|| By FITSNEWS || This website has been accused of hero worshipping former U.S. Rep. Ron Paul – and we’ll be honest, there’s some truth to that allegation. We endorsed Paul’s 2012 bid for the “Republican” presidential nomination, and we’ve repeatedly praised him for his tireless advocacy on behalf of individual freedom and free markets.
Paul is the most consistent elected official we’ve ever encountered – which in this case is a good thing because his consistency has been almost universally applied to common sense reform proposals.
But no one – not even Ron Paul – gets it right 100 percent of the time. We were reminded of this when we published Paul’s latest column criticizing capital punishment.
“An increasing number of conservatives are realizing that the death penalty is inconsistent with both fiscal and social conservatism,” Paul wrote. “These conservatives are joining with libertarians and liberals in a growing anti-death penalty coalition.”
Usually this website is at the forefront of pushing precisely this sort of coalition – in which fiscally conservative, socially libertarian perspectives unite around a common sense concept.
A “death penalty ban” is not one of those concepts, though.
Paul is correct when he writes that capital punishment – as currently implemented in America – is a costly proposition. And he’s correct in worrying about potentially irrevocable impositions on liberty associated with the practice. But the death penalty is expensive precisely because our country has been afraid to implement it. And liberty is and will always be a search for balance – exercising our circumstantial discernment in an effort to determine the best method of protecting the most fundamental rights for the most people.
Confessed killers – or killers who are found to have committed premeditated murder beyond a reasonable doubt – have forfeited their liberty. And we believe in many instances – like this one – they have forfeited their life as well.
“Rather than dispensing true justice, our court system has instead chosen to give the savages who perpetrate these acts free food, clothing and shelter for life,” we wrote earlier this year. “While forcing taxpayers (including the families of their victims) to pay for it!”
“In what way, shape or form does such a policy advance the preservation of life and liberty?” we asked. “Isn’t it just incentivizing additional savagery?”
We believe so …
So yeah. We’re calling it: Ron Paul is wrong on this issue.