By R. Brownell
Juan Martin Garcia was executed in Huntsville, Texas on October 7th, despite the opposition of the wife of the man he murdered. As IJ reported about the story:
In 1998, Garcia, who was 18 at the time, robbed Hugo Solano at gunpoint for $8. Solano was fatally shot 4 times in the head and neck. Garcia claims the shooting was an accident. He said on death row:
“He punches me. First thing that came through my mind is that the dude is going to try to kill me. He grabbed the gun with both of his hands and it discharged.”
However, Eleazar Mendoza, a witness who received 55 years for aggravated robbery, said that Garcia held Solano up at gunpoint asking for money, and shot him when Solano refused to give it to him.
Right before he was lethally injected, Garcia apologized to the wife and children of Solano, who were present for the execution. He said in Spanish, “The harm that I did to your dad and husband, I hope this brings you closure. I never wanted to hurt any of you all.”
Solano’s wife, Ana, did not believe that the execution should have taken place. She and her children cried as they witnessed Garcia’s death and let him know that they loved him. Solano said she was able to forgive him because his apology was sincere. She told the Associated Press that it came “from his heart” and that “It’s about God. It’s about Jesus.”
When Solano testified against Garcia receiving the death penalty, she said he should live so that he can share his story with others and hopefully help people who are in comparable situations learn from his mistakes.
I’m not going to say that all victims of murder should have the heart of Solano, I don’t have that authority; but what this shows is something that is causing a lot of hurt in America. I became pro life when I accepted Christ into my heart, but as I began understand the sanctity of life and the role of the state, I came to this conclusion: If I am to believe that God is in control of bringing life into the world, I need to accept that it is God only who should take life, self defense excluded. I think a lot of libertarians take the anti-death penalty stance because they too feel that the State has no role in dictating who lives and who dies, but they leave out the most important detail, life matters.
The death penalty is not just not wrong because it places a man in shackles where other men kill him against his will, but because of other reasons social conservatives and anti death penalty liberals don’t consider:
- You might accidently kill an innocent person.
- It is a huge waste of money and resources to conduct.
- It doesn’t keep the public safe from future crime.
- Most importantly, it doesn’t bring peace to the families it is meant to bring justice to.
The fact that families who have to witness the executions don’t feel any ease should be the biggest red flag. According to Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty:
The death penalty divides surviving families
-
The death penalty is supposed to be reserved for the “most heinous” murders, but that implies that most murders are ordinary. There is no such thing as an “ordinary” murder for the grieving family left behind. Many families feel these kinds of distinctions are a slap in the face.
-
The death penalty has split families apart, forcing relatives with different views on the issue to engage in a polarizing debate at the time when they need each other most.
-
When the defendant and victim are related, families are even further torn apart. In a number of cases, for example, children must first cope with the murder of one parent and then suffer a new layer of trauma and grief when the other parent is executed for the crime.
-
Case in point: Felicia Floyd was 11 when her father murdered her mother in a drunken rage. Felicia’s father was on death row in Georgia for 21 years, during which time the family was able to find some reconciliation. Felicia and her brother pleaded with the state not to execute their father, but were ignored. The execution left them orphans.
Bottom line, the death penalty is another heinous institution we need to move past, and if we aim to bring about a free and civil society, it needs to be discussed more frequently and more openly.