The Capital Punishment, the Crime, the State.

Laws are social agreements, social facts and the social instutacionalitation of the rules. fot that, the laws are an interesnting subject for any student of sociology too. The greatest French socilogist Emile Durkheim says the laws are cohercitive and support hardenss in a human group. That's true, but ¿that means we can do everything in the name of the law? I disagree.

I think the center of the discussion in those kind of themes is just one: The Human Rigths. The States of all the countries must guaranatee the respect of The Human Rigths, because the History teaches us about the disasters in people and societies when they were violiated. For that, in my opinion the Capital Punishment has no pros, just cons.

It's a scientific fact that the humans are a consequence of their social environment. In Chile and all over the world. So, the real solution is only a long term solution, because it means a social change. The social changes are not only from the State, because the State defends the social-model who permits social differences, marginalization, states of alination in the poorest people, etcetera. That is the reality because many states and politics defend Capital Punishment or hardening laws in general.

Personally, I've never been victim of a crime. But I think this it's not the really important thing. Important things are two: to defend the Human Rigths and to understand reallity about the crime, marginalization and real position of the State in those themes.