The Death Penalty: A Necessary Evil - Research Paper Example

Society as a whole puts more value on the killer’s life than the killer did on their victim because the perpetrator is given a trial and multiple appeals which is more consideration than the victim received. Allowing a murderer to enjoy free housing, medical care and three meals per day all paid for by taxpayers is more distasteful than the act of employing the death penalty. Premeditated murder is the most inhuman and malicious crime there is because the act violates their victim’s right to live, the most precious of all aspects of being human.

 When the thief commits a crime the stolen items are usually replaceable but when life is taken, it’s gone forever. The excruciating pain of loss also forever lingers in the hearts of those left behind. In a perfect world the death penalty would not be necessary. It’s the killers who, essentially, force society to resort to the practice in an ongoing effort to safeguard against the most destructive crime against humanity. The death penalty should be perceived as one tool among others in the effort to make the world a better place to live, work and love.

The two concepts often used to support the death penalty are the respect for human life and justice for all. These phrases also represent the very foundation of two other concepts this society holds dear, civilization and democracy. The stability of these principles is dependent on the equitability of the justice system which historically and properly condones the death penalty. (Cassell, 2004). If the death penalty were to be abolished, the crime of murder would be diminished to other types of offenses that earn the perpetrator only jail time.

This would trivialize the horrific crime of murder as well as the value society places on human life. It would mean society, in effect, does not really care about the victim or their family. “You lost your loved one? That’s a shame but we really don’t care” would be the message sent loud and clear. The death penalty must always be available, if for no other reason, to demonstrate that this society does care about the value of human life and demands that everyone who does not is taken from society.

The death penalty is essential if to show that the laws we all live by respects human life. The opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in the verdict following the Gregg v. Georgia death penalty case demonstrated sound reasoning. “Indeed, the decision that capital punishment may be the appropriate sanction in extreme cases is an expression of the community’s belief that certain crimes are themselves so grievous an affront to humanity that the only adequate response may be the penalty of death.

” (“Gregg v. Georgia,” 1976) If murderers are allowed to keep their own life it means society deems their life more valuable than the victim. Most Americans agree with this sentiment. In addition, most would like to think that if someone killed them, their fellow citizens would ensure the killer lost their own life as well. An October 2007 poll by Gallup found that nearly 70 percent of Americans were in favor of retaining the death penalty but only about a quarter want it abolished. In 1994, the all-time high mark for death penalty support, 80 percent of all Americans wanted to keep the death penalty.

(Jones, 2003). Death penalty opponents claim that it is not a deterrent to crime, that it ultimately doesn’t save lives. That often recited and obviously misleading information is easily refuted. The serial killer who has been caught, tried and