The right to take a life is something I’ve wrestled with since childhood. Some of the issues are included in the previous article, and this is a continuation.
Many years ago I met a high-ranking UK politician, the top legal adviser to the then Prime Minister. He had been a barrister and a judge, and had been involved in some trials when the death penalty had been passed (the last UK executions being in 1964). He talked about the atmosphere in the courtroom at the moment of sentencing, and the horrific emotion that welled within him and others present. From a humanitarian standpoint he told me he had concluded that the death penalty was simply wrong. And this came from a legal mind.
However a few decades later he had changed his mind, and was part of a pro capital punishment movement. One can only speculate why, presumably age had blunted his emotions and he now viewed the issue more coldly. If an eminent lawlord can change his mind it underlines the dilemma for the rest of us.
So where does that leave us? Where we started? Not quite. I guess it all goes to show that we should follow both our head and our heart.
For what it’s worth I’ve finally come to my own conclusion. I would support capital punishment, but with some caveats: firstly it would be only for the most evil of crimes, eg mass murder, and secondly there can be no doubt as to the perpetrator. Of course there must be a fair trial, and a mandatory appeal.
In addition I would respect others’ views and not be too proud to never change my mind.
2 thoughts on “The Right to take a Life, part 2”
Nice to know, thanks.