Death Penalty - Essay Example

Jess Coleman wrote the article “Is the Death Penalty Ever Justified?” Death penalty refers to the conviction to death upon commitment of a crime against humanity. Indeed, most countries in the world including China, Iran, Yemen, Sudan, Tunisia, Syria, Egypt, the US, Iraq, North Korea, and Libya allow the death penalty. Nevertheless, the validity of this crime is subject to world debate attraction divided opinions from religious groups, human rights activists, and different personalities. As such, Jess Coleman equally seeks to address this topic by giving various arguments and statistics against the death penalty (Coleman Web).

According to Jess Coleman, the main aim of according death penalty to convicts is to deter, control, and ultimately curb crime. However, he argues that whether the death penalty has achieved its purpose is a point of discussion. He argues that any executions take place in a violent manner though the intention is usually honorable. He notes that no substantial evidence relates increased executions to reduced crime. Instead, he observes that there is a correlation between increased executions and a rise in crime in countries like China, Iran, Yemen, Sudan, Tunisia, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, North Korea, and Libya. In addition, he argues that ultimately what the death sentence achieves is death and not justice. Moreover, he notes that just like in any other policy, society and the government are not ready to deal with the aftermath of the death penalty. As such, he argues that governments should look for better and more ethical ways of holding criminals accountable than subjecting them to the death penalty (Coleman Web).

Indeed, the author’s purpose is to refute the idea that the death penalty is justified in society. He uses trusted statistics to prove that the death penalty barely reduces crime in society. He seeks to point out the need to find other avenues of seeking justice than convicting criminals to death.

I agree with the author’s argument that death penalty does not deter crime. Actually, as he portrays in the data no substantial evidence relates increased executions to reduced crime. This is so because in many cases death penalties rise from failed legal process where convicts do not get a chance to defend themselves. Others rise from vengeance as states seek to silence citizens who oppose the government. At the same time, the offended person gets no justice when the offender dies. It would serve the victim better if the criminal takes responsibility than dying. Actually, two wrongs do not make a right and death penalty is another wrong that cannot serve justice. I hence agree with the author that death penalty only achieves another death and no justice. Where a court convicts someone wrongly, that decision is not reversible and hence death penalty might end up extinguishing the wrong people from the society. Hence, execution guarantees death and no justice. In addition, I agree with the author’s argument that the society is usually not ready to deal with the aftermath of a death penalty.

In most cases, death penalties attract huge human right activism who claims violation to the right to live. Additionally, in numerous occasions, a court convicts the wrong person to death and the real criminal surfaces thus challenging the quest to curb crime. As such, I agree with the author that the government and the society should adopt better and ethical ways of holding criminals accountable than subjecting them to a death penalty. Ideally, is more beneficial to the offended families to hold the offender in jail for life than to kill him. That way the criminal will take responsibility and the victims will feel justice coming their way. I therefore find that the author has a sound reasoning and presents a good argument in his opinion. Moreover, he offers good evidence to his argument by presenting reasonable data to support the fact that executions do not deter crime (Coleman Web).