Thou Shalt Not Kill, or Thou Shall Be Smitten

It has been said many a time that killing is wrong no matter who does it. While it is agreed upon that killing is wrong the question remains what is to be done with those who do it? What most people against the death penalty think is that prison for life is the best option for murders, because it is not for mere humans to decide who shall have life and who shall have it taken life. Thus the government being consisted of mere humans it seems inappropriate for the government to carry gods weight. Although life imprisonment has proven effective in the past, it is now an expensive option. Correctional facilities are over crowded, and this is becoming a strain on tax payers, since we just keep tucking the felons away. It is one closet that will hold only so many skeletons. While our current death penalty system is faulty, it does not mean the idea is wrong. One canine Californian law states that after 3 reported attacks the dog must be put down. Sound familiar to our 3 strikes law with felons? Difference is that in the end dogs don’t know any better, and react on instinct, whereas humans are to be above their instinct and are to react with reason. We don’t expect the dog to know any better, and understand that it can’t reason right from wrong sometimes but eventually if it is being a problem to society it is put down. Some might think that applying this reason to humans is ridiculous and ludicrous rationalization. We put ourselves above the canine species because we are able to rationalize, and therefore we should know better than to kill. It is obvious that if dogs aren’t above the rational influence, that they can’t be accountable for their actions; yet we “destroy” these creatures anyways. The question remains what is human kinds’ excuse? A dog’s nature propels him to attack until the threat of danger is gone; i.e. their adversary too weak to attack. We put ourselves above canines when it is we who are the brutal animals, killing our own kind sometimes for the

Cited: Barnet, Sylvan, Hugo Bedau, eds. Current Issues and Enduring Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking and Argument, with Readings 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. - Blackmun, Harry “Dissenting Opinion in Callins v. Collins.” Barnet : 645-648. - Bruck, David “The Death Penalty.” Barnet: 601-610. - Koch, Edward I “Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life.” Barnet: 601-605. - Kozinski, Alex and Sean Gallagher “For an Honest Death Penalty.” Barnet: 654-657.