by slim'n'none

Created on: July 16, 2008

It has been said, and famously so, that treason, is a matter of dates. I prefer to think of it as which side of the fence you sit on. Men the British considered, and indeed hanged, for treason, we hail as heroes. Now, given the facts of those cases, either side could be said to be legal, and indeed the legality of it is as much a question of the dates as anything else.

The colonists claimed they were a new country, no longer subjects of the crown. Britain's empire said they weren't, and claimed that they were in fact citizens of the British Empire. Rule Britannia. The outcome remained to be seen at the time, though history has since passed down its own verdict. Had the British won the war, the men would have been traitors in fact. As it stands, they are wrongfully convicted patriots.

Now, the point of this opening has been as much to define exactly what treason is, as it pertains to this debate. Simply put, being a traitor requires you to be a member of the organization you're doing your spying on. If you're not a member, then you are simply a spy. So, to be considered for the crime of high treason against the state, legally, you must first be a citizen. No one who is not a citizen can be tried, convicted or executed for treason. They must be tried for something else. Now that we know what treason is, we can move on to how to deal with it.

The answer, to whether traitors should receive the death penalty vs. life imprisonment is really, quite simple. It is, in essence, an argument over whether or not the death penalty is acceptable. It is. In fact, not only is it acceptable, it is necessary for a wide range of crimes, and, if handled appropriately should be a great deal cheaper than simply imprisoning a man or woman for life.

In this debate, the opponents of the death penalty have made several points. Some good, some, absolutely horrible, and some were utterly unconnected to the debate and so are irrelevant. But, in good faith, I will tackle each argument one at a time.

The worst of these articles completely fails to address the question at hand. Instead, the author the current lowest ranked article goes of on an anarchist tangent calling for the dissolution of the current government. Fortunately for him, his writing is in a country where freedom of speech is guaranteed, even if it be against the current government, so long as it does not incite the public to take up arms against that government. However, his essay is at best poorly written, consisting of one giant

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next Page >>