Not so many years after Act III
Sam Gritter:
Hello, everyone, I’m Sam Gritter, and this is the Public News Digest, morning edition. Today we are discussing the momentous passage of a bill into law, a law that, well, stated simply: a law that allows one human being to take the life of another.
Here to discuss the passage of this new law, we have with us in the studio and connected via satellite, 4 guests, Kami G’Shinda with Lord’s university in New Boston; Katherine Strophe, our regular political pundit; Zack Affrice, the lead spokesman for the group Americans Against Murder; and finally Mort Gallows, a law expert from Flowers College.
Let’s start with you Kami, what do you think about this. Your an ethics professor. Have we gone too far here? Is this pushing us to the limits of freedom? Isn’t killing another human being still an immoral thing to do?
Kami G’Shinda:
Hello, Sam. It’s good to be here. Let’s just say right off the bat that no one here is saying killing isn’t immoral. It’s still basically a bad thing to do. Just because it’s no longer punishable by law, doesn’t mean it’s OK to do.
Sam Gritter:
Well, Kami, you say that, but In the first week since the passage of this law, we’ve seen an incredible amount of killing.
Kami G’Shinda:
Well, yes, Sam, there has been a lot of killing, but, I think there is one thing we need to really hone in on here, and it’s this:
We have not decayed into a society where killing another human being has become acceptable, quite the contrary, we have matured into one. That is to say, we are a more advanced society now than we have ever been before. Let’s not ever lose sight of that.
Most rational people are not going to kill wantonly and randomly. Yes, sure, there’ll be some of that right off the bat, but it certainly won’t continue. People are too smart and too rational to do that sort of thing. Once people begin to see the inevitably consequences of behaving in this manner, they’ll find it’s generally not a rational choice. The level of killing were seeing today, will certainly begin to taper off in the days ahead.
Katherine Strophe:
Yes, Sam, if I might add to that.
Sam Gritter:
Please do Katherine.
Katherine Strophe:
Well, as you all know, the President was very instrumental in getting this bill passed into law. It could never have happened, if not for some consititutional changes made last year ...
What I really want to say here is that the the president supports this new law, because for the most part, people want it.
The legal system has just become so bogged down. The number of Raskolnikov killings has just continued to rise and rise until it has become impossible for the legal system to work the way it once did. The courts have become so bogged down with just brilliant defenses. Defenses that takes years to work out.
And one thing these defenses have shown us, is that plainly, in some cases, these killings were, in a way, sort of inevitable. These defenses have caused all of us to stop and think, maybe there are times when it is legitimate to take the life of another human being. You’re not crazy just because you go out there and kill someone. Not at all. Sometimes you have your reasons. People have begun to see that.
Now, I think when you look at this in light of various new reinterpretations of the true meaning of freedom, I think, as Kami said, that we’ve shown a great deal of moral maturity in passing this new law. It’s not the government’s place to determine whether a killing was justfied or not, it’s for the people to decide.
Sam Gritter:
... and as for those who get killed?
Katherine Strophe:
Well, Sam, it’s a jungle out there. You’ve got to be careful, you’ve got to learn to take care of yourself. I think to a great degree that’s what this law is saying. And let’s be realistic about it. This law has brought out an already existing law of life. It has brought it to the forefront of things. And we’ve seen that that’s the way the majority of people in this country want it.
Kami G’Shinda:
Yes, Katherine, I think you are exactly right. And, Sam, if I might add something more, for years now, this country has been in a total quandary over how to deal with our ability to manipulate DNA. We’ve learned so much about genetics, and we can do so much with the human body and system, but no one knows where to go with it. How to use this great achievement. Now the answer seems to be to just do what you want, to play with the DNA and just see what happens, maybe even make some random changes just for experimentation.
Now that death has entered the equation again, natural selection can finally get back to work. We’ve been expecting it for so long, but I think now, within 3 or 4 generations, considering the state of DNA technology, you’re going to start seeing a lot of improvements in the human species.
Katherine Strophe:
Yes, I think Kami’s got a good point there, but I would like to point out something myself, just like Kami already pointed out. These killing should level off.
People have a new freedom, and it’s understandably exciting. They want to test the waters, they want to see just how far they can go, just how far they can push it. And so, yes, I and everyone else has got to admit we have in the last week just seen a surprisingly large number of killings.
But two things, first, no one’s blaming it on the new law, people for the most part still seem satisfied with it. And second, I’ll say it one more time, this will level off.
Once people see the consequences they face after killing a person, they’ll learn to be more careful. Killing a person, even without any legal penalties represents a lot of risks. If you kill a person, inevitably that person has both friends and relations, and certainly you will incur the wrath of those people. This represents a lot of risks to you.
There are still some people who think you can kill in secret, but with the technology available today to even the most simple of private detectives, inevitably, the person responsible for any killing can easily be discovered.
