Dead Man walking was an extraordinary and really thought provoking movie that got me to re-examine some of my fundamental beliefs of the death penalty. It's the first time I actually saw a video so graphic about death row. It was so detailed and it showed us how the inmate on death row felt through out the process. I use to be all for death row. My beliefs were you take a life your life shall be taken with no mercy. That's what my religion also taught me an eye for an eye. But after watching Dead Man Walking it got me thinking the criminals on death row do deserve there sentence but taking away a life is in god's hand not ours. I liked when Sister Helen asked Phelps "Aren't there, I argue, some rights fundamental to human beings-- such as the right not to be tortured or killed-- that everyone, including governments, must respect? Doesn't the moral foundation of a society erode if its government is allowed to treat these fundamental, nonnegotiable rights as some sort of privilege, which they take on themselves to dispense for good behaviour or withdraw for bad behaviour?" We are all entitled to life with out torture with out worry of some day are life being taken away.
The government should respect this not go against are right and put an end to our life. The long appeal process seams to insure a fair trial but in reality the prisoner's success depends on how good of a lawyer he can afford.
Rayfay and Burns only 18 years old and Washington already consider that if they find them guilty they will put them on death row. The only thing that stopped Washington was on the basis of extradition. A death sentence goes against section 7 of the Charter of rights and freedom stating that, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of the fundamental justice." When sentencing some to death row you're taking away his right of life liberty and security. You might think well they deserve it because they committed the crime they have to do the time. But you have to look at it as were human we makes mistakes some of us make small ones others make bigger ones but were also entitled to a second chance. Youth live life by taking risk sometimes but you got to understand at the age of 18 you're still immature I know I am. This is the age were you think your invincible, these mistake are big for sure they can not go unpunished but they shouldn't be dealt with by death sentence. It all so violates constitutional prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" and other provisions of the Bill of Rights.
People also change just like Matthew Poncelet in the end he realised that what he did was wrong and he asked for forgiveness if he wasn't sentenced to death Matthew Poncelet could have had time to repent for his since. He could also have a chance to pay-back society. A great example of contribution to the society is the case of Leopold and Loeb. They kidnapped and murdered a 14 year old boy to see what it was like. They both were spared the death penalty and were sentenced to life. Together, their accomplishments included working at hospitals, teaching illiterates to read, creating a correspondence school, making significant developments in the World War II Malaria Project and writing a grammar book. A great amount of people were directly helped by Leopold and Loeb and both of them made a conscious commitment to atone by serving others. Now when people ask me if I am for or against the death penalty all I'll tell them is, are we justified in playing God by determining another's date of death?
People seem to understand that life precious and life for a life is the way to be looked at it.