In ancient times and today, capital punishments, such as the death penalty, have been used to penalize a variety of offenses. These offenses, in the eyes of the government, include murder committed in the course of rape, kidnapping, and drug crimes. This capital punishment allows justice to be restored to those who have committed heinous crimes. In light of these offenses, it is clear that the death penalty should not be abolished, and that these individuals should be punished for their crimes.
The continuation of the death penalty acts as a deterrent to other crimes, ultimately saving lives. Some crimes that these criminals commit are so heinous and inherently wrong that they demand strict punishment such as the death penalty. The cost of committing a crime so grave causes people to change their behavior to avoid these costs, thus reducing crime and homicide rate. This reduction then leads to more lives being saved. A strong link has been revealed between executions and reduced murder rates. Research shows each execution carried out is linked to about seventy-four fewer murders in the following year (Death Penalty 1). Thus, it can be deduced that keeping the death penalty inherently prevents more crime from happening and saves lives. The death penalty allows the state to exact appropriate retribution. The state has a responsibility to punish those who deserve it, but only to the extent they …show more content…
The allowance of this capital punishment permits other crimes to be deterred thus saving more lives. It also serves as retribution for the victims and can be considered moral in many aspects. In addition, it provides peace and security to society by establishing strict punishments to control brutal and horrendous crimes. In the end, the real threat to human life is not the legal punishments that criminals receive, but the criminals themselves.
The continuation of the death penalty acts as a deterrent to other crimes, ultimately saving lives. Some crimes that these criminals commit are so heinous and inherently wrong that they demand strict punishment such as the death penalty. The cost of committing a crime so grave causes people to change their behavior to avoid these costs, thus reducing crime and homicide rate. This reduction then leads to more lives being saved. A strong link has been revealed between executions and reduced murder rates. Research shows each execution carried out is linked to about seventy-four fewer murders in the following year (Death Penalty 1). Thus, it can be deduced that keeping the death penalty inherently prevents more crime from happening and saves lives. The death penalty allows the state to exact appropriate retribution. The state has a responsibility to punish those who deserve it, but only to the extent they …show more content…
The allowance of this capital punishment permits other crimes to be deterred thus saving more lives. It also serves as retribution for the victims and can be considered moral in many aspects. In addition, it provides peace and security to society by establishing strict punishments to control brutal and horrendous crimes. In the end, the real threat to human life is not the legal punishments that criminals receive, but the criminals themselves.