24/7 writing help on your phone
The death penalty has been a capital offense of significance across many years. The decision to put someone to death has been productive over the years. The nature of the Death penalty punishment brings the worst fate to criminals over history. The capital punishment has continued to instil fear among capital offenders decreasing the crime rates. The narration of the capital castigation dates to the 18th century B.C with examples of existing laws like the Code of Hammurabi as an initial form of death penalty laws.
The code stipulated the lists of crimes that if committed by a person were punishable by death. In Britain, around the 10th century, death penalty was adopted as the assured mode of execution for the Englishmen. The death penalty continued to exists over the years serving the interests of the Englishmen.
Later, after the discovery of the new world, other countries came to understand the need to implement the punishment fort individuals that committed grave crimes.
For instance, during King Henry VIII reign, people adopted the capital punishment for those accused of treason against the state. Others that were suspected to have committed murder also qualified to be served with the death sentence. It is estimated that about 72,000 people lost their lives during the active years of the death sentence. In example, a country like the United Kingdom handed criminals the penalty easily upon justification of their crimes. The ease of allocating the death sentence during the 18th and 19th century gave it the popularity that it still holds till date.
In the modern era, other forms of capital punishment have replaced the death penalty depending on the form of crime. Over these many years, the death penalty did was not voluntary though the world witnessed some volunteers to this form of punishment. The essay herein in is an argumentative essay on death penalty offering arguments against supporting death penalty as a capital punishment for offenders.
Death penalty receives much popularity among some individuals and groups in the modern society. The acceptance of this brutal form of punishment goes that some of the offenders commit grave crimes. The nature of their crimes affects lives inflicting pain to families and relatives like in the case of murder. It is believed that murder offenders can only be brought to justice through being subjected to an equal cruel form of punishment like their acts. Some pro death penalty argues that an eye for an eye serves the better purpose as compared to offering punishment sparingly. (Hoyle & Hood, 2015) asserts that, a rational argument of these individuals is that the capital punishment supports deterrence to criminal activity. The pro death penalty groups feel that when United states practice this capital punishment, they help reduce the increasing rates of violent crimes. In essence, criminal offenders fear losing their lives in the process and them fear bearing the weight and guilt of their actions. The capital punishment has a way of sending a strong message to murders and individuals with intent to commit violent crimes.
The capital punishment also has a way of dealing with the retribution effect. In the United State of American society, people favour vengeance; therefore, the popular belief is that when one decides to take an innocent life, then justice must be served. The only assured way of serving justice and avenging for the death is by handing the murders a capital punishment. The logic in this reasoning by pro death penalty groups is that it creates accountability in the society. People will understand the need not to fear violent crimes since the penalty already eliminates the possibility of these crimes occurring. Heinous murders also deserve a treat of their actions which leaves many families crying over their loved ones. By supporting the death penalty, it makes sense that a criminal justice system needs to be accountable enough to deal with criminal activity. Jurors have a mandate to ensure that a violent murderer does not live to see the light at the end of the day. (Hood & Hoyle, 2015)
Even though these criminals may be jailed for life, the death penalty is more appropriate in that it discourages the disrespect for human life. This ideology implies that the death penalty is a kind of measure in place to support moral order in the world. The death sentence also follows the constitution provision where one can be tried in a court of law and passed verdict by jurors after thorough investigations and trials. This means that then, they can be handed the death penalty sentence after investigations proving their action. Then again, it is evident that a family that has lost a child to the hands of a heinous murderer cannot recover or regain the life of their loved ones.
Over the past few decades, the research conducted on the death penalty attempt to reveal that death penalty is not determined to restrain to violent crime. In lieu of that matter, it has also been proved that the death penalty tends to deter murders. Although, there is a lot of numerous flaws and omission as the concept has been interpreted to fall inside the fateful categories of junk knowledge. Nonetheless, the death consequence is a brutal and unusual chastisement. Ideally, considering the British medical journal research report, the death penalty offers dangerous flaws and lethal injection that capital criminals are administered, the practice that results to extreme suffering to the prisoners that are purposed to be executed in the United State of America.
