A Humble, Prudent, Simple, Unassuming Proposition
For Preventing Any
Further Disagreement over the Punishments Given to the Suspected Perpetrators
of Various Heinous Crimes, and for the Discouragement of All Crime in the
Entire Country as a Whole, Now and forever, for the Infinite Benefit of the Public.
It
is an unfortunate truth to any and all of those who travel, or make their way
through, or live in, or travel through to live in, or live in after having
traveled through, our great, prosperous country, that crime is ever rampant,
and that furthermore our judicial system is entirely incapable of doing
absolutely anything about it. Even the decisions that are made by the system
always lead to one side being dissatisfied, and the sentencing system leads to
all sorts of different punishments for all sorts of different crimes.
In
my humble, prudent, simple, and unassuming opinion, anyone who could provide a
decent, logical, and detailed plan by which to fix our judicial system should
be remembered and respected by everyone, ever, for all of eternity, and thus
showered with riches, and also rewarded with exemption from whatever system he proposes.
Now
that that has been said, let us turn our attention to the problem at hand.
After much careful thought and deliberation, I have come to the appalling
conclusion that our court system is entirely flawed and in some places simply
irreparable. It is true, some courts and cases are capable of producing some
satisfactory results, but, when discussing true justice, any non-satisfactory
court decision is absolutely inexcusable. Logically speaking, a satisfactory court
decision is one wherein justice wins, and herein lays the main flaw with our
system.
In
any court case, there are two sides, those being the prosecutor and the defendant.
The two tell their different sides of the story, present evidence to back their
various claims, and finally demand one thing or the other. The Judge, that is,
the representative of the court, and therefore of justice, then makes a ruling
in favor of the prosecution or the defense. Either the defense or the prosecution
wins, and because of this, the Judge, the one who represents justice, is
incapable of winning! Justice cannot win due to the actual inherent structure
of the court proceedings!
Thus,
in order to fix this grievous error in our judicial branch, I propose a simple
fix.
I
have been informed by a very knowing German-Chinese man of my acquaintance in
Bulgaria that crime is indeed wrong. Furthermore, one cannot do anything wrong
when they are dead. Thus, since it has been statistically proven that those who
have committed a crime are more likely to commit another crime, the only truly
viable punishment for any crime is death. As such, I propose that, no matter
what the crime, the punishment should always be immediate execution.
In a courtroom scenario,
this would allow for the complete elimination of the prosecution, and as such
the complete elimination of the defense. Only the guilty and the Judge would
remain, and since the guilty would be sentenced to death, the Judge would win.
Because of this, justice would win, since, of course, in any competition, the
person who stays alive the longest is generally deemed the winner.
A secondary and very
minor change that I would then tack on to the first would be the complete and
utter elimination of the judicial system as a whole. Instead, the person to
deliver the universal sentence of execution should be the person who catches
the guilty committing the crime. Since not every citizen is equipped with the
tools to kill a man on sight, this task would fall to the police, who would now
carry the responsibilities of the judge, the jury, and the executioner.
The recent non-indictment
and complete dismissal of many police brutality cases throughout the country
over the course of the past few months and years only evidences the fact that
proponents of the current judicial system would probably find the above to be a
welcome change, since they clearly support the decisions that these officers
are already making out in the field.
Now, if you will
forgive my little digression, I shall return to listing the benefits of such a
system, which I believe are plentiful and obvious.
For first, such a
system would discourage crime as a whole. I have it on good authority from my
German-Chinese friend that people, generally speaking of course, do not want to
die. Since that would be the punishment for crime, people would obviously no
longer want to commit crimes.
Secondly, execution has
the same effect on a human being no matter who they are, and as such the
punishment is entirely equal. There will no longer be any fear of discrimination,
since all crimes, big or small, and all people who commit them, would be
punishable and punished with the same thing, death.
Thirdly, as I have
stated before, such a system would allow justice to win in every case it is
presented, since the winner of the gunfight would usually be the police
officer, who is the representative of justice. Should the police officer lose,
other police officers would simply search for and kill the criminal. Ultimately,
a representative of justice would eventually kill the guilty, and should the guilty
ever die (which is inevitable) justice will have been served anyway.
Fourthly, such a system
would remove all the pesky details usually involved in crime fighting and
solving. All we have to do is simply trust the police officers and their judgment
without question, since they would be the envoys of justice.
Fifthly, as I have already
stated, it would get rid of the judicial system as a whole. Since there would
no longer be a court system to be corrupted, politicized, or dissatisfied with,
all corruption, politicization, and dissatisfaction within and surrounding the
court system would cease to exist.
Many other advantages
might be enumerated, one must only sit down and think about this genius of a
solution for a short while before even more come to mind. I can think of no one
objection that could possibly be brought up against this proposition that could
effectively disagree with the idea that it either prevents disagreements over
punishments given or discourages crime as a whole. Therefore, let no one talk
of these other, phony, apathetic and passive solutions; of learning to
recognize the influence of socially sanctioned hatred and discrimination: of
improving public access to judicial proceedings and the like: of encouraging
transparency in investigations: of discouraging polarization and politicization
of the courts and judges. Lastly, of encouraging honesty, discipline, decency, and
equality in the judicial system and the criminal justice system; let no man
talk to me of these expedients and the like of them, at least until he sincerely
believes that there is even the slightest hope of putting them into practice.
I profess, in complete
and utter honesty, that I have no involvement or personal interest in promoting
this system, seeing as I would be exempt from it because of the fact that I
created it. Thus, I remove any and all bias from my end, and present this fantastic
idea in the hopes of bettering my country.
No comments:
Post a Comment