Hypothesis: Due to the dubious and unproved value as a deterrent to violent crime, the inequity and mistakes inevitable in any system of justice instituted and administered by fallible human beings and the degrading and hurtful impulse toward retribution and revenge that it expresses, the abolition of capital punishment should be still maintained in Australian society.
Violent crime abhors most of us, and outrages our sense of morality. But more than that, it offends our sense of safety and well being within our communities. It tears at the very fabric of society. For many, the response to crimes of a violent nature is calls to "get tough on crime". (Philips,J.H,1987) Some years ago, former West Australian Premier Richard Court mooted the idea of the reintroduction of the death penalty in Australia for violent crimes. The logic is essentially, "you killed someone, so we'll kill you". Some call on religious authority- "an eye for an eye." (Opas, P.1996) There's a big problem with this logic. Proponents of the death penalty claim ownership of the moral high ground in their arguments regarding murder, rape and other crimes. They claim the violence and immorality of the crime gives them a right to demand that they be able to do the same thing- to take the life of the perpetrator of the alleged crime. If a government commits murder, does it not commit a crime? Or do we merely accept that because the government is a democratically elected body, that it has legitimacy, and therefore a right to do what is otherwise illegal? When is it right, or just, for the state to kill? Australians have not had to confront this uncomfortable issue for more than a generation. Like the right to vote, to gather and to speak freely, the right of a person to live whatever their crime is a foundation stone of Australia's progressive liberal democracy.
The term 'capital punishment' is derived from the Latin caput, meaning 'head'.
