Life is a basic human right which every human being is entitled to. Life is sacred and as much as possible; it should be preserved and protected until natural death occurs. However, under some conditions, an individual may be deprived the right to life due to a number of reasons. This will greatly depend on the individual’s country of residence, since different countries issue different punishments regarding the same crime.
For example, in the United States of America, different states assign different punishments for murder. There are a total of 36 states which still execute capital punishment as punishment for murder, while the rest execute a life imprisonment (Prejean, 1996). This remains a challenge to the entire policy making system of America. It remains a dilemma why a criminal in the same country should face heavier judgement than another in the same country, yet they have committed the same crime. In real terms, there should be a uniform implementation of similar jurisdiction regardless of the place of residence.
Cases of lenient application of policies in some areas have made them targets of criminal activities. Criminals will feel ‘safer’ in the areas where the laws are soft since they are assured to go through the punishment and hopefully come back to the society, and continue with their anti-social life.
In conclusion, it should be clarified that no matter where a citizen lives, laws should be applied firmly, with the same weight. It defeats logic when criminals move to a different state to commit crime, simply because they believe they will face a more lenient judgement than if they committed the same crime in their state (Constanzo, 1998). Crime should be punished with the same seriousness, as a way of promoting national security.
Reference List
Constanzo, M. (1998). Just revenge: Costs and consequences of the death penalty. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Prejean, H. (1996) Dead man walking: An eyewitness account of the death penalty in the United States. New York: Vintage Books.