Okay, you're right...

Your "moon shot" post did mention a national prize. I was wrong.

District of Columbia vs Heller and its opinions will be released tomorrow after the 10 AM session begins, according to the latest news I have read. You are correct (again) in thinking I am anxiously awaiting the decision and the opinions. I read the transcripts of the arguments and some of the 50+ briefs filed from both sides, and I am confident that the ban will be over-turned. Hell, even the Brady Campaign has admitted defeat on this issue, and is calling for renewed efforts of gun regulation at a state, county and municipal level, rather than continued attempts at Federal regulation.

I am confident... but had you asked me, I'd have said that the "conservative" court we have today would have upheld the LA sentence of death for a confessed serial child rapist, too.

Anyone that knows me or has followed this blog for any length of time knows I am no fan of the death penalty, but as long as it remains the prerogative of the States to sentence convicted criminals to death, and those States follow the will of the people (which they do) in regard to its institution and application... I don't raise too much of a stink. I am also the FIRST to admit that in crimes involving violence against children, my position on the death penalty comes very close to out-right support. Any hesitation I feel in regards to the death penalty is based purely in my most deeply held religious beliefs, and as such, is very much outside of the bounds of any political debate or commentary I may wish to enter into... in other words, it is a "faith-based" position and not one I can rationally defend to someone that holds differing beliefs.

My position on the opinions given for the decision released today is this:

Both the Bible (Judeo-Christian) and the Qur'an (Islam) contain detailed descriptions of what sorts of punishments are to be applied for certain types of crimes. The most famous (and misunderstood) is from the Book of Exodus, Chapter 21 verse 23: "an eye for an eye". The Latin term for this kind of justice is lex talionis, and most modern scholars that I am aware of feel this was God's way of placing a "statute of limitations" on the prosecutors of crimes. No punishment should exceed the scope of the crime committed.

I, personally, disagree. I think God DID intend the punishment of crime (and serious sin, in general) to fit the scope of the crime. Some call this "tit for tat", and I guess it is. Most would argue that this kind of justice is too open to "cruel and unusual punishments", and perhaps they are... but I feel that many crimes deserve... no, DEMAND cruel and unusual punishment, as long is it doesn't exceed the scope of the crime. The premise that punishment for crimes should be painless is nearly asinine, in my eyes. Pain is something evolution has used to hone our survival skills with for hundreds of thousands of years... who are we to put it aside as an aide in shaping our society and its more difficult members? Don't we spank disobedient children so they learn what is good behavior and what is bad? Don't we learn at a very young age NOT to touch a hot iron by touching a hot iron? Isn't it possible that a young criminal would learn quicker that crime is BAD if he had to suffer (in the physical sense of the word) for his or her crime?

I'm not advocating torture, obviously... but hard, physical labor for those that repeatedly break society's laws is NOT cruel and is only unusual in that it is not employed enough in our society. 50 lashes with a bullwhip for an assault conviction would probably go a long way in assuring society that those convicted wouldn't repeat the crime. How many repeat drunk drivers do you think we'd have if we gave each FIRST conviction 60 days "breaking rocks" with a sledge hammer in the hot sun? If you don't break rocks fast enough, you get extra time put on your sentence... that should keep them out of the court system!

As far as raping children... in the worst sense of the term, too (as Ryan said)... I do find it difficult NOT to support a death sentence. To so brutalize a child of 8 years old (which the man in LA did) and later confess to it warrants no mercy, in my eyes... and I'm not the child's father. I can't imagine how I could hope to be merciful or forgiving if I were the child's father. Like Ryan said... I'd volunteer to pull the trigger myself, and do so with an absolutely clean conscience.

Just as there IS real evil in the world... there IS real justice, and while we may not be able to hand out God's own Justice... there is nothing to say that we can't be the instruments of God's own justice.