Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished?
In the discussion of the death penalty and its legality, many will wholeheartedly agree that sentencing someone to death for a crime is immoral. However, this agreement will usually end with the question of if these criminals are deserving of death and if we as a scoiety have the power to condemn them to death. Many believe that if the crime is deserving, we should have the right to end a life, but there are others who believe that no crime is worth a human life. Although some think that the death penalty deters people from committing major crimes and maintain that it has never been proven unconstitutional, no one person should hold the ability to kill another, and the only benefit that the death penalty gives is retribution and revenge.
Fighting fire with fire never progresses a disagreement. Most are taught that from a young age. The death penalty is fighting fire with fire, an eye for an eye. Many argue that the only benefit of the Death Penalty is the revenge that victims receive. A professor at St. Peter’s College, Raymond Schroth, claims that “the desire for revenge is one of the lowest human emotions.” Schroth’s point is that the death penalty isn’t benefiting anybody through this act of revenge. This …show more content…
Many times, innocent people have been acquitted for crimes they did not commit. “Since the reinstatement of the modern death penalty, 87 people have been freed from death row because they were later proven innocent. That is a demonstrated error rate of 1 innocent person for every 7 persons executed.” These 87 people were saved, but there are also others who have been killed and were innocent. Bringing these innocent people so close to death for a crime they didn’t commit doesn’t progress our society. With a life in prison sentence, people who are proven innocent can at least be justified . The death sentence doesn’t allow for this
In the discussion of the death penalty and its legality, many will wholeheartedly agree that sentencing someone to death for a crime is immoral. However, this agreement will usually end with the question of if these criminals are deserving of death and if we as a scoiety have the power to condemn them to death. Many believe that if the crime is deserving, we should have the right to end a life, but there are others who believe that no crime is worth a human life. Although some think that the death penalty deters people from committing major crimes and maintain that it has never been proven unconstitutional, no one person should hold the ability to kill another, and the only benefit that the death penalty gives is retribution and revenge.
Fighting fire with fire never progresses a disagreement. Most are taught that from a young age. The death penalty is fighting fire with fire, an eye for an eye. Many argue that the only benefit of the Death Penalty is the revenge that victims receive. A professor at St. Peter’s College, Raymond Schroth, claims that “the desire for revenge is one of the lowest human emotions.” Schroth’s point is that the death penalty isn’t benefiting anybody through this act of revenge. This …show more content…
Many times, innocent people have been acquitted for crimes they did not commit. “Since the reinstatement of the modern death penalty, 87 people have been freed from death row because they were later proven innocent. That is a demonstrated error rate of 1 innocent person for every 7 persons executed.” These 87 people were saved, but there are also others who have been killed and were innocent. Bringing these innocent people so close to death for a crime they didn’t commit doesn’t progress our society. With a life in prison sentence, people who are proven innocent can at least be justified . The death sentence doesn’t allow for this