nger is pointing to its own actions. Learning morals is only as hard as people make it. Why complicate things? Some people think that restitution is granted when one is sentenced to the death penalty. However, if a loved one is murdered and his family feels justice in having the murderer done the same, is it not considered equally demented? Forgiving and forgetting are entirely out of the question, but one should consider the concept of regret and remorse. Just as one feels terrible and wishes the benevolence of their neighbor when wrongfully driving through his yard, surely a murderer may feel the same. One is only human and no one can expect any more. A mistake is a mistake, no matter whom it may harm or what destruction it may cause. There's always the chance of the innocent being in the wrong place at the wrong time. A handful of evidence from a strong lawyer could sentence someone to life in prison, and even the death penalty. One could be spending and ending his life in captivity for simply walking down the wrong street on the wrong day. Should he have to serve the time that's not rightfully his and take the needle that shouldn't prick his skin? It's a small fault in the justice system that is not easy to overcome, but that's someone's life, and not knowing the truth could be devastating. Abraham Lincoln declared, "All men are created equal." This statement of truth has obviously been left out of consideration in the court room. The man that sits upon the bench in this room is no more entitled to justice than the one that sits in the defendant's seat. Everyone deserves a second chance because they are all capable of reformation. Is the reasoning not simply to teach a lesson that one punishes another? The offender should have the chance to go back into the world and prove himself honorable. May he that makes no mistakes take the rights of he that made the big one. A crime is a crime, be it desiring a brother's wife, or shooting her...
