Capital punishment should end
For instance, capital punishment is subjected to criminals with a record of awful life, but the justice system does not apply fair-mindedness to take the life of a criminal due to the fact that the criminal took the life of another person. What is the excuse behind killing people because they killed others? This judgment is awkward because execution is not deterrent. Death penalty influence the society negatively as it only brings in a brutal cycle of more murder. Deterrence Death penalty is not deterrent. In support of capital punishment, people believe that putting prisoners to death helps stop upcoming murderers from commitment of similar crimes; contrariwise, this is not the certainty. Killing a life imprisoned inmate is too much of a good thing, and a pointless exercise.
Because killing criminals does not lower rate of crimes, death penalty is only a blood game. The use of capital punishment can also be negated from a philosophical standpoint; it is a paradox. Killing a person to prove the point that killing people is wrong makes no sense whatsoever. Like the old saying goes, “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Now, fast forward three years and he’s lying on a bed, getting a lethal injection. This is a man who tried to kill himself before the officers apprehended him and he’s now being killed in order to dispense ‘justice’. This kind of story isn’t rare; in fact, it happens often. Why would the judicial department give criminals the death that they so desire? Murdering criminals sets them free from their actions; they cease to be responsible for the murders.
Instead of giving them an easy way out, they should be tormented by the ghosts of their past victims. However, the cost of keeping huge numbers of death rows is also quite heavy. A recent study conducted in the state of California revealed that incarcerating death rows totals to $90,000 extra government expenditure for each inmate annually totaling to sixty million. The fact that so many tax payer dollars go towards killing another human being makes it immoral and unjustifiable. Al this revenue go into more humane endeavors, such as: education, roads, infrastructure and even financial aid. Why should tax payers pay for the crimes of others? What does it say of our society when a state spends millions of dollars to kill a criminal? What kind of message does that send to our constituents? According to () in the past 35 years California had 13 executions.
The death sentence cannot be infallible. Some way, somehow, there will always be an innocent person on death row who might end up killed on false charges. Instead of wasting valuable time and money, it’s better for states to just remove the death sentence (Timmons & Patrick, 382). How can society put faith behind a system that has a potential of killing innocents? Faith in capital punishment is unjustifiable because it isn’t foolproof. With the advent of DNA technology, there have been many stories of men and women who have been released thanks to DNA evidence. Is it justice when a man’s life is taken away from him because of a simple technicality? A lot of lawyers say that a man must be found guilty without a reasonable doubt in order to be incarcerated.
From $10 to earn access
Only on Studyloop