Death Penalty in the USA - Research Paper Example

Some people commit heinous crimes like murder and this is mainly intentional due to greediness or cruelty. Different countries have laws that are meant to protect the interests of the citizens and death penalty has been used to solve such criminal cases. However, this practice has often come under criticism for various reasons. Against this background, this paper is going to critically evaluate the factors for and against this practice in different places. To a larger extent, it can be seen that people who commit such gruesome crimes like murdering others in cold blood should also be killed since they would be seen as very dangerous to other citizens in society. Upon conviction of murder, the murderer should also be killed. Therefore, death penalty is ideal in this case since it would be meant to deter the other people from committing such kind of gruesome crimes which may negatively impact on peace in the society. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), human beings are born with inalienable rights which should not be violated by other people. Article 3 of the UDHR (1948) states that “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of a person.” Different countries have laws that mainly derive from their constitutions and these laws are meant to protect the interests and rights of the citizens. Since everyone is entitled to life, it can be argued that capital punishment such as death penalty should be abolished since it violates the rights of other people. Instead, other sentences should be put in place in order to deal with such cases since killing a person because he has murdered someone would be a violation of his right to life. It is only God who has the powers to end human life since he is the creator. In such a case, it can be observed that there is no other person who is supposed to kill another individual even if that person has committed a serious crime like murder. The responsible authorities should find other means of sentencing people who have committed murder. According to Bahati (ND), death penalty is inhuman, cruel and degrading punishment that should not be used by different countries. In countries that use this law, all people convicted of murder are hanged as punishment. However, the method used when the executions are carried out is cruel since the person involved will be subjected to cruel death. This violates the rights of other people since it is stated in the UDHR (1948) that every person has a right to live. Ending another person’s life in such a violent manner amounts to cruelty even if that person involved would have committed a serious crime. It is argued that sentences such as life imprisonment can be ideal when dealing with cases involving murder. There is no person who will have a guilty conscience of having killed the other person. Therefore, death penalty should not be used when punishing the criminals since it is cruel. On the other hand, it can be seen that some people are very cruel such that they kill others in a very bad way. Such people should also die the same way since they would have killed others as a result of greediness or just cruelty. Various studies indicate that death penalty has been used in many countries since time immemorial. In other religions, all murderers are killed. There are various methods that are used when terminating the lives of the people involved in murder cases. In some religions, the offenders are stoned to death while in some areas the culprits are hanged. The culprit is first tried and once convicted of murder, then he is also killed. There are some people who are specifically concerned with carrying out the executions in different areas. The bible also mentions the use of capital punishment were people who kill others also deserved to be killed. Bahat (ND) quotes some bible verses which support death penalty and they include the following: “He who kills a man shall be put to death.” Genesis 9:6 states, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.” Exodus 21:12-14 states: “whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death. But if he did not lie in wait for him, but God let him fall into his hand, then I will appoint for you a place to which he may flee. But if a man wilfully attacks another to kill him treacherously, you shall take him from my altar that he may die.” There are also other numerous verses in the bible which support death penalty. If the bible supports death sentence, then all criminals who murder others in cold blood should also be subjected to the same treatment. Thus, “a tooth for tooth, eye for eye” principle should be applied since it would be concerned with protecting the interests of all people. The aim of applying the death penalty would be meant to ensure that all citizens enjoy the rights to their lives. Cruelty against human kind should be treated with the contempt it deserves and this means that all murderers should be eliminated from the society in order to promote peace and justice. In as far as the concept of human rights is concerned, it can be noted that John Locke’s Second Treatise Government 1776, USA states that all individuals have natural rights to their lives and liberties (Donnelly, 1998). It is the role of the ruling government of the day to put measures in place that are meant to protect the lives of the citizens in the country. The ruling government has the power to enact laws that are meant to shape the behaviour of the people such that peace and harmony prevails in the country. For instance, all governments have clearly defined criminal laws which are designed in such a way that all culprits are brought to book to ensure the prevalence of justice. According to Kleyn & Viljoen (2002), criminal law is often regarded as penal law and all people who commit crimes such as murder which are classified as criminal would be liable for prosecution by the government. It is the duty of the government to prosecute as well as to sentence any person who is accused of committing a criminal act. The state has a duty to punish all the transgressors against the stipulated laws of the land. Murder is a serious crime which should not be tolerated in any democratic society since there is no one with a right to kill another person. Death penalty should be enforced as a way of trying to deter people from committing criminal cases such as murder. The behaviour of people living in a particular society should be regulated so that it does not impact negatively on other people’s lives. For instance, killing another person can be regarded as culpable homicide or murder. In some instances, the death of another person can be a result of mistake but the offender in this case will be liable for a lighter sentence or fine. However, there are some cases where the killing would be intentional. Murderers usually kill other people with the aim of robbing them of their valuable possessions. In such a situation, the culprit should not be let free as this would promote criminal activities in the society. Justice should prevail for the sake of citizens living in a particular society (Muller et al, 2007). In the absence of a fair and democratic justice system, it can be seen that people can kill each other wantonly and this can severely impact on other people’s rights and liberties to live. Basically, death penalty should be enforced in cases involving gruesome murder of other people as a way of removing the culprits from the society. The other aim of enforcing this law is to send a warning to other members of the society so that they would not commit similar offences. If the justice system is lenient to culprits who commit serious crimes like murder, it may be difficult to govern the societies involved. In every society, there are laws that are supposed to protect other people so that it can be easy to govern as well as control them. In each country, the law of the land should be used to protect other people such that the country can be governable. Extreme cases like murder should never treated lightly since they destabilize the society in a variety of ways. Intentional murder cases deserve to be treated with the highest degree of contempt so that other people can freely enjoy their liberties. It defies logic to pardon the murderers since this would encourage other people to commit heinous crimes to other innocent citizens. Any person who is found guilty of a murder case should be hanged since this is the only punishment that can help to reduce the cases of murder in a given country. However, the culprits have to be tried in the court of law so as to ensure that justice prevails. Once found guilty, the culprit should be hanged since this is likely to warn other people against committing such offences. There is no person who should be above the law in any given country and this principle should be enforced at any cost. Human life is precious hence it has to be protected by all the citizens. Failure to adhere to this principle can lead to anarchy in a country which can ultimately make it ungovernable. This would not be a good thing for other peace loving citizens. Brown (2001) states that capital punishment can be used as a very effective strategy that can ensure the restoration of justice in a given society where people can learn to respect other citizens. Over and above, it can be observed that there are often conflicting interests with regards to the aspect of death penalty. Whilst some people may argue against this particular practice, it can be seen that people who kill others should also be killed since they would be dangerous elements in any society. There are various international laws that treat murder as a serious person since there is no person endowed with the right to terminate the life of the other person. As long as the culprit is found guilty of a serious criminal offence that involves gruesome murder of another person, then the culprit should be eliminated from the society since he or she will be a serious threat to the lives of other people. References Bahat, A. (ND). The Death Penalty Debate. Tanzania Law Reform Commission. Brown, S. P. (2001). ‘Punishment and the restoration of rights’. Punishment and Society, vol. 3(4), pp. 485-500. Donelly, J. (1998). International Human Rights, Boulder, Westview Press, Colorado. Kleyn, D. & Viljoen, F. (2002). Beginner’s guide for law students, 3rd Edition. JUTA: CT. United States Department of State (ND). Country reports on human rights practices, Washington DC, US Department of state, Issued annually. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948). United Nations Department of Public information. Read More