For so many years past, there was no death sentence in the country. There were heinous crimes but these were few and far between.
In the recent past, the death penalty law was passed and applied. But the number of heinous crimes even increased.
There must be something wrong here somewhere. Was it not said and is it not still claimed that killing criminals deters crimes? How come there are more crimes vis-à-vis the death penalty? This does not add up. The triumphant claims that the execution of criminals would lessen crime appear to be irrelevant to the rise or fall of the number of crimes.
The stark truth is that death penalty patrons would like to overlook the glaring fact that the number of heinous crimes rests closely affined with the abundance of prohibited drugs in the nooks and corners of the cities and municipalities all over the country.
Drug addicts acting on their base instincts are not deterred by the threat of death penalty. Reason: losing the dictate of reason and the power of reason, those under the influence of drugs are precisely in no position to think right, to decide well, to act properly. Killing drug addicts for the commission of heinous crimes while conveniently forgetting the immediate relevance of dangerous drugs thereto, is poor judgment to say the least.
Away with the death sentence!
It is not the only way to punish heinous criminals.
It is not the only means to serve justice.
The wisest judge may still err.
The convict may still be innocent.
There must be something less heinous than death penalty.
There must be a better way to prevent crime.
10 July 1999