After watching this debate over capital punishment rage on for years, with no sign of a successful conclusion ever being reached, I believe that I have come up with a plan that would be acceptable to all.Many find our current method of punishing and executing criminals to be deficient, claiming that the system is racist and that our society is too quick to take the lives of others. Fans of capital punishment, however, claim that the threat of death acts as a powerful deterrent to crime.What we need is a method of capital punishment which will truly be a deterrent and not be applied haphazardly. We need a method of execution, which makes society personally responsible for the lives of its citizens. Based on these guidelines, I truly, completely and thoroughly endorse a program of public stoning.”Why stoning?” you ask. “Isn’t stoning passe? It hasn’t been popular for at least a thousand years.” Like all good fashions, I believe that death by stone will make a comeback and I feel that now is the time. Public stoning is a punishment mentioned in the Bible. Public stoning is still practiced in many different parts of the world. In fact, just last week a teenage couple was stoned to death by their village. These young lovers wouldn’t tell you that stoning is outdated.Public execution makes the general public personally culpable for the lives of its criminals. In the past, witnesses to hangings, guillotinings and beheadings were ensuring that justice was meted. Stoning takes that one step further, making those throwing stones personally responsible for executing the sentence.But who should throw the stones? If it is left open, might you just get a bunch of crazies and weirdos? I feel that those who declare the sentence should carry it out. The jury is a random group of people, already called together to decide the criminal’s fate. By now, they are responsible for deciding whether the accused should live or die. Allowing them to carry out the sentence closes the circle, and provides closure for all involved.As mentioned above, the current system of enforcing justice can be applied haphazardly and injudiciously. Forcing the jury to act as executioner will sober those who are quick to declare “Death!” No longer could jurists assuage guilty consciences by pawning off the execution upon some hooded, anonymous Executioner. This would dramatically cut down on the number of people sentenced to die.Of course, I know that some of you still aren’t convinced that public stoning is the correct way to go. You ask, “But isn’t that cruel and unusual punishment? Stones hurt. Shouldn’t we be more humane to our citizens?” Which is more humane: a fairly quick execution, or 70 years in a concrete cell? Personally, since death is the end result in both cases, I’d rather get it over with sooner that later. It may be a little cruel, but certainly no more cruel than the actions which brought the accused to this point in their life. And if we make it common practice in this country, it can’t very well be considered “unusual.”I feel that I have made a good case for public stoning, listing the positives and countering any objections, so that the reasonable person has no choice but to believe in the wisdom of this course of action. For the reasons listed above, I wholehearted endorse the idea of instituting public stonings as the method of execution in the United States.
Kevin Quinn is a senior English major from Akron, Ohio.