Death is a condition where there is permanent ending of life and all biological functions that maintain living organisms. A penalty is a punishment imposed on a person due to the violation of the law. It is a practice which is sanctioned by the government where an individual is subjected to death as a punishment for crime. Almost all the societies have employed the death penalty, and it had existed for quite an extensive period even all through the medieval epoch when kings hanged individuals when it was not yet called death penalty (Martinez, Richardson, " Hornsby, 2002). Most people do not recommend or maintain death penalty despite the fact that it has been used for many years since it is inhumane, against their religious beliefs and views or it being immoral, also some individuals view it as being racially based (Megivern, 2011). Every individual has a right to live, and thus their lives should be protected and supported. This essay will present various reasons and claims to support the death penalty.
First and foremost, the death penalty prevents future murders. With these said it is without a doubt that most societies always use the most stringent punishment possible to discourage prospect or future crimes. A person who has a mission of murdering someone will think twice before doing so for panic or fright of losing their life only if murderers are subjected to the death penalty. Isaac Ehrlich, a criminologist, engaged a new kind of study and analysis in 1973 and the results revealed that seven lives were saved for every offender who was executed since others were discouraged from committing murder (Ehrlich, 2008). If nations which have high rates of crime did not use the capital punishment, the murder rates would have even been higher.
A Jurisprudence professor at Fordham University by the name Ernest Van den Haag closely researched the question of deterrence. He suggested that the death penalty have a propensity of discouraging prospect criminal activities more than other punishments even though statistical demonstrations are inconclusive. In essence, every individual fear death more than anything else and in particular anything that is deliberately scheduled by the court (Van, 2015). Van also suggested that what deters most is what individuals fear the most. This means that some the threat of death penalty has a capacity of discouraging executioners whom in one way or another may not have been deterred.
Since its finality is more feared than imprisonment, Van believed in death penalty since it discourages some prospective murderers who are not hindered by the thinking or contemplation of detention. It is less necessary to preserve the lives of murderers who are convicted with the reason that probability of executing them would not discourage others whereas it is more important to spare the life of a few innocent victims by discouraging their murderers. Due to his crime, the consciousness of a murderer has only negative value while that of victims who might be saved is valuable, so, to guard and defend the lives of innocent victims in fondness to those of real murderers, the criminal law is used (Van, 2015). In order to deter crime, we threaten punishments since punishments and threats are essential to deterrence. Therefore to prevent or discourage crime like murder, the death penalty is the best form of punishment.
The next argument regards retribution. A just society requires capital punishment for a life taken. The sense of balance of justice is always disturbed when a person kills someone; this is dangerous since the society succumbs to a decree of violent behavior if the balance of justice is not restored. However, it can only be restored by taking the life of the murderer, and by doing so, it reveals that the society treats murder as not only a serious offense but also an intolerable one.
Religious values do not only form a basis for Justice but also have maintained historically that it is right to take a life for a life and an “eye for an eye.” Death penalty leads to the termination of the murderer’s crime even though it will not restore both the victim’s family and the victim of the status which preceded the murder (Megivern, 2011). Under our system of law, criminals deserve the most horrible punishment that is capital punishment if they commit the most heinous and cruel offenses. However, the value that the society places on protecting people’s lives would be undermined if a lesser punishment is subjected to such a criminal.
The death penalty may be used since it is applied fairly. Although the capital punishment is subjected to some people while other people are spared, that does not give a reason that everyone should be pitied and forgiven. Despite the fact that some suspects escape punishment unfairly, anyone who is found guilty should still be punished. The claim that the capital punishment lies on race is an irrelevant factor and could be easily mitigated to apply the claims based on baffling and inexplicable inconsistencies that associate to membership in gender and other marginalized teams (Stichter, 2014). In order to perform a criminal justice system, for instance, the death penalty, the state is not required by the constitution to eradicate any noticeable discrepancy that relates to a potentially unrelated factor.
Though rare, putting to death the innocent is an acceptable risk of the capital punishment. In the 1970s, increased appeals and safeguards were added to the United States capital punishment system. Therefore, there is no evidence that there has been an execution of an innocent person and even if it has occurred, then it is sporadic. People who have been released from the death string by the claim of innocence is only based on legal technicalities. If at all someone is shown to be innocent, the executive leaders, such as the governor, can do all it takes to free that person. However, claims of innocence are usually used as a mechanism to do away with the execution. When the death penalty is carried out, innocent lives are spared since murderers are incapacitated; this means that capital punishment is the most effective punishment for preventing such murderers from replicating their offense (Stichter, 2014).
In my own opinion, I strongly support the death penalty since it is the most controversial form of capital punishment among all the statutory sentences for prisoners. I believe that the primary objective of subjecting criminals to capital punishment is to get rid of them since the communities have no hope in them (Meranze, 2011).
This paper presented various reasons as to why capital punishment should not be repealed. If the death penalty does not exist then, offenders will have no fear to commit serious crimes. Abolishing death penalty will be a tremendous mistake since murderers will not stop their criminal acts. Therefore, the justice system regarding the severity of crimes and punishment should be re-evaluated. I as a result of this affirm that I came to this conclusion for the reason of my understanding of human life; I thereby commit myself to work towards protecting people’s life by strongly supporting the death penalty.
References
Ehrlich, I. (2008). The deterrent effect of capital punishment. Economics of Legal Relationships, 370-397. doi:10.4324/9780203930885.ch16
Martinez, J. M., Richardson, W. D., " Hornsby, D. B. (2002). The leviathan's choice: Capital punishment in the twenty-first century. Lanham, MD: Rowman " Littlefield.
Megivern, J. J. (2011). Religion and the death penalty in the United States: past and present. Capital Punishment, 116-142. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511489273.005
Meranze, M. (2011). The Death Penalty. America's Death Penalty, 72-105. doi:10.18574/nyu/9780814732663.003.0003
Stichter, M. (2014). The Structure of Death Penalty Arguments. Res Publica, 20(2), 129-143. doi:10.1007/s11158-014-9242-1
Van H. (2015). Deterring potential criminals. London: Social Affairs Unit.