Death penalty receives a negative implication in the concept of the most misperception that is presented in the entire law firm ruling. The notion executed in the ruling tends to be the ideology of cost encountered for the death penalty at a time of execution. In lieu of that matter, this notion is believed to be true when bill of the death penalty are calculated at the time of putting to death. For instance, the involvement of the persecutors and the defense attorney need along time of investigation and pre-trial hearings. Therefore, the death penalty ruling will take numerous years and enamours cost before the time of execution is on the horizon. (Sundby, 2015) alluded that, despite the fact that death penalty ruling tends to nurture and shape thug life behaviours, there is need to consider the concept of reforming them into responsible individuals.
By so doing, they will be able to change their habits an ideology that will nurture their morals and habits for life than jailing them for life or sentencing them to death. Therefore in that line of reasoning, the notion of the death penalty for the crimes that are conducted, it’s not known to kill criminals. Although the principles of reforming criminals is not a simple thing, we should also try to do more work that is dedicated to changing criminal life to more notion that saves lives.
In reality, most of the innocent lives have been swept away by this intensely blemished practice of the state ruling due to that fact that death penalty ethnic inheritance cannot be done away with or well explained. In that point of view, I tend to decide to fight for the repeal of the death penalty since it continues to offer the insight to popularity and the usage of the legacy that is gained from the death penalty notion to engage in slavery and racial injustice. Then again, the concept gained from the ruling has increased the death row to more than 41% in the western regions and almost three times that percentage in the dark countries.
The negative insinuation fundamentals that lie on the death penalty flaw and injustice are that it has triggered for the failure of the resilience among different candidates since they tend to lack the commitment to address the idea. Therefore, by considering such an ideology, the law tends to be an international catastrophe that is based on the ethnically biased chastisement and ineffective in handling the criminal matters. According to (Rowan, Lee, & Paternoster, 2016), the death penalty history, more than 18,000 executions that have taken place, only 43 white have been involved in the for killing the blacks. A sensible explanation for that line of reasoning is that the death penalty debate has all the reasons why has to be abolished. For that matter, the death penalty is pure, racist.
According to the search chronicle in the vain of the execution on the affluent strata, it’s clear that more than 90% of the defendants charged with the ideology of the capital crime are absolutely indigent and they are not capable of hiring an experienced criminal defense attorney. Moreover, they are forced to use the inexperienced and overworked defense thus resulting in the trial not lasting for more than two weeks thus the poor presentation of their good defense. The logic behind that line of thinking is that the death penalty debate ruling is dedicated to punishing the poor and leaving the rich individuals unharmed. Defend on both sides of pros and cons of death penalty Abolition of the death penalty sentence.
In my own analysis, the death penalty should be done away with due to the fact that, the concept that is altered in the death penalty is not humane. In addition to that, the death penalty is a brutal way to deal with criminals in conjunction with the brutal methods that are used in the world that include beheading, hanging, and shooting. Then again, the ideology of the death penalty is a diminishing idea. Therefore, I think the abolitions of the concept will be of great advantage on the way of dealing with capital criminal matters. For instance, in 2007 Guinea and Mongolia turned their back on the death penalty for all crimes in their countries. Moreover, in the recent report, more than 106 super countries are drawing their back against the death penalty.
This essay supports the decision to allow for the death sentences to continue working against criminals and their criminal activity. a rational approach on the matter reveals that even thought it takes away the lives of the criminals, it leaves no room for the beloved families to mourn especially in murder cases. Lastly, the sentence serves justices to those that take away innocent lives in heinous criminal activity. In this regard, states should continue to uphold the death penalty with intent to eliminate heinous acts and serve hard justice to perpetrators of acts against humanity.
Criminal activities continue to flood the world despite the frequent measures designed to curb criminology. In this view, the death penalty sentence has been in existence to cover for the violent criminal activities in the world. Historically, the death sentence started as a law of execution for the heinous acts in England. Over the years, its precise approach to dealing with the hardcore criminals gave it reason to gain popularity for humanity. The pro death sentence camps find the sentence to be most effective especially in sending chilly warnings to criminals with intent to take life. (Alvarez & Miller, 2017) suggest that, the camps disputing the sentence continue to hold differed viewpoints about its effectiveness. Many argue about is morality especially since it deals with the taking of lives. In many views, pro death sentence camps have valid reasoning since it is the taking of the lives of the criminals. However, the taking of lives may not be justified by a criminal justice department system. In this view, one would want to support the anti-supporting camp that reviews the morality of the criminal department which is part of the human lawmaking process.
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!