Crime is a noticeable part of society, and people acknowledge that attention should be made towards it. Most individuals recognize the danger of crime against their lives, however the methods and the steps to solve it, is still not clear.
In most countries, the death penalty has been sanctioned to many wrongdoers with a variety of offenses from the ancient time to the current-day American. Historically, death penalty has been a justifiable and competent ways of preventing crime. Today, the death penalty remains an appropriate means for sanctioning punishment for murder and other dreadful offences (Amnesty International, 2003).Criminal justice systems sanction punishment for three reasons: just punishment, deterrence, and incapacitation. Death penalty serves these goals more appropriately compared to long terms of life imprisonment (Justice For All, 2003). Possibly the main aim of a criminal justice system is to inflict just punishment.
A punishment is said to be just if it acknowledges the crime gravity. In constituting the crime sentences, the appropriate punishment must be considered by the society. To be equal to the crime of murder, such a crime sentences must recognize the sacredness of human life.Murder is different from other crime in terms of degree and kind. The society can know the gravity of murder only if it accepts the death penalty. In fact, to restrict sentence of most serious homicide to imprisonment shows an unacceptable message.
Most of the offences such as sexual abuses and drug trafficking are today being punished with prolong sentences and at time with life imprisonment terms. If the capital punishment is not inflicted, the law penalties of the criminal will eventually increase and murder cases will not be distinguished from other crimes.When the punishment structure recognize the considerably of the death penalty, then the sentences range will actually acknowledges weightiness of murdering an innocent individual (Cabana, 1996). Those who want to abolish capital punishment have a fall impression of this argument and considered death penalty as revenge. This perception misinterprets the operation of the criminal sentences. Revenge refers to private persons who take the law in their hands by inflicting their own punishment.
Death penalty is not inflicted by the private people but by the government through a criminal justice system.In most countries, death penalty has been recognized as the only appropriate sentence for some of the monstrous murder. A system which inflicted such punishment after a careful procedure, does not exact revenge but instead inflict just punishment to the offenders (News Batch, 2003). The death penalty can also be accepted due to its deterrent impact that saves the lives of innocent people by preventing potential murderers.
Logic supports the assumption that death penalty is the most appropriate deterrent for planned murders. Death penalty possibly is the most feared sentence than a prison term.The length to which criminal murderer go through to prevents this punishment obviously shows this fact. In a real sense, capital punishment does not deter all murderers. However, since death penalty is more severe compared to other penalties, it is logical to say that its existence will make some murderers to decide against heinous murder.
As observed by the Supreme Court, there is carefully planned murder, such as hire murder, in which death penalty entered well into the cold calculation, which herald the decision to act. This logical conclusion is supported by subjective evidence.For instance, in states that inflict the capital punishment, some burglary offenders have claimed that they did not use gun while committing burglary due to death penalty in case of shooting. Conversely, in states without capital punishment, kidnapped victims have reported that their abductors planned to kill them since it will make no difference in time they will serve in prison if caught. Thus since there is a good reasons that capital punishment will deter some murderers, respect for human life demands that the capital punishment is carried out by the society (News Batch, 2003).
Death penalty also prevent subsequent killing by the murderers. This incapacitation impact is significant because of the risk created by murderers. The data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics reveals that out of 52,000 prisoners serving prison time in 1984, approximately, 810 had previously committed murder again (Cabana, 1996). If some of these murderers were sentenced to death for their first murderers, then innocent persons would have not been killed. Life imprisonment without parole exposes the guards and other inmates at risk.
In fact, without capital punishment, a murderer serving a life imprisonment has a potential to murder.Similarly, an inmate serving a life imprison term may escape from prison or get executive leniency. Only death penalty can end the risk to others posed by the potential murderers (Zimring, 2003). It is difficult to imagine why one would oppose death penalty. Critics of the capital punishment argue that there is a likelihood of executing an innocent person.
Certainly, there is a likelihood of sentencing to death or fining an innocent person wrongly, but they assert that because of the conclusiveness and cruelty of the capital punishment, the effects of executing an innocent individual are greatly wrong.It is good to note that the judicial system takes several measures to protect the right of the innocent persons. In fact, there is a complex procedures requires to imposed death sentence to someone convicted of murder. Even though it is unlikely that individual who is innocent would be executed, the society should ask whether the execution of an innocent person is enough claims to abolish capital punishment. Before answering, one must consider the lives saved by the capital punishment.
Successive killing are prevented, and serious murderers are deterred.The assumption that it is better to loose 45 innocent persons so that no innocent man is murdered can be accepted. Risking the likelihood that a person could be wrongly sentenced to death is worth to save thousands lives of persons who may be the next victims of murders (Amnesty International, 2003). Discrimination is another claim against the capital punishment. About 82 percent of victims of murder are white while 13 percent are black.
Critics of the capital punishment, argues that the lives of white are valued more than the black.If this is the case, then one wonders why 55 percent of those executed are white and black 39 percent, when blacks have been convicted of 49 percent of all murders while white 39 percent between 1976 and 1994 (Zimring, 2003). Careful precaution depends on the nature offences but not the victim’s race. The reason why whites are largely victims of execution cases is that they are the most victims of capital offences. In that case, capital punishment is neither racist nor violet the serious and strange punishment sentence (Amnesty International, 2003).Conclusion Death penalty has proven to be effective upon the states in determining the sentences that the offenders deserve.
This is essential to ensure that safety and moral values of the society is uphold. Thus, there is no need for us to consider the expenses used in capital punishment. Of course, the life of human is vital, for it may be simply yours. Otherwise, death penalty should not be abolish, but instead we should hold the country accountable for effectively imposing capital punishment for those who really deserve it.
