An eye or two for a crime
SHOULD we abolish the death penalty and maintain life imprisonment? My answer is neither!
We seem to feel that there is no alternative although both “solutions” are NOT working.
Other than as punishment (or vengeance), what benefit does the death of the convict provide? The victims and their families do not get any benefit at all except to vent their rage as revenge. However, in the revolutionary alternative I am suggesting, other people can truly benefit even when the convict is alive.
Also, there is a good opportunity for the criminal to reform and contribute to society. It is almost guaranteed that the criminal would never repeat his crime!
As we know, the death penalty is NOT really a deterrent for would-be criminals. For example, drug smuggling cases continue to increase even though in Malaysia we impose the mandatory death sentence for those caught! Also, death is not really a deterrent for those with blind loyalty to some cause. In fact, many (like suicide bombers and extremists) may feel pride in dying for their cause. Even for such cases, I think my suggested punishment would be more effective as a deterrent.
Life imprisonment also creates several major problems. Firstly, more money needs to be shelled out by taxpayers to build more prisons and for wages to staff the prisons. Secondly, even parolees may relapse into their former criminal ways. Thus, long jail terms may not actually rehabilitate the convicts.
So what is my revolutionary suggestion that could be more effective as a deterrent, allow a better chance for penance and reform for the convict as well as provide some restitution to the public?
My suggestion is that those convicted of violent crimes (like rape, armed robbery and murder) who have been sentenced to death or life imprisonment be instead compelled to donate their eyes to an eye bank. Don’t be shocked! It is not as inhumane as hanging or spending the rest of their life behind bars.
My reasoning is simple:
1. Restitution: While killing the convict or keeping him imprisoned for life will not benefit anyone, donating his eyes to those who need them is immediately doing a good deed. He might have taken a life or caused lifelong trauma (in rape cases) to his victims so by giving up his eyes, he will give light to others. This is immediate restitution.
2. Deterrent: I believe it is a great deterrent. Even the criminal who is not afraid to die would think twice about having to lose his sight. Most of the time, these criminals act violently and cruelly because they feel they have power and strength.
3. No relapse: On losing his sight, the convict has to learn again to just live day to day– to walk, read Braille, and etc. Immediately, he loses the so-called power that enabled him to hurt others. The chances of him ever repeating his heinous crime is almost zero. I have not heard of sightless robbers (except in movies) or rapists. I don’t think one could even become a snatch thief when one cannot see!
4. Chance to repent and reform: The convict now has the opportunity to reflect on and really think about his actions and life. Thus, there is every chance that he may truly repent and reform.
The convicts whose eyes are donated can be put under the care of the Malaysian Association for the Blind (MAB) and given special counselling for six months to a year until they have adjusted to the loss of their sight.
The money saved from having to build more prisons and staffing them can be channelled to a national eye foundation or MAB, which can use the funds to improve the lives of the many unfortunate blind people in this country.
Perhaps the eye operations can even be reversed (depending on the convicts’ behaviour and state of medical science). Recently, I had two eye operations and there was no pain.
I hope my revolutionary suggestion can be carried out humanely and in the best interest of all the people involved – the victims and their family, the criminal as well as the public.
CONTRARY BUT RATIONAL Klang