THE EDITOR: Trinidad is being bombarded with violence and horrifying homicide. A kindly, gentle people now live in fear because the Government is not tough enough on crime.
Maintaining a stable society involves giving citizens a sense of justice when they are victims of crime.
The death penalty may seem inhumane to some but that is a value judgment not universally accepted.
In what respect is it inhumane? What religious criteria are being used? What philosophical considerations will be argued? And by whom?
I have difficulty understanding what is inhumane about executing a murderer who has been found guilty and has had due process under our laws.
We expect others to repay our loans.
It is a form of reciprocity that underlines all human relationships.
Justice is also a form of reciprocity. It strengthens a society by implementing laws that embody agreed-on moral values.
It is certainly better that all societies no longer employ the death penalty. Unfortunately, when a society faces widespread evil, as TT does, it must have the courage to employ strategies to eliminate that evil.
That evil exists there is no doubt. It is reflected in the intentions and consequences of human beings to harm others.
All societies have a concept of right and wrong, and corresponding concepts of good and evil. Good actions are rewarded, bad ones punished.
And murder is the ultimate evil.
Execution may/may not deter others from committing murder.
But it will certainly forever deter the murderer. He/she will never be able to harm others, and society will be a little safer.
Execution will give the parents and relatives of the victim a sense that our society takes their suffering seriously.
Murderers also shudder at the thought of being executed.
Our politicians are too pusillanimous to take the initiative to implement the law.
If TT is truly independent, our politicians must show courage and initiative when our existence is threatened. That would be a justification for the big salaries and pensions we pay them.