The Death Penalty Must Be Executed
Murder is defined as ‘the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another’. Isn’t this the definition of capital punishment? The death penalty should be executed, it was and always will be a morally corrupt system, teaching society that it is unacceptable to kill, but to kill a killer is acceptable. The number of humans who were innocent, mentally ill or executed for the sole purpose of preventing future crime is unknown and will remain so until the death penalty is sentenced to death itself. Why should the death penalty remain? It takes the lives of those who deserve more punishment than being able to escape from the world.
Innocent, guilt-free, faultless. Many, many people are sent to prison …show more content…
Deterrence is the only argument which death penalty advocates discuss in disputes regarding pro-death penalty. But, there is no plausible statistical evidence that the death penalty decreases the rate of murder. If capital punishment lowered homicide rates, states in America with the death penalty would have a low rating of homicide. The Death Penalty Information Centre in the USA has looked at statistics which show that American states with the death penalty have consistently higher murder rates than states without the death penalty. As of 2015, the average murder rate of death penalty states was 5.1, whilst states without the death penalty had a rate of 4.1. This proves that the death penalty doesn’t act as a deterrent. Imagine sitting at the kitchen table in the morning, and your husband has angered you one too many times. Do you not contemplate murdering him because you could be executed if caught? I don’t think so! A lot of countries have eradicated the death penalty for this reason, as it clearly has no impact on the amount of homicides that occur, as homicides are often spur of the moment crimes of passion. Countries which have abolished the death penalty have substantially lower crime
Murder is defined as ‘the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another’. Isn’t this the definition of capital punishment? The death penalty should be executed, it was and always will be a morally corrupt system, teaching society that it is unacceptable to kill, but to kill a killer is acceptable. The number of humans who were innocent, mentally ill or executed for the sole purpose of preventing future crime is unknown and will remain so until the death penalty is sentenced to death itself. Why should the death penalty remain? It takes the lives of those who deserve more punishment than being able to escape from the world.
Innocent, guilt-free, faultless. Many, many people are sent to prison …show more content…
Deterrence is the only argument which death penalty advocates discuss in disputes regarding pro-death penalty. But, there is no plausible statistical evidence that the death penalty decreases the rate of murder. If capital punishment lowered homicide rates, states in America with the death penalty would have a low rating of homicide. The Death Penalty Information Centre in the USA has looked at statistics which show that American states with the death penalty have consistently higher murder rates than states without the death penalty. As of 2015, the average murder rate of death penalty states was 5.1, whilst states without the death penalty had a rate of 4.1. This proves that the death penalty doesn’t act as a deterrent. Imagine sitting at the kitchen table in the morning, and your husband has angered you one too many times. Do you not contemplate murdering him because you could be executed if caught? I don’t think so! A lot of countries have eradicated the death penalty for this reason, as it clearly has no impact on the amount of homicides that occur, as homicides are often spur of the moment crimes of passion. Countries which have abolished the death penalty have substantially lower crime