Advocacy Letter Draft 1- WIP

This is my first and  draft of my and very rough draft of my advocacy letter to my local state representative. I apologize for the awkward spacing… this blog is a bit difficult to format.

April 10, 2013

Hon. Samuel H. Smith

109 Indiana Street

Suite 3

Punxsutawney, PA 15767

Mr. Smith,

First off, my name is Hannah Allen and I am an Animal Science major at the Pennsylvania State University. I am writing to personally advocate for a cause that I feel very strongly about. One I feel that you could make a great improvement in if you chose to do so. The issue that I am speaking about is capital punishment.

I grew up in the Corsica area with a local attorney as a father. Much of my life, I was exposed to the legal system at its personal level. Our legal system in general is something that strikes many with a bitter taste, and as a child it was difficult to hear teachers, loved ones and even friends talk about the “crooked attorneys.” It is always trying to not to reply with spiteful and venomous words, just to defend a loved one. In school, I once had government teacher ask me how my father lived with himself, knowing he was defending guilty people. So, I asked him. He replied to me without furor and explained that the issue of guilt was not his job to decide. Our legal system is designed so that there are checks and balances. It was just his job to ensure that every person he defended got a fair chance. He said that in law school, they were exposed to the old maxim, “It is better for ten guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to be convicted.” This got me to thinking, as humans, it is impossible for us to be accurate all the time, mistakes are made.

This has led me to develop a particular interest in a commonly debated issue regarding our legal system nowadays, the approval and implementation of capital punishment. I fail to understand how capital punishment can be accepted as appropriate for usage in a system run by humans, humans that inevitably make mistakes. As well trained and honorable in intention our juries can be, it is foolish to assume that they are always right. Now, I understand that there is rarely certainty in the world, this is unavoidable. However, I fail to see how we can decide that something as final as the decision to end a life can be based upon uncertain reasoning.  While it is natural to desire ultimate retribution against the villains of society, as the superior species we must embrace and develop the restraint to not act on our primal instinct to seek vengeance.

Also, is it not true that the primary purpose of punishment for correction? As citizens of the United States, we pride ourselves on our diversity and acceptance of those who are different than us. I understand that we must implement laws and consequences protect citizens. Yet, the concept of doing to a murderer what he did to his or her victim seems to feel like pure retribution. Revenge just does not seem to fit into the compassionate and “new beginning” type of ideals we as a country hold dear. Punishments and legal structure provide the backbone for rules and allow society to function with some sort or order and efficiency and deter the individual from repeating the mistake he or she made, while deterring others. I cannot help but wonder how capital punishment fits into all of this. How is an individual supposed to right the wrongs they committed, or even simply come to see that they are wrong if they are eliminated from this earth? If rules and legislation are around to better humanity, is this not supposed to be through teaching as opposed to simply eradicating those who exhibit repulsive behavior?

The implementation of the death penalty may provide a solution for keeping our citizens safe from dangerous characters and ultimately punishing them for their wrongs, but it is simply too final. The reality is that yes, everyone does make mistakes. As humans we are taught to learn from our mistakes and attempt not to repeat them. The sentiment is nice in theory, but when a human life is concerned humanity cannot afford to take the chance. The death penalty may be considered a perfect punishment. The fact of the matter is that this is an imperfect world. It is not that humans are never to be trusted, weaknesses just must be recognized. In order to function properly the trust we put in each other and ourselves must be sensibly placed. We have neither the authority nor the discretion to take and spare human lives at will.

In the sciences, we constantly have to make allocations for “human error.” While the concept is broad, its truthfulness is undeniable. Nothing developed or decided by humans can ever be considered completely foolproof. I implore you, enlighten our state’s legal system to acknowledge this error in our nature. We must ensure that not one innocent man is convicted. The government must protect and enrich its citizen’s lives, not end them.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Hannah K. Allen

Undergraduate, Animal Sciences

Schreyer Honors College

The Pennsylvania State University

PH(814)715-2357

hka5026@psu.edu