And so, you’ve got to be rational about this. If you’re not, and you unwisely go out there and just start killing people, you’re not going to last long. Someone’s going to kill you.
Kami G’Shinda:
Which of course, is where natural selection comes in.
Katherine Strophe:
Yes, I suppose that is true. And along similar lines, if you were to go back a few decades and look at the trouble we were having with random shooters, people who in anger would just enter a business place or a school and just start killing people for the pure joy of it, those people wouldn’t last 3 second nowadays. People nowadays are ready and prepared to defend themselves, something like that is just not going to happen.
Sam Gritter:
So you’re saying random violence will be much less of a problem.
Katherine Strophe:
Sam, what I’m saying is there is no random violence. Just people going through a learning process.
Kami G’Shinda:
An evolutionary process.
Katherine Strophe:
Yes, an evolutionary process, a learning process, what have you. Killing brings consequences, people have got to learn that. When they do, the level of killing your seeing now will die off.
Eventually, if someone chooses to kill another, he’s going to have real reasons. He’s going to do it despite the consequences, because he really believes in his actions.
Kami G’Shinda:
Yes, Yes, you know a lot of this comes down to morality. This is all about real morality. What we have going on here for the first time is morality at work. Philosophers and debaters of ethics have just argued for so long about what is right and what is wrong and then tried to force their personal verdict on the rest of the populace-
Katherine Strophe:
-and governments have been no better, you might add.
Kami G’Shinda:
Yes, that’s just right. And so now for the first time, what we’re saying is it’s not anyone’s place but you’re own to decide these things. You decide if killing is right or wrong yourself, then take actions based on your beliefs in the knowledge that no government or philosopher is going to interfere.
At that point, it’s merely empirical to say, that those who survive were right, those who didn’t were wrong. That’s the tough part about life. But it has always been the great, legitimate, and ultimate truth. We’ve coddled and protected ourselves from it for far too long now. So, really what you are seeing here is a great leap forward for society.
Sam Gritter:
Okay, well, if I might, I’d like to get Zack Affrice into this. He’s the lead spokesman for the group, Americans Against Murder, and represents basically the last lobby group left in Washington that was fighting the passage of this bill into law. Zack is coming to us from our Washington bureau via satellite. Zack, are you here with us?
Zack Affrice:
Yes, I’m here.
Sam Gritter:
Well, Zack, now that the bill has been passed into law, what has been the reaction among members of your group.
Zack Affrice:
Well, just awful, Sam-(cough,cough)- excuse me-it’s very bad and we will continue our struggle-(cough,gurgle)
Sam Gritter:
Zack, are you OK there?
Zack Affrice:
Fine, Sam, must have (cough, cough) swallowed my -(cough, cough, cough), oh dear ...
Sam Gritter:
Zack, uh ... er ... the studio manager said you just coughed up some blood. Are you Okay?
Zack Affrice:
Huh? Oh, yes ... (cough, cough) ... oh shit .. (cough, cough) wait, damn it, don’t you cut me (cough) off. I’ve (cough, cough) got something to (cough, cough) say. Wait! (cough, cough, cough). IntelligentSia®-(cough) It’s IntelligentSia®- (cough) it ... (cough, cough, cough) it makes people nasty!! grok (silence.)
Sam Gritter:
Zack? Zack? ... wait a second ... I’m being told now by our producer in Washington that apparently Zack Affrice has fallen out of his chair, the crew is checking him out .... umm ... uh ... yes, yes ... oh, No! He’s dead ... they’re using a detector ... it looks like poison ... yes, it is poison. Zack Affrice has been poisoned, and we’re bringing it to you live, right here on Public News Digest, Morning Edition.
Kami G’Shinda:
Wow! How apropos to our topic!
Katherine Strophe:
Ha, ha,ha, now don’t be too cute, Kami. You could be next.
Kami G’Shinda:
Well, at least we now know why he was against the law!
Sam Gritter:
If you could excuse us, I’m afraid we’re going to have to go off the air for 5 minutes, we’ll be right back with more of this discussion.
(5 minutes later)
Sam Gritter:
Allow me to apologize to the viewers at home. We had expected to be able to interview Zack Affrice when he was suddenly killed. So now that he is no longer available, we’ll go to our next guest immediately. That’s Mort Gallows, a law expert from Victoria University. He’s going to talk about the laws that paved the way for that law which now allows us to kill without government inteference. Mort, are you out there and kicking?
Mort Gallows:
Yes, I am, Sam. Ha, ha, ha.
Sam Gritter:
Okay, Mort, so tell us about the laws that paved the way for the one we’ve been discussing.
Mort Gallows:
I like to start by saying that you just can’t legalize the killing of one individual over another without first taking into account property laws, inheritance laws, and indeed over the last few years there have been some dramatic changes. If I might begin by reviewing a law passed just last year, after the constitutional amendment ...
[and so forth and so on ... ad nauseam.]
The End