Statistics show that the prison system is working. Crime rates are down, and people are becoming more civilized. While this is a valid point, consider the number of repeat offenders. “Today more than two million people are incarcerated in state and federal prisons, 600,000 are released every year, and within three to five years 50 to 60 percent return to prison for committing new crimes or for violating their conditional releases” (Jablecki). Too many people are coming out of jail and committing a crime again. I believe that if a person is “sick” enough to rape a woman once, jail will not teach him anything. This person will sit in jail for several years, and then come out of jail and possibly do it again. In 2000, the median jail sentence for “violent felonies” was sixty-three months (US Department of Justice). Is it likely that a person who commits a violent felony will be completely cured after just more than 5 years of prison? These statistics can only be valid if a judge finds the person guilty and worthy of jail.

Many people use the defense of “mentally ill” in order to excuse a crime. This is a very sensitive topic because it is dealing with sick people. While it is not the person’s fault that he is born ill, it is also not society’s fault. If somebody is sick enough that he can kill a person who looks at him odd while walking down the street, then this person cannot be in society. If he is not in an asylum, the only way to eliminate the issue from the community is to kill the person. This may seem insensitive, but when dealing with serious crimes, sensitivity cannot play a role.

I believe that the best way of eliminating evil is to first define evil, and then kill the evil people in a community. Not only would this prevent people from doing something horrible, but it would prevent first-offenders from doing it again. The first offense would also be the last offense. In addition to the plan being more effective and reaping immediate results, it would also be much more cost friendly. By killing the people who commit serious crimes, these numbers can be cut. Even though it would cost some money to carry out my plan, it would not come close to the amount it would cost to keep putting people in prisons. “California state government expenditures on prisons increased 30% from 1987 to 1995, while spending on higher education decreased by 18%” (National Association of State Budget Officers). If something works better and it is cheaper to implement it, why not incorporate the plan? Not only would there be less government spending on jails, but there would be more spending on beneficial programs like education. This could also help in the efforts because more educated people are often considered less likely to commit a crime. This would create a domino effect, and in turn, would reduce the spending even more. The only X-factor is that there must be a specific person or organization that is in charge of carrying out the punishment. If random people start running around the community killing the evil people, chaos will ensue.

BackToChapterList