Does the death penalty cause reduction in murder and other crimes? Most of today’s societies seek the abolition of capital punishment. However, there are a lot of countries that use execution as law. There is an old debate between for and against death penalty, which includes three general heading: Mortality, utilitarian and practical. In this essay we will discuss them in both opinions.
Firstly, I think death penalty not only doesn’t reduce homicide, but also it is inherently violent. Proponents of this idea claim that capital punishment violates the condemned person’s right to life and it is fundamentally inhuman and immoral. In addition, they point to researches that show death penalty is not more effective deterrent than the alternative sanction of life or long-term imprisonment. They also declare that the death penalty can’t be administered in a manner consistent with justice. Therefore, this group is trying to abolish execution.
On the other hand, there are some people who support the death penalty based on this proverb: ” An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”. They believe execution is a just from of retribution. In another word, those who commit murder, because they have taken the life of another, must forfeit their own right to life. also they express that the death penalty makes it impossible for criminals to do bad things over and over and it means we can all feel safer, as they can’t commit anymore crimes. Moreover, those who support this opinion believe that it’s possible to fashion laws and procedure that ensure only those who are really deserving of death will be executed.
To sum up, both opinions are common in world and the proponents of each provide reasons and evidence to substantiate their claim. Opponents of execution believe it increases violence while, the opposite side claim that death penalty decrease crimes and stops criminals. I personally believe that we shouldn’t retaliate to prevent a wrongdoing and I think today’s civilized societies need more humanitarian laws.
Does the death
penalty
cause reduction in murder and other crimes? Most of
today
’s societies seek the abolition of capital punishment.
However
, there are
a lot of
countries that
use
execution as law. There is an
old
debate between for and against death
penalty
, which includes three general heading: Mortality, utilitarian and practical. In this essay we will discuss them in both opinions.
Firstly
, I
think
death
penalty
not
only
doesn’t
reduce
homicide,
but
also
it is
inherently
violent. Proponents of this
idea
claim that capital punishment violates the condemned person’s right to
life
and it is
fundamentally
inhuman and immoral.
In addition
, they point to researches that
show
death
penalty
is not more effective deterrent than the alternative sanction of
life
or long-term imprisonment. They
also
declare that the death
penalty
can’t
be administered
in a manner consistent with justice.
Therefore
, this group is trying to abolish execution.
On the other hand
, there are
some
people
who
support the death
penalty
based on this proverb:
”
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”. They
believe
execution is a
just
from of retribution. In another word, those
who
commit murder,
because
they have taken the
life
of another,
must
forfeit their
own
right to
life
.
also
they express that the death
penalty
makes
it impossible for criminals to do
bad
things over and over and it means we can all feel safer, as they can’t commit
anymore
crimes.
Moreover
, those
who
support this opinion
believe
that it’s possible to fashion laws and procedure that ensure
only
those
who
are
really
deserving of death will
be executed
.
To sum up, both opinions are common in world and the proponents of each provide reasons and evidence to substantiate their claim. Opponents of execution
believe
it increases violence while, the opposite side claim that death
penalty
decrease crimes and
stops
criminals. I
personally
believe
that we shouldn’t retaliate to
prevent
a wrongdoing and I
think
today
’s civilized societies need more humanitarian laws.