Legalization Of Death Penalty

1690 Words 7 Pages
Death Penalty is the execution of an offender sentenced to death after conviction by a court of law of a criminal offense. Death penalty should be distinguished from extrajudicial executions carried out without due process of law. The term Capital punishment is sometimes used interchangeably with death penalty, though imposition of the penalty is not always followed by execution (even when it is upheld on appeal), because of the possibility of commutation to life imprisonment. The terms "death penalty" and "capital punishment" are frequently used to mean the same thing. However, some people believe that a difference exists because "death penalty" refers to the penalty received and not necessarily its implementation while "capital punishment" …show more content…
Death penalty applies to the murders that are done savagely (kills that are done deliberately). The best approach to keep some of these brutal homicides is to utilize Death penalty more. A few individuals say that capital punishment is unfeeling, unjustifiable and it is in good. I feel that death penalty, on the off chance that it was in constrained, would be an obstacle for wrongdoing. There are numerous qualities and shortcomings encompassing the death penalty. There additionally have been numerous contentions for death …show more content…
We can even say that society fears where may they strike next can it be me, or even someone else I love. See fear has always been an issue and what people fear they try to destroy. Others may even argue that those who have committed these heinous crimes should not have the right to live. Anyone who has to endure such a tragedy will feel in this manner, you took what is mine now I want what is yours, and to him or her that makes it all better. Society feels that a judgment set is ample for the victims’ trauma, that the victims will feel accomplished by inducing the capital punishment. In fact, is it not true that most of these cases are open and shut because the jury is already set with a one-track mind of convicting a criminal and sentencing them to death? Yet, if a juror were falsely accused would they not like a fair trial? Would they not expect to be heard out instead of already knowing their verdict? As such if found guilty for a very offensive crime, would they expect the death penalty or to be left to serve their time? Over time some people in society have maintained the notion that it is legitimate to proceed an "eye for an eye" and a life for a life. Although in the Ten Commandments it states that, “Thou shalt not kill”. So I ask the question is that not what the judicial system is

Related Documents

Related Topics