Riel's Second Offense Against The Canadian Government example essay topic

On May 15th, 1885, Louis Riel, one of the most wanted criminals in Canada, was finally apprehended by the Canadian militia. After one successful murder and two unsuccessful rebellions, this insane criminal was finally to be brought to justice. A few weeks later Louis Riel was forced to face judgment for his crimes. He was found guilty of high treason and sentenced to the death penalty. Riel had failed to negotiate with the Canadian government before turning to violence, had committed treason, and had executed an innocent Canadian citizen. Riel had indeed committed the crimes held against him in the courtroom, which justifies the Canadian government's choice to have him executed.

Treason is treason, even if you are justified in committing it; you have still committed treason, an offense punishable by death. The definition of treason is "the criminal act of causing harm to your country... ". (Oxford - Students dictionary of English, 2001) Riel was clearly guilty of committing this crime. This was not an issue of self defense, the M'etis had attacked first. It was the M'etis led by Riel that waged war, not the Canadian government.

Today if a radical group inside Canada attacked the Canadian government and executed an innocent man they would be punished quickly and severely. Treason was not the only crime Riel was guilty of either; during the first rebellion that Riel was involved in he went to the house of John Schultz where Riel and the M'etis captured 48 men. They were sent to Fort Garry where they were held as prisoners. The second crime Riel committed took place on March 4th, 1870. Riel ordered a M'etis firing squad to kill Thomas Scott, one of the prisoners from Fort Garry.

Like treason murder is murder, even if it is justified, however this incident was not justified in any way at all. It was an evil and cowardly act on the part of Riel. When Riel's trial took place he wasn't even charged with deliberate and intentional murder of an innocent man. Even if he was not charged with treason he should still face the death penalty for killing a man. The NIV Bible clearly states what should be done in this situation, "Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot". 'Life for life,' Riel should have clearly been executed for this one reason alone.

The rebellion of 1885 was Riel's second offense against the Canadian government, the second time he chose violence over negotiation. This was not, and is still not acceptable. "The M'etis began by taking hostages, and cutting telegraph lines". (Shuttle, web) Currently the United States of America is negotiating with Iraq and other world powers about weapons inspections and their policies on it. If these negotiations had not been taking place, and the USA had just begun dropping bombs on Iraq millions of lives would be lost and World War would no doubt ensue. Luckily Riel only Attacked Canada so the rest of the world did not get involved.

After Riel had chosen violence twice the Canadian government realized they could not allow a man who chooses violence over words to continue living in Canada. This was yet another reason for his execution. Riel was a powerful and well respected man among the M'etis for what he attempted to do for them. He is still remembered in Canadian history for being a man who fought for the rights of his land and his people. The Canadian government realized that there were many followers of Riel, and that some of them may even try to fight and commit treason in the same way Riel had.

Unwilling to take this risk the government decided that a harsh punishment must be inflicted upon Riel in order to show other potential "wannabes" what would happen to them if they ever tried anything like this. If Riel had a minor punishment such as a fine and a required apology, he might try to lead more rebellions or more of his followers might attempt to. The death penalty is just about as harsh a sentence that can be given. This ensured that everyone knew the consequences of what would happen if they ever attempted anything like this again. Riel had committed one murder, committed treason twice, and chose violence over negotiation both times, maybe if all of these offenses had not been committed Riel execution would have been unfair, but all of these crimes had been committed and no one was arguing against this. Therefore his execution was completely and totally justified.

Oxford University Press. (2001) Oxford Student's Dictionary of English Oxford, En: Oxford University Press Shuttle, P. Louis Riel Home Page [Online]. Retrieved October 15, 2002, from the World Wide Web: web.