Outline:
- Introduction
- Defining Death Penalty
- Retentionist nations
- Abolition by Amnesty International
- Against Death Penalty
- Wrongful convictions
- Miscarriage of Justice
- Judicial Flaws
- Expensive
- Costly than Life Imprisonment
- Rehabilitation Failure
- No Chance for Reformation
- Its not Deterrent
- Conclusion
- Personal Opinion
- Works Cited
Against Death Penalty
“Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to air my view against death penalty. Death penalty or capital punishment is the lawful killing of guilty people, required by law, as a form of punishment due to capital offenses heinous crimes such as homicide, rape, drug trafficking, treason, arson, and violent robbery depending on different retentionist nations such as Iran and the U.S. The U.S remains one of the few countries globally, to apply death penalty on specific crimes. Death penalty is attained through methods like beheading, electrocution, gas chamber, hanging, lethal injection, stoning, stabbing and shooting, which triggers many legal and ethical aspects that should be considered by any society that administers it as a form of punishment. It is a degrading and dehumanizing act done in the name of deterring crime and enacting justice in the society. The amnesty international opposes death penalty and advocates for its abolition stating that 25, 19 and 23 countries carried out executions in 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively with abolitionists rising from 108 in 2001 to 139 in 2010 (‘Amnesty International’ pr. 2). It is not within the absolute rights of the state to punish people through inflicting a death penalty. Punishments should be fair and just although people still view murder as a crime to be severely punished, but this could be achieved thorough other ways such as serving a life sentences (Yorke 282). I will discus the reasons why death punishment should be abolished, which include wrongful convictions, cost and failure for rehabilitation.
First, wrongful convictions are a form of justice miscarriage attained when an innocent individual is executed. There can be no ways to reverse the act or compensate for the wrong convictions (Maura pr. 1). This misconception by judicial system is so risky especially for homicide cases since the diseased and the accused are the only ionmdiviodu.als that can really tell the actual incidences. The BBC asserts that, “In the USA, 116 people sentenced to death have been found innocent since 1973 and released from death row” (pr. 14). In this case, is it really right for defense and prosecution legal systems to convict and individual for murder? No. administering death penalty is in fact marked by flaws where some judicial systems are unjust with numerous appeals or based on racial lines and socio- economic status. Moreover, Individuals with psychiatric problems have been executed without having to explore their mental status. Therefore, the judicial system is sometimes bias and prejudiced. It is therefore essential to conduct DNA profile in a crime scene aided by forensics to ensure that wrongful convictions are dealt with since this would offer scientific and reliable evidence to rightfully accuse a person.
Secondly, death penalty is expensive since its cost exceeds greatly the expense of administering life imprisonment on a criminal (Yorke 281). These costs are incurred during appeals, litigation costs, hectic procedures as well as legal struggles that delay the process (Maura pr. 4). This is the taxpayer’s money which would rather be invested in other infrastructural development such as schools, medical services or transport sector rather than be used to execute criminals. In the US, capital punishment is very costly as pointed out by the BBC that “the cost of convicting and executing Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City Bombing was over $13 million. In New York, since the death penalty was reinstated in 1995, costs for each person condemned to death were approximately $23 million” (pr. 53).
Third, capital punishment does not offer essential ground for individual to reform through rehabilitation. This is opposed to the role that any punishment should achieve of deterring an individual from having to repeat a crime by offering him of her another chance to prove reformation. In addition, death penalty does not help to deter heinous crimes in the society since it has practically failed to show such an achievement in nations which uphold capital punishment (McCafferty 161). This is because such crimes are committed due to personal reasons aimed to satisfy individual interests. Thus, executing a criminal eliminate chances for reformation and the role of the society and the judicial system, of reforming social misfits. Death penalty is irrevocable, offers no room for rectification and most importantly, deprives an individual the chance to reform. An individual should be isolated only when he is socially dangerous but should become a part of the society on reformation, an aspect that should be incorporated in the social policies. It is the crime that should be taken away out of criminal thorough rehabilitative measures and not his or her life, an aspect which demonstrates absurdity, barbarism and lack of appreciation to the sacred nature of life, which is awarded freely and should be taken as so (BBC pr. 38).
In conclusion, I hope you have agreed with me that although death penalty has been a controversial debate, it is a moral dishonor and a mockery at this time and age of civilization since it appears barbaric with technological innovations which reveal wrongful and irreversible convictions. Criminals are entitled to their right to life just like any other human (McCafferty 185). They have emotions and are sensitive to torture and pain just like any one of us. Even as the judicial system is looking at a humane way of killing a person, any execution carried in whichever way triggers great suffering to the person and triggers terror and psychological trauma as the criminal waits for the day of execution. Death penalty dehumanizes and does not reform individual to constructively contribute to the society. Therefore, death penalty is detrimental to the accused, their families and the society at large. Thank you.”
Works Cited
Amnesty International. Death Penalty and Capital Punishment. New York: Amnesty International. 2011.
BBC. Arguments against Capital Punishment. 2011. April, 10, 2011 <http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/capitalpunishment/against_1.shtml>
Maura, Kelly. “Capital Punishment: An .Offense Against Victims.” Guardian News and Media. April, 2011. April, 10, 2011. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/apr/07/capital-punishment- texas>
McCafferty, James. Capital Punishment. New Jersey: Aldine Transaction. 2010. Print.
Yorke, Jon. Against the Death Penalty: International Initiatives and Implications. Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. 2010. Print.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]