Capital Punishment: An injustice or a necessity?

GCSE Religious Studies (Philosophy & Ethics)

The most severe of all sentences, also known as the death penalty, capital punishment involves the state in deciding whether a criminal should or should not die for their crimes is requires law to kill the criminal. Capital Punishment is a very controversial issue in today’s society, with opinion being very much divided for or against the issue and I will study to find out which is the more responsible and better for our society.

Most people believe that Man deserves the highest respect. This is not however considered crucial for the one who hurts his fellow man only for the victims of crimes and their family. Sympathy and unity with the victim causes many people to believe that the death penalty is the only appropriate punishment for murder. They believe it will give the victim’s family closure; it will satisfy their need to avenge their loved one. If however the state murders a murderer, the state is every bit as wrong in my view. It is only adding to the cycle of violence. As the belief for respect of man states, it would also come forth that these criminals have a right to life, a natural human right and capital punishment is a direct violation to that right, which is internationally agreed upon in the UN. Most anti-death penalty organisations, like Amnesty International, base their stance on human rights arguments.

Many people believe that capital punishment makes criminals think twice leading to a safer society. The use of capital punishment means that some dreadful criminals will never again get out and repeat these crimes and in prisons the staff might also feel safer with the existence of the death penalty. It is not unusual for there to be conflicts, violent behaviour and murder in prison. Some criminals who have been sentenced to long prison terms or life would probably have refrained from cruel acts of violence and murder if they knew that it could lead to the death penalty. Today, people who are sentenced to a lifetime in prison can expect to be released early much more, and this is unlikely to prevent him from committing crimes and indeed make it possible for him to commit more. Even if statistics prove otherwise many people feel safer because of capital punishment. However it is commonly argued that that today's deterrent is just as well achieved by other means, especially life imprisonment. This in turn, would let pro-death penalty supporters argue that life imprisonment does not prevent murder within prison and that life imprisonment is less effective deterrent than the death penalty despite the number of murders and other serious crimes within prison, this issue can be dealt easily by removing the dangerous inmates to solitary confinement. Also there statistics which suggest that countries which have the death penalty do not have lower rates of violent crime than those which do got, which calls into question its effectiveness as a deterrent.

Password

Confirm Password

I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy

Murderers and violent criminals will always exist in society and the death penalty can only lower their number a tiny bit. It is to be expected, however, that every executed criminal will make for safer society. A prison term on the other hand would mean that there would always be a chance for that criminal to get out and repeat their crimes. Many people strongly believe that life should mean life, particularly in the case of murder. However this deters the convicted from possibility of rehabilitation and redeeming themselves, this is evident from the death row inmate and former American ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

The Death penalty, declares to the criminal that his evil and depraved act will not be tolerated. Capital punishment is therefore the strongest moral statement a society can make to show which crimes are horrible. At the same time, the death penalty, suggests that society too lacks morality if it can put a person to death. Capital punishment makes society appear violent too. It has a brutalizing effect because it sends out a message that it is acceptable to kill in some circumstances and may even be responsible for increasing the number of murders in countries in which it is practiced.

“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.” (The Bible) Whether one believes that the words come from a god or not, these words show an ancient sense of justice, which in turn testifies to a view of the high importance of man that has existed far back in the history of humanity. There is something within people that automatically says that man has such significance, dignity and importance that someone who murders anther does not deserve to live. This natural instinct to protect life is something we need to confirm and value, but is putting another person to death the best way to underpin it? The bible also says “Thou shalt not kill” which states that no person on earth has a right to take a life, with no exceptions, and that is wrong to play god by choosing who lives and dies.

There is no greater crime on earth than to take a fellow man’s life. A person’s life cannot be violated in a more brutal way. Human worth cannot be more despised in any more severe way. A murderer gives his victim a horrible punishment, which is to deny that person their whole life ahead of them. However a just and humane society cannot, if it punishes a murderer by taking his life. This is inhumane can even constitute as a form of torture (a further violation of human rights), this can be specific to methods of execution like the gas chamber and the electric chair, (two forms of execution still used in America) which are widely seen as producing great pain and suffering in the victim. Even in botched forms of the lethal injection execution, which is considered to be the most humane form of Execution can paralyze the victim for a period before ending her or his life, victims may endure suffering not apparent to observers is considered by some to be a form of torture.

Capital punishment is not a cure that will completely remove all of this, victims will still suffer. Yet, when a death penalty is carried out it still means a clear and vital turning point for many, towards greater relief and relaxation. Inner peace might also be the obvious result in someone’s soul, when one understands and feels that justice has been done through the use of death penalty. The person’s heart will always feel troubled if they know that a violent criminal and murderer never received the punishment they deserved. When the death penalty is carried out there is a decisive end to the deed of the criminal. This means that a decisive step has been taken, especially for most of the victims. Someone, who has caused so much worry and pain is gone. This becomes a concrete step on the road to greater inner peace. When the murder is sentenced to a lifetime in prison, there is a constant reminder for the victim, the relatives and more that after a time the offender will be free again, and the crime will, therefore, remain as an open reminder that never cease to cause pain. It is difficult to find really compelling arguments against the death penalty.

The death penalty is often opposed on the grounds that because every criminal justice system is suspect to judicial error, that innocent people will inevitably be executed by mistake, with capital punishment, this result is irreversible but with imprisonment this can be fixed. Even a single case of an innocent person being executed is unacceptable. There are numerous specific causes of wrongful convictions which would include old witness evidence which would be countered by newly available forensic evidence, Suspects may receive poor legal representation perhaps due to class distinction were a higher class person may be able to afford the best solicitors in the country were the working class people do not have much money to afford a reliable solicitor and therefore more poor people will be ion death row. Finally the last would be Discrimination which I will look at next paragraph.

The death penalty has also been known for being used in unfair ways. For instance, women are rarely sentenced to death, although in the US twenty percent of homicides are committed by women. Also, a wrong number of non-whites have been executed. In the 20th century, when the death penalty was used for rape, no white men were executed for raping non-white women whereas most black offenders who raped white women were executed. This gives us the impression that the race of the person to be executed can affect the likelihood that they will receive a death sentence and as a result of this there are a large number of ethnic minorities on death row, supporters of the death penalty would say that the death row verdicts on people about interracial murders are not racially motivated but are due to that most cases have murders committed during another form of criminal activity whereas same race murders are normally personal motives for revenge and that juries are more likely to convict someone who killed out of cold blood than someone who killed for a personal motive.

After going through all the points I think most would agree that the purpose of capital punishment is to discourage dreadful crimes and to remove individuals who commit these crimes from society forever. While capital punishment may remove some of these individuals, it does not remove all, and some of the individuals it removes from society have not committed terrible crimes. And it has been proven, legal killings are not successful in preventing illegal killings and make that society just as bad as the murderer.