Sanity before a death penalty
The concept of using medicine to induce sanity before a death penalty is cruel in one point of view and just in another. In the ruling of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Arkansas that allow the government to use force to return sanity to the man sentenced to the death penalty is, as claimed by David Kaczynski, the Executive Director of New Yorkers Against the Death Penalty, as “absurd.”
This case presents a moral dilemma that can be presented as either something that should be done or something that should not even be conceived of, depending on whose point of view it is. Personally, I believe that sanity should not have been forced on those who will incur the death penalty for two reasons. First is that the spirit of the use of the death penalty does not require the sanity of a man, and second is that it degrades the profession from something that is to be regarded as life-saving to something that can be used to take away life, or worse, subject the patient to torment.
In the fist point of contention, the death penalty is in legislation for two reasons: deterrence and the termination of recidivist offenders. If these are the reasons why the death penalty was instituted, then, the reason for inducing sanity to the convicted serves no purpose other than to torment the person into facing his death. While this may seem a just penalty to others, we must take a closer look at the state of insanity the convicted prisoner has experienced.
There are a number of variables that result in a person’s insanity, the underlying triggers are always stress and anxiety combined with other factors. In the prisoner’s case, then, whatever has caused him to crack is mostly attributed to the fact that he was caught and sentenced to death penalty, which is already stress-inducing in itself. If the reason for induced sanity is to hammer in the consequences of his actions, then what he felt under the intense pressure of his sentence is already...