In recent years, there has been controversy over the issue of capital punishment, where some people may think capital punishment remains necessary to maintain low rates of violence and crime of society, but others do not. Regarding this problem, I completely agree with preserving the death penalty in order to offer citizens’ a safe and secure living environment as I will discuss further in the following essay.
To start with, proponents of this issue agree maintaining capital punishment is crucial to preventing criminals from committing offences repeatedly and to help prevent people from living in fear of violent crime. There is growing evidence that the death penalty is essential to controlling violent behaviour and showing that crime is not tolerated. The evidence for this rationale is based on examples from several non-death-penalty countries which describes some people suffering attacks from strangers, such as shooting or stabbing, leading to death. Therefore, in such cases, I deem that the death penalty should be maintained in order to protect people as well as stem public panic.
Nevertheless, some critics try to abolish capital punishment, they may think crime rates are not reduced by the death penalty and that it does not deter the root causes of violent crime.
Opponents are convinced that it is a form of revenge, which delivers a violent message and encourages people to solve this problem with violence. I advocate the death penalty is necessary to prevent the crimes from happening again and to decrease the threat to others, because abolishing the death penalty does not do enough to address violent crime deterrence and public panic.
To sum up, capital punishment is a debatable problem with strong views on both sides.
Taking prompt action can reduce crime and panic.
In recent years, there has been controversy over the issue of
capital
punishment
, where
some
people
may
think
capital
punishment
remains necessary to maintain low rates of violence and
crime
of society,
but
others do not. Regarding this problem, I completely
agree
with preserving the death
penalty
in order to offer citizens’ a safe and secure living environment as I will discuss
further
in the following essay.
To
start
with, proponents of this issue
agree
maintaining
capital
punishment
is crucial to preventing criminals from committing
offences
repeatedly
and to
help
prevent
people
from living in fear of
violent
crime
. There is growing evidence that the death
penalty
is essential to controlling
violent
behaviour
and showing that
crime
is not tolerated. The evidence for this rationale
is based
on examples from several non-death-penalty countries which
describes
some
people
suffering attacks from strangers, such as shooting or stabbing, leading to death.
Therefore
, in such cases, I deem that the death
penalty
should
be maintained
in order to protect
people
as well
as stem public panic.
Nevertheless
,
some
critics try to abolish
capital
punishment
, they may
think
crime
rates are not
reduced
by the death
penalty
and that it does not deter the root causes of
violent
crime.
Opponents
are convinced
that it is a form of revenge, which delivers a
violent
message and encourages
people
to solve this problem with violence. I advocate the death
penalty
is necessary to
prevent
the
crimes
from happening again and to decrease the threat to others,
because
abolishing the death
penalty
does not do
enough
to address
violent
crime
deterrence and public panic.
To sum up, capital
punishment
is a debatable problem with strong views on both sides.
Taking prompt action can
reduce
crime
and panic.