Death Penalty Pro's - Essay Example

A number of organizations have gone against death penalty, with convincing arguments surrounding its ineffectiveness in preventing future crimes, its cruelty and various other reasons. Listening to their arguments would make one think that the supporters of death penalty are nothing but cruel and inhumane individuals devoid of compassion and willing to kill, which is the very crime that they abhorred in the first place. One of the most vocal of all the activists is Amnesty International, which made a public declaration that "death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.

" The group also believes that this type of punishment is a form of human rights violation, irrevocable, may be inflicted on the innocent, and does not certainly stop future crimes to be committed. Abolitionists back their claim with statistics and studies, although most of these studies have been misrepresentation of the truth. They have succeeded in their quest in a number of nations around the world. Amnesty International states that from the time that it started the movement against death penalty, the number of nations that have abolished death penalty from the judicial system has risen from 16 to 86 nations.

Notwithstanding the strong opposition to death penalty, however, the American public continues to quietly support this form of punishment for heinous crimes. This support was even reinforced after the September 11 attack on the United States. It is reported that one-fifth of those who usually go against the death penalty feel that the terrorists who execute such crime against humanity deserve death sentence (Cable News Network). This goes to show that people feel that it is necessary to punish those who are willing to kill numerous others and still justify their murderous actions.

First among the arguments of opponents of the death penalty surrounds its ability to deter crime. They state that there is not enough statistical basis to say that the imposition of death penalty prevents further crimes from happening. Opponents even think that crime rates are higher for those states with death penalty statutes than those which do not adopt capital crime punishment. While it is difficult to convince people who have already made up their minds against death penalty, it should be emphasized that deterring crime is not solely the reason for exacting death penalty on those who committed heinous crimes.

John McAdams aptly states that execution of murderers even without deterrent effect, would still be better as this will diminish the number of criminals in society than if they were left to live and with that inaction, people expect future crimes to be prevented (American Bar Association). Even as opponents of death penalty believe that the punishment does not ensure the decline in crime rates, they also do not provide enough evidence that inaction against doers of heinous crimes warrant the decrease the occurrence of crimes. George E. Pataki believes that death penalty is effective in preventing future crimes from happening, and that the government should use every action possible in order to protect