The Ultimate Consequence of Capital Punishment

At those times, crucifixion, stoning, beheading, burning, or more they were the different forms of death sentence accomplishments, which resulted in the ultimate consequence. In the current societies, the ways have taken a different turn, where lethal gases, injection, hanging, shooting or electrocution are the forms of capital action. However, the issue of capital punishment has stirred controversial storms in the communities, where some people are supporting it while others are against it (Hochkammer 2017). Some of the people have the ideology that the capital punishment is uncivilized and unnecessary forgetting that it plays crucial function concerning the prevention and reduction of crime rates in the societies. Therefore, these differences in ideologies lead to the efforts of trying to justify the presence of death penalty punishments in the judiciary.

Why should one deserve to live and yet he or she has caused somebody’s live and torment to the victims’ families? This act is not morally acceptable in any society or nation, and that is the reason why the Indian government executed Yakub Memon, the person who was financing the attack. However, some of the people are of the opinion that the capital punishment is immoral and follows the footsteps of the lawbreakers. They argue that the murders cause havoc in the societies since they have an urge for blood and death, and by giving them a death penalty is just but a way of satisfying their ambitions. These people fail to understand the forward-looking approach, which states that the punishment focuses on instilling good habits to the future generation whereby the people will be following morally perpendicular directions consisting of zero rape cases, murder issues, and more.

Furthermore, the acceptance of capital punishment helps to a greater extent in the prevention and reduction in the crime rates in the societies. The constitution is crucial in any country since it is a way of setting milestones for a nation, for example, to ensure that there are no unwanted activities in the communities. Therefore, dominantly jeopardizing the constitution leads to the death punishment. For instance, Harris and Klebold murdering fifteen students in Columbine High School were against the law hence they earned themselves the capital penalty. However, some other people oppose these justifications of the punishment stating that it does not reduce the number of crimes where the act itself involves taking the life of another person hence amounting to criminal activity.

Furthermore, they claim that the constitution protects the rights of people, which states that everyone has a right to live. There are those crimes like pickpocketing, and the likes, which their concentration is low. For these, the individuals can go to jail for some years where they will engage in rehabilitation, counselling, and more and thus there is a high probability of changing their ways. On the other hand, there are capital offences, for instance, crime associated with murder, rape, molestation, robbery with violence, and more. People indulging themselves in these cases have low chances of changing, such that if released on parole, they will put the people in danger. Therefore, instead of using the taxpayers’ money in this category, it is better to use the money to improve the health sector and develop the country.

They also state that the life of the prosecutor will face tormenting times, which is costly. However, it better to invest in the lives of people who are promising to change to better than those who are destructive and life-risking in nature. In conclusion, the world that we live is full of controversies usually from the different perspectives of the people. Therefore, whether the constitution of a country upholds the death penalty, the different inclination of views from different people from varying backgrounds will still bring the controversy around the matter. Therefore, according to my opinion, the urge to reduce the capital offences in our communities, maintain desirable moral ways in our societies, and better the lives of promising people in jail outshine the counterarguments that a death penalty is a form of non-civilization and unnecessary.

In the religious view of the death penalty, there has been a mix of opinions from different religious affiliations. The Old Testament supports the death penalty as it advocates for an eye for an eye principle where if someone kills another, then, he should face the same treatment and be killed. Most countries in the world do not advise on death penalties but rather on the ethic of rehabilitation. They prefer to sentence people to life imprisonment rather than executing them (Bedau & Hugo, 2009). Recently in the Boston marathon bombing, the jury in Massachusetts doled out the death penalty of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev after being found guilty of the offenses charged against him. People should be given a life sentence in jail rather than executing them as there is no research done to prove that executions induce serious deterrence more than life imprisonment.

When there are mechanisms to sense, convict and imprison quickly, there are higher chances of deterrence as people will have a fear of being caught and convicted. In America, most of the executions are by lethal injection or by electrocution. Both methods are done while the person is unconscious hence there are no sufferings involved (Bedau & Hugo, 2009). This does not match the pains that the victims suffered such as in the case of genocide. Since execution is carried out in a humane way rather than suffering, no human rights are being violated, and this is done by the constitution. However, capital sentences have their cons. At times, the punishments can be too severe as in the case of a person who is mentally ill and requires professional assistance.

