Death Penalty Arguement

854 Words 4 Pages
the death penalty should be opposed in all cases without exception regardless of the nature of the crime or the characteristics of the offender or the method used by the state to kill the prisoner. The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is the process of a cold-blooded murder committed by the goverment in the name of justice. It constitutes a violation of the right to life as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration. Just as there can not be a justification for torture or cruel treatment , the death penalty , like torture , it is a physical and mental assault on an individual . And you can not measure the physical pain caused by killing a human being , as you can not measure the psychological suffering caused by foreknowledge of death at the hands of the state , and the death penalty is discriminatory and is often used disproportionately against the poor and members of minority groups and racial, ethnic and …show more content…
As long as human justice remains fallible , it is no way to eliminate the risk of executing the innocent . And Amnesty International continues to demand the abolition of the death penalty in the whole world unconditionally
Putting an end to the death penalty means recognizing that it represents the public policy subversive and exciting divisions are not consistent with the values that are shared by people on a large scale . They are not prone to errors irreversible , but is considered expensive public money , as well as social and psychological cost . Did not prove they are a special deterrent to crime , it also eliminates the possibility of rehabilitation and

Related Documents