Death penalty is the ultimate punishment for capital crimes committed by individuals in any country. The death penalty can be either by hanging being gassed or lethal injection. Over the years, the death penalty is put in use by laws of most societies as punishment for the crimes considered “unforgivable”. However, death penalty has been misused by people in positions of power to silence their political or business enemies, who threaten their survival in these positions of power and influence in the society.
Whether or not the death penalty should be abolished remains a matter of concern to many people in the society. These people include: politicians, religious people, social movements and the justice department. There are those who are in support of the death penalty as a capital punishment while some are against it. This argument has been in existence for a long time, but the world is slowly embracing the forgiving side, and the death penalty is being abolished in many countries.
Make your first order with 15% discount and get 10% OFF MORE for ALL orders by receiving 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page
Those who are in favor of the death penalty have various reasons for thei9r support. First, they are of the idea that the death penalty will deter people from committing crimes. Offences that are considered capital are common in every society. For instance rape, murder, trafficking drugs and nuclear materials, have become a norm. Death penalty is a means to reduce the rates of occurrences of such crimes.
The other reason considered valid is that the death penalty is a cheaper way of dealing with capital crimes compared to keeping criminals in jails for life sentences. The argument is that it will cost the government less money to execute capital criminals than maintaining them. It has also been observed that most of the people who commit capital crimes are violent, and it is not safe for them to be together with other people freely in the society. After serving their jail terms, these individuals go back to the free world, and the chances of such people repeating the same crimes are higher than the chances of the reforming. As such, capital punishment by death will eliminate them from the society for the protection of the society and keeping the society safe from any harm.
Most of the individuals who support the death penalty justify their argument by stating categorically that the intensity of a crime should be equal to the offence. Most murder suspect serve a life sentence in maximum security prisons. However, the victims of murder and other members of the society, this is not a fair deal. To them, the crime of death should be paid by death thus execution of the suspects found guilty of murder serves them right.
Hire our qualified writers!
Not enough time to create an assignment by yourself?Order now
- on time delivery
- original content
- quality writing
Prisons keep criminals from the society and rehabilitate them for the better. As such, when criminals come out t of jails they are least expected to commit the same crimes again. However, life imprisonment does not serve this purpose. Why should an individual be kept in jail if they are not going to come out anyway? This is the other argument made by individuals in the society who support the death penalty. Death penalty solves this problem effectively for them. In most countries death, penalty is constitutional and effectively acts to sever the purpose of punishing capital criminals for their crimes.
There are people who are totally against the death penalty. These groups of people include: religious people, social activists, politicians and other civil rights groups. They have various reasons from all schools of thought to reject the death penalty punishment for capital crimes.
First they argue that the death penalty violets the human rights of the individual by subjecting them to a cruel death. They argue that most people who face execution suffer from pain when they die. Death by hanging, lethal injection or electrocution is more painful compared to death of the individual through natural causes. The killing of other human being by the law is not humane even if the individual is a criminal.
They also argue that killing an individual who committed a capital crime does not make the victim any different from him. In the case of murder, both parties are on equal grounds as both the law and the criminal have taken life. As such, they consider that two wrongs cannot make right, and such individuals should be imprisoned for life rather than facing the death penalty.
Get a price quote:
Recent statistics show that the implementation of the death penalty does not necessarily deter people from committing crimes. The crime rate is as normal as it was initially in the society whether the death penalty implementation is in the society. The people against the death penalty argue that the excused to deter capital crimes in the society should not be used to support the death penalty.
The justice system is not perfect. As such, once in a while innocent people become convicts of crimes that they did not commit or were framed to have committed them. If any individual is convicted of murder and is to face such cruel death, for a crime he or she never committed justice will no longer be evident in the country. Many people in powerful positions whether politically or financially can use their power and influence to cover up crimes. They can simply frame someone and having them executed. There are estimates of about four hundred people who were wrongfully convicted in the twentieth century.
The other argument by the religious leaders is that the death penalty gives the people power to play God. According to most religions it is only God who has the absolute right to take away or give life. No individual or even the government has the power to take an individual’s life no matter what crime the individual has done.
Statistics also show that the death penalty is discriminatory. The bigger percentages of the people who face death penalties are either from the poor or middle class in the society or a minority race in the country. Therefore, the death penalty is not serving the purpose for which it was to meet thus should be abolished.
The main aim for capital punishment is to make the criminal pay for their crimes severely and accordingly. If this is unquestionably the reasons does the death sentence server this purpose? To many people, life imprisonment is a more severe way of punishing capital crimes that death. People who kill can serve life imprisonment while paying for the crimes they committed rather than facing death. On the other hand, these individuals may be having skills and talents that could be put in to use by the government for the good of the society. Such individuals are of no significance while dead.
In conclusion, substantial evidence indicates that, rarely does capital punishment deter crime. The cost of the trials and appeals against a death sentence cost more than maintaining the prisoner in a jail for life. The justice system is not perfect, and many people are usually wrongfully convicted. The people on death row and facing death sentences are of the minority groups in society. Polls indicate that people who support the death penalty are murderers. The standards of morality are relative, and each society has its own standards, and the morality behind the death penalty cannot be clearly established. However, there are more logical and backed up reasons why the death penalty should be abolished. There are proves that deter penalty is not worth it.