Capital punishment is defined as the execution of a person by the state as punishment for a crime. It is said that capital punishment is inhumane as it involves the killing of people. It concerns a life created by God and raises the question on the value of life and human rights. That is why several countries have started to abolish the aforementioned rule and have used the life sentence for the same cases as that of capital punishment. Countries that still wish to use the death penalty use it for very severe crimes/offences and are likely to be less economically developed countries such that of Ethiopia, Nigeria and Malaysia.Compared to the previous times, the death penalty is now reserved as a punishment for severe crimes such as murder, espionage, treason, or as part of military justice.
Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims and this should be altered. It’s time we put the emphasis of our criminal justice system back on protecting the victim rather that the accused. We need justice for current and past victims, longer sentences and the death penalty is the way to achieve this. Death sentence provides a deterrent for prisoners already serving a life sentence. Nothing is to stop people who have been sentenced to life imprisonment to kill in prison; to escape and kill or to kill when their life sentence (minimum of 15 years) has been
The two individuals that are on opposite sides of the death penalty are Edward Koch and David Bruck. The mayor Edward Koch believes that the death penalty is necessity for todays society. David Koch is saying that the death penalty is another form of murder. If someone were to kill another person, the authorities have all the rights to sentence them to death and to guarantee such a horrific crime would not happen again. Mayor Edward Koch claims that to help the penalty for murder would be a huge insult to the victims, other than David Bruck correctly argues that justice is not served by creating another victim accountable for the things that he or she have done.
Executions may increase murder rates because they raise the general violence level in society and because violence prone people identify with the executioner, not with the target of the death penalty. When someone gets in a conflict with such individuals or challenges his or her authority, he, or she will execute them in the same manner the states executes people who violates its rules. Since capital punishment is brutal, some countries have decided to abolish the cruel acts of punishment. They would rather have the offender remain incarcerated than to hand down such a brutal
Since the capital punishment is still carry on, many opponents and defenders of the death penalty appeal to the sanctity of life. However, the death penalty is not justified. This is because death penalty is not an effective crime deterrent, executed innocent people and it needs a higher cost to carry on. First of all, some opponents argue that death penalty can help deter crime and protect public. For instance, the criminal will think twice before killing for fear of receive the strongest punishment.
Should one subsequently face legal execution, the method may vary in dignity. Whilst an American death-row inmate likely faces lethal injection conducted in private (Death Penalty Information Center), his Saudi Arabian counterpart faces public beheading (National Post, 2013). The risk of violating the right to life by incorrect verdicts, in conjunction with unproportional costs and failure to deter, makes Capital Punishment highly questionable. “Innocent until proven guilty”, the same legal and moral principles should indeed apply for “Innocent until proven guilty, innocent if proven non-guilty following false verdict”. Many, if not all, would agree.
This results in poor representation of convicted people in courts and unfair verdicts. Another issue associated with the penalty is that the value of life is lessened. Government should be concerned with the damage inflicted on society when a person is sentenced to be killed by juries. Being put to death by a people does not seem to be that different from a heinous murder committed by a murderer. With all of the media reporting executions like movies, societies become desensitized and accept death penalty as the right way to take care of criminals.
Shalom wonders what this is saying about our current system that is in force (10). The author reveals that murderers that are unable to pay for their defense are more likely to be sentenced to death then those who are capable of getting a lawyer. Former Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall says that “the burden of capital punishment falls upon the poor, the ignorant, and the underprivileged members of society” (11). Shalom concludes that the United States is not the only country that is continuing to practice capital punishment. The other countries are considered to be far from world leaders in human rights.
Alex Shalom’s final point is that having the death penalty makes the United States look hypocritical. Both, the United States and Iran, have the Death Penalty and use it for criminals under the age of eighteen, Shalom argues. His point was that we are just like Iran even though we are going to war with them, which makes us hypocrites. Shalom ends the article by asking when are we going to
Since the United States does not have an official religious code to interpret right from wrong, we have to depend on our criminal laws. If the laws are not strict enough, as the Death Penalty is, it is too enticing for our criminals. Therefore making it easier for criminals to kill. Harsh, severe laws provide an important measure of society's values and morals. How can the government be "soft on crime"" How can they let others kill innocent people?