• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Is it ever justifiable to execute a criminal?

Extracts from this document...


Is it ever justifiable to execute a criminal? "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." Is this moral? All over the world debate has been going on whether it is ever justifiable to execute a criminal. Today, one of the most debated issues in the Criminal Justice System is the issue of capital punishment. In my opinion the death penalty, executing criminals is unjust in many ways. I feel this way, as it is not justifiable to kill people. The death penalty is merely saying that the government is above the law. If the people aren't allowed to kill then why is the government allowed to kill? ...read more.


Unfortunately that is not the case. According to the International Debate Education Association, "Higher execution rates can actually increase violent crime rates. California averaged six executions a year from nineteen fifty-two until nineteen sixty-seven and had twice the murder rate than the period from nineteen sixty-eight until nineteen ninety-one." Obviously, proven by the above statement criminals do not take their punishment into consideration before they act out in violence. Since the legalisation of capital punishment, many states have made incompetent decisions. According to the International Debate Education Association, accounts for twenty three innocent people that were executed in the United States during the twentieth century. How many other executed criminals were unable to prove there innocence? ...read more.


Are the real murderers still free and roaming around our streets? In conclusion, I think the death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman degrading punishment and it also violates the right to live. The death penalty has never been shown to overcome crimes more effectively than any other punishments. No matter what reason a government gives for killing prisoners and no matter what method is used, the death penalty can't be apart from the issue of human rights. Human rights are not given by governments and they can not be taken away by governments. Human rights belong to everyone. Of course in cases of clear guilt, it is easy to say they deserve to die. However, the case involves the death of someone somebody else loves and it is hard to say goodbye. Capital punishment degrades society. Why do we kill people to prove that killing people is wrong? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Capital Punishment section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Capital Punishment essays

  1. Our aim of for both questions is to explore the guilty conduct required of ...

    Usually a person who is in a state of automatism at the time is not liable. This is because any "internal factor", mental or physical is, in law, a disease of the mind. Carl moved Bill to the beach, which was a novus actus interveniens, that is an intervening act.

  2. Analyse the philosophical principles of at least one ethical theory and evaluate its application ...

    Nobody has been able to convincingly support the assertion that capital punishment has a deterrent effect. Nobody knows whether it might even cause murders, especially among the suicidal and mentally ill, who, unable to kill themselves, might kill so that society would arrange their deaths for them.

  1. Is an eye for an eye a legal remedy in the 21st century?

    Surprisingly this has not been the case for as stated above there are many flaws with in the legal system. Thankfully there have been many public outcries and cases where people have been seen to express their realisation that the death penalty breaches many human rights.

  2. Liability in criminal law

    of death is the 'but for' test, the courts must be convinced that the death would not have occurred but for the actions of the accused. White 1910 did not satisfy the 'but for' test, as White's actions made no difference to the outcome.

  1. Outline the basic principles of sentencing

    not that much dangerous therefore, the sentence could be suspended or they could be sentenced with probation. This seems to be reasonable when someone make a minor mistake without any previous plan, should not go to prison; because he is not going to commit it again, however if he make another mistake then he will face a heavier sentence.

  2. Role of Fate

    mysteries but because none of us could go on living with out the exact knowledge of the place and mission assigned to us by fate" points that the whole town is guilty about Santiago's murder as they feel part of it.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work