So this is the first rant I am posting on the enema and to be truthful I am really unsure how good it is. That being said it is a rant and it goes off on a different tangent near the end so it meets the requirements of other rants I have read on the internet. So here it is, for better or worse (in the future I won’t be putting up these little notes before rants but for the first on I thought I would)

Note (this will appear before all rants): This is a political rant and is meant in no way, shape or form to end any discussions about anything. These rants are meant to start discussion and (hopefully) open some minds to new ideas. Also, these rants are written by fairly seasoned pompous asshole who will not respond to comments or questions. Now here’s Tom with the weather.

If it is morally wrong to kill someone, how can the state kill someone using moral authority as their justification?

Obviously, the issue of capital punishment is not this clean cut, if it was then capital punishment would not be an issue and it would not be state policy in any western nation. Now going over why the issue of capital punishment is so complex is not my purpose here, my purpose is to ask why we kill people to as a punishment for…well, killing other people. Is is the worst punishment we can think of? Is it to make an example of them? Is it to deter others from committing murder? Or are we stuck in a pattern of dealing out harsher and harsher punishments and sentences from crimes and have we reached a point where other alternatives need to be considered?

First, capital punishment is not the harshest punishment we can think of. Even though death is probably the scariest thing I can think of, it would be ignorant of me to think there is not any punishment that would not make me wish for death. Second and for that matter third, capital punishment does not deter people from killing, it may make them work harder to not get caught but it wont stop them if they really want to kill some one. This is obvious from the high (in comparison to other western nations) murder rates seen in the US.
So then is the answer in the fourth question? Why do we keep increasing sentences if it just leads to more people in prison and not less crime? For the past few decades all we have done is is increase sentences to deter criminals and from the looks of the current prison population numbers, it isn’t working.
Sadly, for both you and me (and especially that creepy looking dude bouncing a basketball in the corner*), I dont have the perfect answer for these questions but I do have a suggestion that by no means is original but has been so grossly ignored that…well im not any good with metaphors so I will just give my suggestion. It has two parts: first, the problem of poverty has never been seriously addressed. Poverty is still an glaring issue but no intiatives that will make any change have been in put into place by North American governments. We turn a blind eye to poverty and the despreration and problems it cause and then we complain about crime. Second, the systemic racism that exists within the justice system needs to be fixed. This is a momumentous problem but nevertheless one that needs to be addressed. This problem exists throughout North America and I see it first hand living in Saskatchewan. The overrepresentation of aboriginal people in our jails is disgusting yet this issue in not brought up in federally or provincial elections even though it would help everyone, aboriginal or not. But instead we ignore this problem, we look the other way and just make punishments harsher for the crimes, hoping that this time this same old strategy just might work.

*Old inside joke that likely no one will remember