By: Brendan Moriarty 04/28/96
-Preface: Let it be noted now that this speech is very opinionated.
I strongly believe that the Death Penalty is a form of punishment to be used when needed. Which opens up the question, when should it be used? That may be the breaking point in a lot of arguments, deciding when to use the death penalty is a very touchy subject. I believe that only murderers deserve the death penalty, but I do not believe that all murderers should receive it as punishment. In cases where someone was killed in self defense, the 'murderer' should not receive the death penalty. But when someone is killed in cold blood then there should be a consideration. Again, not all cold blooded murderers should receive it. Premeditated and sometimes on the spot murders are also candidates, but that depends on how the victim was treated before the murder. Was he/she abused or tormented in a severe way? Or was the victim raped? I would also take into account, the number of people killed by the murderer. Those are not the only things to take into account, but I will stop here.
It was August 3, the year was 1986. A man named Esquel Banda had just raped, stabbed and strangled a 74 year old widow by the name of Merle Laird in her own house. Banda then sucked the blood from the woman's mouth.
Does that describe a kind, gentle man, who is not a threat to society? A man who values life or a man that deserves life when he seems so eager to destroy it? I certainly wouldn't think so.
Some people believe that the death penalty is wrong, what do you think? Is it OK for a man to commit heinous murders but not OK for our valued legal system, who's outcomes depend on ordinary people like you and me, to decide to terminate that mans life for his crimes to others?
The death penalty is just that; a penalty. Its intention is not to present an example to others, to show them 'not to commit murders, or this may happen to you...',...