape of a woman on the woman's indecency. We need to understand that the root of the inequality towards women stems from the archaic thought that men are superior to women and now that our present generation has (or have they?) learnt that that's wrong it's time our culture evolved into accepting equality for women. When these protectionists tell women to dress better to prevent being raped, I say tell the men to stop raping!! Maybe our culture should evolve to abhor rapists and punish them for the animals they are, that would make more sense as a culture.
The most widely used phrase by the so called protectionists is "westernization". Apparently our Indian culture is so fragile that a breeze from the west is enough to shake its foundations. Valentine's day, night clubs, divorce, nuclear families are the some of the few victims of westernization claims. Again, westernization is being mistaken for an evolution of culture that is growing to accept changes in human behaviour. Unfortunately for India, we started on the back foot of a history of deep rooted cultural and religious beliefs which pushed the inevitable evolution of our culture behind. And now that our culture has finally begun to evolve we are being criticized of aping the west, whose culture has had the luxury of evolving much earlier.
On a more positive note, although it will take a while for most Indians to adjust to this evolution of culture, I believe the transition will happen and no more will we, the progressive Indians, be accused of operating AGAINST THE INDIAN CULTURE.
First of all, is our Indian culture (whichever form) so fragile that it needs protection in the first place? The best part about culture is that it can and should evolve and expand to capture the sensibilities of the current/living generation. Just as our understanding of the universe has progressed over generations so has our understanding of human emotion and psyche. That's what has led to the abolition of slavery, sati, child marriages, child labour etc. Our culture has evolved to accept that these acts were wrong and against humanity. So the protection of culture could be termed an oxymoron, as protection is against the very definition of a culture.
Now that we know that culture shouldn't be protected but allowed to grow let's question whether the culture that most Indians claim to be protecting are really indicative of Indian culture. On the forefront of the so called protectionists are Indian women and their behaviour in society. It is claimed that, according to Indian culture, women are supposed to be suppressed and have less freedom than Indian men. This includes draping their body with "decent" attire, no drinking or smoking in public and worst of all blaming the rape of a woman on the woman's indecency. We need to understand that the root of the inequality towards women stems from the archaic thought that men are superior to women and now that our present generation has (or have they?) learnt that that's wrong it's time our culture evolved into accepting equality for women. When these protectionists tell women to dress better to prevent being raped, I say tell the men to stop raping!! Maybe our culture should evolve to abhor rapists and punish them for the animals they are, that would make more sense as a culture.
The most widely used phrase by the so called protectionists is "westernization". Apparently our Indian culture is so fragile that a breeze from the west is enough to shake its foundations. Valentine's day, night clubs, divorce, nuclear families are the some of the few victims of westernization claims. Again, westernization is being mistaken for an evolution of culture that is growing to accept changes in human behaviour. Unfortunately for India, we started on the back foot of a history of deep rooted cultural and religious beliefs which pushed the inevitable evolution of our culture behind. And now that our culture has finally begun to evolve we are being criticized of aping the west, whose culture has had the luxury of evolving much earlier.
On a more positive note, although it will take a while for most Indians to adjust to this evolution of culture, I believe the transition will happen and no more will we, the progressive Indians, be accused of operating AGAINST THE INDIAN CULTURE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
