Death Penalty
This lawful infliction of death as a capital punishment has been operational in many countries for long. This form of punishment serves as a quick remedy to incapacitate a criminal with corporal criminal activities. However, several anti and pro arguments exist as to the justification of this act.
Arguments for the death penalty
Execution of criminals is beneficial in that it deters the possibility of felony continuation by the convict. Arguably, the release of convicts would render them the opportunity to carry on with their acts of murder or robbery and even incorporating others leading to crime increase.
Retribution serves as the best punishment for violation of rights to life, safety, and freedom delinquencies. Thus, the death penalty is a just way due to the fact that such offenders have no regard for their lives.
The penalty acts as a deterrence mechanism of corporal crime prevalence. Executions create fear in individuals of committing such delinquencies given the death consequences. Studies indicate that states with death penalty report low murder cases. However, this is subjective as some states without the death penalty exhibit similar results.
Several chastisements for diverse crimes exist in correlation to the form of offense committed. Therefore, a death penalty is a directive meant to serve a constitutional just and right of a wrongdoing. The penalty does not violate any constitutional regulations such as torture. Hence, execution of an inmate under a death row is never improbable.
Moreover, a death penalty reduces on government expenditure on servicing large numbers of inmates in terms of food, shelter, health care and clothing. For instance, the cost of a life serving individual is high than if the individual was executed. Hence, it is a cost reduction strategy in addressing capital crimes.
Arguments against death penalty
This form of penalty is ineffective in the sense that it is based on paper and not reality. In most instances, those convicted for such sentences never get executed. some through an appeal get their sentences reduced, others die of natural causes in prisons as others get exempts. Relevantly, the castigation has no impact on crime reduction, deterrence or serve injustice to the victims.
The penalty would result in wrongly executed an innocent person. Unfortunately, once an execution takes place, there’s no way to rectify that. Therefore, the killing of innocent individuals in the form of the capital sentence should not prevail. Moreover, the form of chastisement is not a globally administered and accepted treatment. Unless unified across states then, it will act to serve justice. For instance, some states in the United States practice it while others don’t and even in those practicing, the citizens are not aware of such punishments.
The sentence, especially in the U. S, is unfair, uncivilized and inequitable practice for its applicability depends on race, wealth, and place of crime. People of color like the African-Americans are likely to be executed compared to whites.
Deterrence of delinquency is low basing it on capital punishment. Very few criminals convicted of such crimes get to the execution point. In essence, no action to fulfill the execution is effectively employed thus, the relative effect on society is very minimal. In reality, no reduction in government expenditure as many convicts ends up serving life sentences thus consuming more.
Additionally, capital sentences take longer trial moments considering death is the issue hence, litigation costs are more than even incarceration. Nonetheless, this is an inhumane form of castigation and acts as revenge rather than a corrective measure to crime.
Conclusively, a death penalty should remain only as an alternative to severe murder cases after a successful evaluation of the crime. Fairness and just should prevail in following the enforcement processes. However, it should not be the priority to corporal cases to reduce on the negative implications of this punishment.
