Should capital punishment be abolished - Research Paper Example

Capital Punishment Capital punishment, also known as death penalty, is a very contentious topic. Peikrishvili (2004) asserts that it is a very sensitive subject, touching the deepest instincts of people including the notions of honor, fear, hatred, as well as revenge. Examples of offences on which it is applied include rape and other sexual crimes, espionage, murder, repeated crimes, and treason. It is also carried out as part of martial justice. While it is still common in some countries, others have prohibited its use.

Many arguments on its efficiency in addition to its value in preclusion of serious crime exist. This paper delves on this topic and strongly supports the view that if a lawbreaker is convicted of the aforementioned and other serious crimes, he/she should face the death penalty as punishment. Introduction Capital punishment is the most severe punishment form and it refers to putting an offender to death. The judicial process applies it on criminal offenders. Some of the approved means through which it is executed include firing squad, lethal injection, hanging electrocution, gassing, and use of the guillotine (Duhaime.org, N.d).

In general, this form of punishment offers a very good method of reducing/containing criminal propensities (Garland, 1991). This is because criminal offenders are an appalling threat to the public (Legal-explanations.com, 2007). One of the arguments in favor of capital punishment has to do with the morality of executions. When somebody instigates force against an innocent individual, he/she affirms that he/she does not stand for the principle of individual rights. It is an indication that he/she does not want to live among people as a rational being but wishes to be a predator, to other people’s obliteration as well as disadvantage.

If the person opts to live illogically, he/she is not entitled to any rights since rights are the result of the man’s nature as a rational being. Other than being an act of fairness for the society, annihilating such a dangerous being is sensible – a person is dealt with appropriate to how he/she acts. The punishment should match the crime. In view of proportionality (a notion in justice stating that the reaction ought to fit the action), the deliberate murder of an innocent individual rightly justifies the premeditated execution of the criminal by the state.

Without justice, persons may take justice into their own hands (Landauer & Rowlands, 2001). Death sentence is also appropriate since it leads to deterrence. By executing criminals, the state inflicts fear in other potential criminals such that they dread facing execution if caught committing similar crimes (Robinson, 2009). Given that the highest interest of the public is to prevent murder and other offenses, it is necessary to make use of the toughest punishment available, death penalty, to dissuade criminals (Deathpenaltycurriculum.org, 2000).

Another reason for the support of death penalty is the fact that it reduces costs. Instead of incarcerating criminals for a long time thereby going through a scrupulous legal system that involves never-ending appeals and delays in pronouncing a death sentence verdict, the government should execute them at once and use its money in more profitable undertakings. Incarceration is very costly and should not be applied on criminals involved in capital offenses. Again, it is very lenient to such criminals (Capitalpunishmentuk.org, N.d).

Another argument in favor of death sentence has to do with retribution. This is one of the strongest arguments and it points to a rational reaction to crime sponsored by the state, which is warranted for the reason that when a person commits crime, the victim is the state. In other words, when harmed, the government is warranted to seek out justice in order to re-balance the justice scales that the criminal inclined to his or her benefit while committing the offense (Robinson, 2009). As Cavadino and Dignan (2007) explain, retribution brings punishment to the offender in terms of “just deserts” and instead of concentrating on the future; it concentrates on the earlier events and presumes that the penalty should fit the offence.

Capital sentence is also appropriate because it incapacitates the offender. Incapacitation refers to a philosophical justification of punishment, which calls for the removal of the offender’s physical capacity to offend (Scott, 2008). It takes away the criminal’s freedom in such a way that he/she is cannot be involved in another offense. Capital punishment attains this perfectly – it is the definitive type of incarceration (Robinson, 2009).  Apparently, executing an offender sees to it that he/she cannot commit more crimes any longer – he/she permanently stops being a menace to the society.

Therefore, as opposed to incarceration whereby the criminal can commit another crime while in prison, escape or even be released, death penalty solves the problem once and for all (Capitalpunishmentuk.org, N.d). Conclusion Apparently, capital punishment is in general a very useful means of containing/reducing criminal inclinations. It is a very appropriate rejoinder to the inhuman as well as barbarous acts of offenders, most of which are so hideous and atrocious that the society cannot tolerate.

Persons who flout other people’s personhood, especially if they do so in distressing persistence thereby making it a routine, ought to face the ultimate consequence in order to preserve the public whose traction is in sheer infringement. Deplorably, in the present-day society, murderers and other capital crimes offenders are allowed to escape the fangs of juries, on the grounds of human rights to life, diminished liability, supposed psychiatric anomalies, just to mention but a few. As Ford (2009) asserts, this remove the faith of the populace in impartiality, something that is very risky for the state.

It is important for nations and states to unite in the re-introduction of capital punishment for the worst criminals especially if they wish to attain an equivalent decline in serious offenses. References Capitalpunishmentuk.org. (N.d). Arguments For and Against Capital Punishment in the UK. Retrieved from http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/thoughts.html Cavadino, M. and Dignan, J. (2007). Penal Systems: A Comparative Approach. The British Journal of Sociology. 58: 496–497. Deathpenaltycurriculum.org. (2000).

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty. Retrieved from http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/student/c/about/arguments/arguments.PDF Duhaime.org. (N.d). Death Penalty. Retrieved from http://duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/D/Deathpenalty.aspx#top Garland, D. (1991). Punishment and Modern Society: A Study of Social Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Landauer, J. & Rowlands, J. (2001). The Death Penalty. Retrieved from http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Politics_DeathPenalty.html Legal-explanations.com. (2007).

Capital Punishment. Retrieved from http://www.legal-explanations.com/definitions/capital-punishment.htm Peikrishvili, I. (2004). Death Is Not Justice – The Council of Europe and the Death Penalty. Retrieved from http://portal.coe.ge/index.php?lan=en&id=penalty Robinson, M. (2009). Justifications for Capital Punishment. Retrieved from http://www.justiceblind.com/death/dpsupport.htm Scott, D. (2008). Penology. London: Sage Publications.