Lennon's killer should never be free |
Wes Malaby |
|
(U-WIRE) STILLWATER, Okla. - "I'm lucky to be alive. You know I deserve to die." Recent statements from Mark David Chapman, whose first parole board hearing was on Tuesday. Chapman, who was denied parole after a 50-minute interview session, is the convicted assassin of music legend John Lennon - who was shot in the back outside his Manhattan apartment in December 1980. Chapman has never been able to fully explain his decision to kill Lennon, but admits he was obsessed with the Beatles and was suicidal up to the point of the murder. The parole board stated Chapman's "most vicious and violent act was apparently fueled by (his) need to be acknowledged." The board went on to say that this behavior was still evident in his parole hearing. The first question is why Chapman was granted the privilege of a possible release. State law in New York deems an individual eligible for parole after serving 20 years of a life sentence. Nevertheless, this arbitrary time period should not be extended to Chapman or any other convicted murderer. Victims are not given a hearing for reincarnation after a 20-year absence from life. Furthermore, out of respect for the families and friends of a victim, parole should not even be an option for sentenced killers. The pain that a survivor must endure must not be overshadowed - even if the killer appears to be rehabilitated. Forgiveness is to be preserved for a higher power, rather than a state government. Yoko Ono, Lennon's widow, has contacted the New York Board of Parole expressing fear for her life, as well as for Lennon's two sons. Whereas Chapman has proclaimed that he is no longer a threat to society, Ono is valid in her concern. Last year, George Harrison, Lennon's band mate, was attacked at his home in England. Bringing us to the next issue surrounding Chapman's denied parole. Pop culture around the world has elevated celebrities to an unhealthy plateau. When Lennon was killed, a collection of devout fans mourned the loss to both the world and to music. But when innocent civilians are the casualties of foreign political conflicts, we are apathetic and immune to the loss, because we only see the differences between us. While it is easy to compare ourselves to celebrities, it is unfair and harmful to publicize their private lives for our own amusement and fascination. Lennon was outspoken and frequently taken out of context in his public statements and through the music of the Beatles. Consequently, he simultaneously established himself as an icon for a tumultuous era and as a scapegoat for a generation passed who failed to understand his vision and clarity. Lennon chose to represent segmentations of our population that were counter to popular beliefs. Irony deemed that he was killed by an individual seeking publicity rather than someone who disagreed politically with Lennon. Lastly, Chapman's statement included his belief that Lennon would be liberal about (Chapman's) request for freedom. Stating, "I think he would probably want to see me released." Lennon was often unpredictable, but rarely foolish in his actions. Chapman will certainly finish his sentence within the walls of his New York cell. . | |