Capital Punishment Doesn T Support The Death Penalty

Good Essays
Nowadays if we open the news wherever we attention them, we find crime history every single channel. The bad news such as criminals has become a piece of our daily lives. So that about this news means that ignore the darkness behind our society? No, absolutely not. Disqualifying crime and criminals is our responsibility, and we can’t reject it. Getting the properly blamed to the death penalty or sentenced is very significant. Definitely not every criminals obligate a case due to they do not have any option to survive such as who steal some foods from supermarket, however someone do this bad feelings for relaxation. I do not support the death penalty for every murder. The death penalty could continue in order to eliminate the refuse of our …show more content…
If insane people are completely unresponsive to encouragements, then their emotional serve do not social goal, thus leading to another beneficial factor of the death penalty. People who have no social goal do not benefit society, culture, or the basic rules of humanity. For example; Heroine man who used this drugs every day in front of his baby and he killed his wife and his daughter in front of this baby after he was finished raping his daughter and his wife he had begun this baby such as a pedophilia and then the guy who was a psychopath he let this baby to die. How do we see the little line between mental illness and criminally psychopath or those are they going to take resume the responsibility for their behaviors? Actually I do not want to say that all mentally handicapped people should be exposed to the death penalty because it is not good for rule of society and humanity. However, some people pose fatal danger to the society in highly an inhumane way, like as this example. In such a way, the death penalty becomes crucial for the benefit of the society. I claim each criminal, do not care how inhuman s/he is, and should be given the minimum one chance to modification him/herself. So, I do not recommend the death penalty for people who have done only one killing. Nevertheless, I have seen lots of evidence almost every year people have committed several murders (e.g., serial killers), or have committed crime even after captivity. For such people, I recommend the death penalty. It must be a limit to which community should put up to. If somebody does not realize that going around murder people is incorrect, then I trust, that letting such people live is not only a great threat to the society, but also a great problem. Critic of the death penalty, Adam Belau, wrote, "Prevention by means of incapacitation occurs only if the executed

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    You can’t punish someone based on what they did; Subjectivism will give anyone on this planet a chance to avoid the death penalty. How you might ask, to someone murder might be the biggest sin in the world, but in this system that’s not a moral fact. It’s just how you feel and your opinion towards the objective but again there is no moral objective fact towards your statement. A view like this is what we need, other people can justify that a murderer doesn’t deserve the death penalty. People will open their minds more broadly and look at the person as a human being.…

    • 1274 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    A result from that, they believe, is that it would lower crime. An attorney, Steven D. Stewart had stated, “The inevitability of a mistake should not serve as grounds to eliminate the death penalty any more than the risk of having a fatal wreck should make automobiles illegal” (ProCon). He is referring to if the judicial system makes a mistake by sentencing an innocent person to death. Everyone makes mistakes so in his mind, the death penalty cannot be taken away or else many other things that could possibly cause mistakes should be taken away. On the other hand, the con side believes that the death penalty should be removed from the judicial system.…

    • 2346 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    There is no room for vengeance and a revenge stance in our justice system. The arguing stance for the death penalty says it deters murders, but in reality, the death penalty just leads to another loss of human life - regardless of the murder being an execution. When somebody tortures another human being, the government does not decide to torture that person in return. It’s the same for a rapist; the government does not rape the rapist. So, why does the government decide to murder the murderer?…

    • 1393 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    I also think we should abolish the death penalty because killing a human for what they did wrong such as murder, will not solve the problem or give the victim permanent relief, it will only be temporary and we are just as wrong as them when they committed the crime. Nathanson states that this does not solve the problem at all because we are still acting barbarically to those who are guilty of a barbaric crime. If we continue to punish the wrongdoers with the same violent actions, we are setting an example that violence is the answer to our problems and that it is morally right. That is not what should be done we should not have to punish the wrongdoer with a severe punishment like the death penalty to get our point across. Like Nathanson says we should want the state to set the right example, and the only violence that is…

    • 1083 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Pro Capital Punishment

    • 1293 Words
    • 6 Pages

    In our society today, citizens see murder as something disgusting and as an act that goes against everyone’s morality. This is because we all live together and by seeing someone dead we all expect justice to be served and a criminal to be blamed for such a serious offence. Some crimes are not as serious as others, but if we want our society to continue running the way that it is we can’t have murders everywhere which is why we must do to them what they have done unto…

    • 1293 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In discussions of capital punishment, one controversial issue has been whether or not the death penalty benefits the states that enforce capital punishment. On the one hand, those who oppose the death penalty argues that capital punishment is inhumane and should not be used to end someone’s life. On the other hand, those in favor of capital punishment firmly believe that the death penalty is the only way to make the world just. My own view is: the death penalty gives life value and justice; it helps reduce prison crowding, and ensures public safety. Americans today tend to believe that the death penalty is inhumane and if the government kills someone they are decreasing the value of life.…

    • 1122 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Once they are dead its over no mulligans, so it should be difficult to make this decision. Koch has a great quote where he says; “If government functioned only when the possibility of error didn 't exist, government wouldn 't function at all.” meaning that government his flawed at all levels and should not be trusted with life. The most important replay Koch gives is does the death penalty cheapen the cost of a life. The death penalty must be seen as the ultimate punishment and not throw around. Yes Koch says if you cannot measure the cost of a human life, but murder can be a ruthless crime, but to condemn another man to death is not only costing that man his life but the emotional weight on the judge jury and the…

    • 1380 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    What about the people who could not show the evidence of their innocence because of inadequate resources? There might be many cases where innocent people were executed because they did not have enough resources and/or a good attorney. The government should be responsible for giving a better attorney and advisors to the criminal and provide them full resources to defend themselves. It should offer spiritual advisors to both, the convicted criminal and the victim’s families. In addition to this, execution should not be affected by the amount of money a person has, and the government should make sure that such inequities do not…

    • 1902 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The debate over the death penalty continues to escalate as more and more individuals gain awareness about the controversies encompassing the topic. This, in turn, calls into question the morality of enacting the process of sentencing someone to death, however, an individual who deliberately murders innocent civilians should not have protection, in regards of morality, from a society, when they pose a dire threat to everyone around them. Morals differentiate between individuals, but the laws put in place by a nation act as a constant that everyone should abide by, despite one’s personal values, because the laws protect the general population who follow them. Only those who contend with the laws will endure the punishments that accompany their…

    • 1243 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Death Penalty Is Wrong

    • 1009 Words
    • 5 Pages

    No one has the power to sentence someone to death with just their word, unless, an individual tries to kill them themselves. The only way the death sentence can be brought up is from a vote the grand jury, after that, multiple courts shall take place. All of the death penalties are from criminals who have killed people. Although the death penalty has quite a few cons, society still needs a way to vanquish the evil from the US. The death sentence should not be a common way to be rid of criminals, however, execution should be on the possible action list for dealing with extraordinary criminals that will do anything to try and murder someone.…

    • 1009 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays

Related Topics