Responding to a response:Death penalty redux

Received this response (from someone called Zoom) to my death penalty column a little while ago:

Hi. I just saw your death penalty piece on Commondreams.org.

You know, I agree with much of what you say, and especially this sentence: “Capital punishment is essentially nothing more than premeditated murder, a revenge killing dressed up as an act of justice.”

But when you ask this question…

“On what ethical grounds can we send a man to death if there is even the slightest of chances that he was not guilty?”

…for me, it begs the question “On what ethical grounds can we send a man to prison if there is even the slightest of chances that he was not guilty?”

I’m curious how you might respond to that.

Well, here goes: The difference between life in prison and the death penalty is that there always is a chance with life in prison to free an innocent man. It would remain a tragic story, but not final. The death penalty can never be revoked.

It is, unfortunately, fine line.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

Author: hankkalet

Hank Kalet is a poet and freelance journalist. He is the economic needs reporter for NJ Spotlight, teaches journalism at Rutgers University and writing at Middlesex County College and Brookdale Community College. He writes a semi-monthly column for the Progressive Populist. He is a lifelong fan of the New York Mets and New York Knicks, drinks too much coffee and attends as many Bruce Springsteen concerts as his meager finances will allow. He lives in South Brunswick with his wife Annie. View all posts by hankkalet