What a dilemma that is. This incident of the execution of Stanley William has stirred some thoughts in me. I feel that I have split personalities that are analyzing the situation and none of them is able to convince the other.
Bo3Bo3-A thinks that finally justice has been served. He strongly believes that blood is for blood. You murder someone, u pay exactly the same price, and that is ur life. 10, 20, or even 25 years later, as in the case of Stanley execution, it has to be served, justice that is. It's time for the families of the victims to feel peace at end.
Yet, Bo3Bo3-B thinks that this man is not the same man 25 years ago when he committed his crime. he is a changed man, and his actions are the best witness. He was even nominated for the Nobel peace prize for his actions to prevent gang fights, and to elevate the communities of poor neighborhoods. He is truly a changed man. Wasn’t 25 years in prison enough? God accepts repentance from those who go astray, and he would eliminate all the sins once someone repents back to him, why can't we?
So you see, I have this war inside of my mind (and such war is not really good for a dude who works with chemicals day in and out) that keeps going on and on and on. Not one side is able to convince the other side with any stand.
What is right? Vengeance calls seems not to leave us alone. Rigid justice seems to be always the most comfortable choice we choose. Should we re-evaluate our stand on capitol punishment? Or we should leave it alone to serve justice for those most affected by crimes. Is it for us to determine if the victims and their families should simply forget about their lost ones? I don’t know.