On Tuesday I was listening to the Fresh Drive on 5fm. I have not heard such a heated show in a very, very long time. Fresh prompted a discussion about the 12 year old boy who was murdered by his victim. yes that sentence is a bit screwy, but true.
The boy had just robbed a man of his cellphone. The man apparently chased the boy who dropped the cellphone in the process. The man picked up the phone, fired a warning shot and then shot the boy in the upper body which killed him.
The debate on the Fresh drive was fought, and I mean fought, between Catherine and Ruben (two of Fresh’s team).
Ruben was in favour of the murder. He was emphatic that the 12 year old got was coming to him and that crime has gone unpunished for too long in SA.
Catherine was fighting for a humans right to live and believed at the time of the conversation/debate that no one person has the right to take another humans life.
I must say I sat in my car and was grateful for the traffic for the first time ever. The traffic allowed me to catch most of the debate and I was absolutely involved in the whole thing. I was even talking to them and their callers. Some of the callers were exceptionally ignorant and even this morning someone phoned in and contributed to the conversation on Gareth Cliff’s show.
My opinion is extremely torn. I am extremely torn.
Let me begin by stating that I do not in any way, shape or form agree with or condone the death penalty. I believe that a person’s right to live supersedes almost and just about everything. This is a principal that I believe in, however I am well aware of the fact that this opinion could easily be changed by various violent circumstances. If I have to choose between my life or my attackers life, they die. Simple. And I know that this flies in the face of what I have just said, but so be it.
I do not believe that the man should have murdered the boy, and let’s not forget that this is what he did, murdered the boy. Catherine’s argument on the radio was that we do not have the right to judge the boy, his actions or his future because we just don’t know. This I agree with. She felt that the man should have taken the boy to the police. This I agree with. But at this point let me use Ruben’s rebuttal; there is no system in place in SA that is effective enough for people to know that if a 12 year old is taken to the police, a correctional service or any other educational facility, he will be helped to become a contributing member of society in a positive manner. Ruben is spot on.
This boy would’ve been taken in to a correctional service, or prison and become more of a criminal. Then when he is released 10 years (or however long) down the road he would become an educated, desolate youth with no future and no choice but to return to crime and develop this skill.
And with that let the catch 22 kick in. What is a person to do? Take the law in to their own hands? Become vigilantes? Rule with an iron fist and lead bullet? I cannot agree with this.
This man needs to be found and put away like the murderous criminal he is. The law is clear about this:
Researcher and retired police commissioner Johan Burger, of the Institute for Security Studies, said the law was clear on when people were permitted to shoot.
“You can only shoot at a person if your life or the lives of people in your immediate presence is in danger.
“So, only if a robber threatens you in a way that is serious enough to believe that a life is in danger can you use a firearm,” Burger said.
And this is my opinion. We MUST let the law be effective, we must HELP the law to do so, we must not take it in to our own hands and create our own sense of justice. This is not good and will not turn out well. Ever. Anarchy is not an effective situation for any coherent resolution. Ever.
Popularity: 4% [?]