Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

CAROLINA CASTILLO 2010-0212

Death Penalty

The death penalty is perhaps the most controversial punishment that society can apply to those citizens who break the law. Since the early penal systems, this penalty remains a practice of "revenge" in response to an insult. Despite the violations of human rights causes, it is a punishment that is drastic and in very special cases it may be the most effective, but not correct. There are crimes that justify their application, people whose death is reflected as a benefit to society. The death penalty is a way to dissuade crimes, but is also a discrimination to the minorities and it violates the human rights.

Death penalty is good and serves a definite purpose of reducing crime as well as bringing justice to the accused and the victims. The death penalty accomplish this goal better than any other form of punishment, as it ultimately ensures that a criminal can never harm another person again. Morally, justice must always be preferred to equality. As Irwin Isenberg said, I favor the death penalty as a matter of justice and human dignity even apart from deterrence. The penalty must be appropriate to the seriousness of the crime.1 In other words, what Irwin Isenberg is trying to express, is that the death penalty is not given to any individual, it is given to those who have met the extreme of the crime.

CAROLINA CASTILLO 2010-0212 The death penalty cases are much more expensive than other criminal cases and cost more than imprisonment for life with no possibility of parole. A study in Kansas indicated that a death penalty trial costs $116,700 more than an ordinary murder trial.2 Complex trial motions, lengthy jury selections, and expenses for expert witnesses are all likely to add to the costs in death penalty cases. The irreversibility of the death sentence requires courts to follow heightened due process in the preparation and course of the trial. After conviction, there are constitutionally mandated appeals which involve both prosecution and defense costs.

If the foreknowledge of any punishment is meant to dissuade the criminal from committing the crime, why do people still murder others? The US had a 2012 murder rate of 4.8 victims per 100,000; meaning that nearly 15,000 people were victims of homicide that year.3 Death penalty does not appear to be doing its job; it does not seem to be changing every criminals mind about killing innocent people. If it does not dissuade, then it serves no purpose. The warning of life in prison without parole must equally dissuade criminals.

I can certify that I do believe death penalty is moral and just. We must never forget that no one has to be executed, if people does not murder, they would not be executed. Murderers are not to be considered as innocent people who are fighting for their own lives. That statement should be for the victims that they have murdered. Let us remember that the rights of the victims are much more important than those of the perpetrator.

CAROLINA CASTILLO 2010-0212

References 1- Website: www.prodeathpenalty.com Retrieved: Tuesday 09, July 2013 1:40pm 2- Website: www.fnsa.org Retrieved: Saturday 13, July 2013 07:30pm 3- Website: www.listverse.com Retrieved: Saturday 06, July 2013 11:20am