These people commit crimes without their consent or knowledge of what they are doing. For those who plan for the offense are justified to be executed (Bedau & Hugo, 2009). Life imprisonment is the best way to solve capital sentences as the inmate can work for the government while in jail. Tougher Gun Control Laws Guns are unique weapons that are used in controlling violence and terrorism by police and the army. Allowing guns in the street is dangerous as lots of deaths up to thirty-one thousand in America. Many others are let traumatized and scared as a result of being shot. Public shootings lead to massive losses annually up to one hundred billion dollars as of 1998. Cases of children and madmen acquiring weapons and causing severe damages have been reported in the past few years.

In 2015, an eight-year-old boy shot his friend in a police and robbers game when he found a real gun in the family’s shed (Habib & Michael, 2012). A twenty-nine-year-old woman was fatally shot by her two-year-old son while shopping. In 2012, Adam Lanza killed his mother and twenty-six people before shooting himself in Newton Connecticut. Having guns around children is unsafe as children may mistake the gun for toys leading to accidents that can result in deaths (Lott & John, 2010). Gun laws that ban use and possession of guns will deprive people the rights to have guns for sports and hunting. From 1980 to 2009, a study conducted indicated that there was no effect on crime rate upon ban of firearms (Habib & Michael, 2012). Gun control laws have no significant determent on crime, but ownership deters crimes significantly.

Gun control does not hinder criminals from acquiring firearms. Most of the crimes that have been done in the past have proven that majority of the guns used were obtained legally. Immigration restrictions Immigration is the movement of people internationally from one country to another which they do not possess a passport or citizenship where they settle as permanent residents, migrant workers or naturalized citizens. They can stay in the country temporarily as foreign workers where they work. People move to other countries due to different reasons that force them to become migrants. These factors could be due to civil war, unemployment, natural disasters, climate change, low income, and famine (Martin, & Philip, 2009). Most people migrate to find favorable conditions for them to live in.

By giving these people citizenship will be beneficial to the country regarding boosting the economy and strengthening security sector. The American diverse, rich and vibrant culture will be enhanced positively. From research conducted, the immigrants who should be legally enrolled could contribute up to eight hundred and thirty-two billion dollars within ten years. About one hundred and twenty-one thousand jobs would be created annually and pay taxes summing up to one hundred and nine billion dollars in ten years (Cardi & David, 2007). Legalizing the immigrants who are eligible will result in massive job creations and more fees will be collected thus improving the economic status of America (Martin, & Philip, 2009). Immigrants compete for jobs with the native Americans in the industries. Due to inflation of workers, there is a decline in wages as the employers overexploit the migrants causing a decline in jobs for the locals (Martin, & Philip, 2009).

Over seventy-five percent of the most wanted criminals in America are illegal immigrants while the majority of the inmates in America are migrants. This indicates that immigrants cause an increase in terrorism and crimes and this has a negative impact on the security and economic status of the country. The immigrant could bring in their cultures which will interfere with the American rich culture thus weakening it (Cardi & David, 2007). Abortion can be recommended by a medical practitioner due to the health status of the mother or if the fetus is likely to pose a danger to the life of the mother. It can also be by choice of the mother not to carry the pregnancy in cases of rape and incest (Block & Walter, 2014).

Most of the women terminate the pregnancy because they are not willing to bring up the baby. They abort using illegal mean which poses high risks of death or other severe complications which may eventually lead to infertility (Greasley & Kate, 2017). Abortion can be allowed or restricted depending on the situation at hand. Scientists believe that a fetus is unconscious until the last trimester of pregnancy and aborting it does not inflict pain on the fetus (Smits & Katherine, 2009). A fetus is practically not a human being hence terminating it does not amount to taking a life or murder. Personhood is initiated at birth and not at conception (Greasley & Kate, 2017). In case abortion is restricted, people will opt for the illegal means which will put them at health risks.

The rich will go to places where abortion is allowed and perform kit, but the less privileged will go for the unsafe practiced that could take their lives. Many religions do not support abortion as they term it as the killing of a human being and is against religious beliefs. The bible does not separate a fetus and a baby (Greasley & Kate, 2017). It views them as one. Life is said to begin at conception. This means that the fetuses are also humans and have the universal right to life. Works Cited Bedau, Hugo A. "Capital Punishment. " Oxford Handbooks Online, 2009. Garland, D. "Capital punishment and American culture. " SSRN Electronic Journal, 2018. Habib, Michael J. "The Future of Gun Control Laws Post-McDonald and Heller and the Death of One-Gun-Per-Month Legislation.