America is a land of conflicting opinions. It’s what makes us great.

The fact that we don’t rise up with only one way of thinking, one type of person and one voice makes us a country of contradictions that should allow everyone to have a place, ideally.

While we are certainly not perfect, our differences should be celebrated, particularly when it comes to our different opinions. When one way of thinking goes unconfronted, it goes stagnant.

One issue that has been argued for decades is the death penalty. It is, in few words, highly controversial. I have noticed that the average American finds it hard to access the death penalty on a personal level.

I haven’t known anyone whose family member or friend was killed by the state. Perhaps this is not that surprising, as only 20 people were executed in 2016, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. 

The death penalty is often depicted on TV, but the defendant, real or fictional, is oftentimes held in a highly sympathetic light.

A few examples that come to mind are The Obsolete Man episode of the classic “Twilight Zone,” the movie “Dead Man Walking” and “The Green Mile.” While there are those that cry out in defense, or opposition of the death penalty, popular media has not yet made up its mind about it. 

One of the more controversial aspects of the death penalty is the execution of intellectually handicapped or mentally ill people. The death penalty has been stayed in the case of those with intellectual disabilities several times.

The Atkins v. Virginia Supreme Court case led to the decision that the execution of the mentally challenged violates the Eighth Amendment, which states that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” 

This may seem to be a cut and dry issue: those who are deemed to be significantly intellectually impaired are not fit to be executed, as it is a cruel and unusual punishment.

But there has been much debate about what constitutes an intellectually impaired individual, and whether it makes sense for them to avoid punishment if they, supposedly, do not know wrong from right.

An argument has been made about whether the IQ score should be strictly adhered to, as has been true in Florida, or if it should be a case-by-case basis defined by both past performance and current ability. Several cases have blurred this line, including those of Robert James Campbell, Freddie Lee Hall and Marvin Wilson.

I cannot be definitive with my analysis, while I know my own mind leans toward being more liberal with the term. I would rather err on the side of letting someone live who should have died, than letting someone die who should have lived.

If there is a question about whether someone knew what they were doing, or if they met the qualifications for mentally disability, the utmost care should be taken in seeing whether they should be executed. Mentally disabled people should not be executed, and more care should be taken to follow that edict. 

Another topic that is just as controversial is the execution of the mentally ill, who differ in the severity of their mental impairment from those who are “intellectually impaired.” When some people think of mentally ill people, they think of those who are incapable of controlling their own actions, or people who are dangerous. This is an untrue stereotype that lumps all of those who have a certain condition into one inaccurate category.

They are oftentimes viewed as evil. This misconception allows people to perhaps feel more amenable to the execution of people with mental illness. It’s hard to disabuse people of this notion, even though many mentally ill people are executed without prior care or sufficient analysis.

Just because a mentally ill person should not be killed for their crimes if they did not know right from wrong does not mean they should not be punished for their actions. The options are never death or go free; there is always imprisonment.

As I have said, the death penalty is highly controversial. It is hard to know exactly the right thing to do, but in the case of those with intellectual disability or mental illness, extra care should be taken to make sure the right thing is done.