Imagine watching the news and hearing that a crime has been committed. The guilty party is sentenced to prison for two consecutive life sentences. The public would feel satisfied. However, what if a governor allows them to be free by simply donating a kidney? How would the public feel then?
Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour has ordered Gladys Scott, 38, to donate her own kidney to her ill sister Jamie Scott, 36. This is no joke! The sisters were convicted of armed robbery in 1993. Three accomplices smashed two male victims in the head with a shotgun, but as a plea bargain testified against the Scott sisters for a shorter sentencing. The Mississippi Department of Corrections no longer believe the sisters pose a threat to society, feeling that Jamie Scott's condition only creates a extra cost to the state of Mississippi. The writer, from Statesman.com feels very angry this is an example of government intrusion into a most personal decision. Inmates should not have to surrender body parts as a condition of release. This for me is absolutely OUTRAGEOUS for someone of the government to allow a felon to get away with such a crime, by just having to donate a body part for someone who is in desperate need just to avoid extra cost to the state. What about the family of the two men that were lured by the Scott sisters. What do they get? Where is their justice? If a simple body part donation is all it takes to get out of jail or some sort of a lighter sentence, I would think there would be one heck of a long line at our governments door waving a sign saying, "I will donate my kidney," especially since it would be their ticket out of prison. The decision of donating or not, should be the decision of Jamie Scott, with the stipulation of still finishing her punishment in prison. Like my father always told me, that of which we have all heard, "If you do the crime, you pay the time!"
No comments:
Post a Comment