Re: Attn jms: The moral obligation

 Posted on 6/18/2003 by to

>My question would deal with today's time. At what point would the killing
>of an individual be warrented?

The first answer, and the easy answer, is: in self-defense, in one's home or in

The less easy answer comes when you get into the legal system. Where does
justice end and vengeance begin?

I think that when you knowingly and deliberately take someone's life, you
forfeit your own. But for me, that means life without the possibility of
parole as a better option than the death penalty. (This is a position that's
taken me a while to get to, to be honest.)

The death penalty and life without parole both are deterrents in that they
permanently remove the offender from society, and I think life in prison is a
far worse fate than a quick death. The difference is that life without parole
allows for the possibility of correcting the few errors that get through, where
the death penalty does not.

The idea of taking someone's life, with malice aforethought (I'm not talkling
about accidental manslaughter or the like) and getting out in five to ten years
is abhorrent.

But that's just me.


(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine
and don't send me story ideas)