Issue of the Death Penalty - Coursework Example

Death Penalty Contents Introduction 3 Trends in Eradicating Death Penalty Worldwide 3 Advantages Of Death Penalty 4 Disadvantages Of Death Penalty 5 Conclusion 7 References 8 Death Penalty Introduction Progressively, in the way of social evolution, an agreement forms among people and nations that given practices cannot be tolerated at all times. Examples of this are ritual human sacrifice, physical torture that is condemned by many nations worldwide and slavery that has been abandoned largely. Relics of these practices may go on, but those are anomalies that go on to underscore the facts that the world is turning against these evil practices. Many nations worldwide has currently abandoned the usage of the death penalty. Consent against the use of death penalty has not been formed by the world (Stuart, 2002). The most popular countries worldwide, China, executes a lot of people yearly and the United States which are the most powerful nation uses death penalty time to time. Worldwide, eighty four nations have retained the use of death penalty. On the other hand, the number of nations using death penalty is reducing and there are possibilities that worldwide opinions and pressure are going to gradually influence all nations in abandoning death penalty. This paper will look at the trends used in eradication of death penalty and advantages and disadvantages of death penalty. Trends in Eradicating Death Penalty Worldwide In 1986, forty six countries had eradicated death penalty for normal crimes. After sixteen years, the number of nations in the same group had doubled to eighty nine. Furthermore, other twenty two nations had stopped implementing death practice, bringing the total number of countries that did not implement death penalty to one hundred and eleven. In a book on world advances in the death penalty, the author Roger Hood stated that the yearly average rate at which nations have eradicated death penalty has risen from 1.5 to 4 yearly (Harold, 2008). In a world whereby death penalty has been put into place in nearly everywhere, abolition is an intense turn around. Even though formal abolitions of death penalty dates from 1870 for Netherlands, 1846 for Michigan and 1867 for Venezuela, many movements implemented in eliminating capital punishment has been recent. Reasons why many nations have eradicated death penalty in increasing ways differ. For some countries, it was a comprehensive human rights understanding. Spain abandoned death penalty in 1995 asserting that it had no place in the advanced penal system and civil societies. On the other hand, Switzerland eradicated the death penalty because it contained a right to dignity and life flagrant violation (Harold, 2008). Advantages Of Death Penalty The crimes of treason, rape, torture, murder, kidnapping and larceny balance on moral codes that escape apodictic evidence by professional testimony. Many communities would fall into anarchy in case they do not act on moral assumptions that are less certain. Abolitionists may oppose that death penalty is integrally immoral. This is because governments are not supposed to take human life no matter what the aggravation (Di Tella, Edwards and Schargrodsky, 2010). This is not a fact, but an article of faith. Additionally, death penalty honors dignity of individuals. This is by treating the person defending himself as a moral actor free and able in controlling his own purpose for ill or good. This does not treat the defendant as an animal that has no moral sense. Because execution methods may lead to pain, either as inescapable death consequences or accidents, this does not establish the sort of impartially intolerable danger of harm. This harm is qualified as unusual and cruel. Kentucky has implemented an execution method supposed to be more humane than the death penalty (Corey Lang, 2000). This was shared by another thirty five states. The decision made by Kentucky in adhering to its practice cannot be seen as probative of the wanton pain infliction in the eighth amendment. In the current history, in cases where execution methods have been challenged in the court as unusual and cruel, the court rejects these challenges. The society has however progressively moved to more humane methods that carry out capital punishment. Additionally, common sense that has been bolstered lately by statistics shows that death penalty will discourage murder. A lot of people fear death. As a result, nothing will discourage a criminal more than death (Borgida and Fiske, 2008). Life imprisonment is not feared by a lot of prisoners. Murderers clearly select it to execution, or else, they would not attempt to be imprisoned to life imprisonment as an alternative of death. Execution of murderers is supposed to go on as long as there are possibilities that these executions defend citizens from murders. The whole society is justly ordered when every individual receives what is expected of him. Crime interrupts this fair order. Many criminals take peoples lives, liberties, peace and goods so that they may have undeserved benefits. By issuing deserved punishments to these criminals protects morally the society by bringing back this fair order, making the criminal pay a price that is the same as the one he or she has committed. This is justice, and should not be confused with revenge that is guided by a different purpose. Families that have been devastated by criminals may be safe when they know that the criminals have been issued with death penalty and will never come back (Corey Lang, 2000). Disadvantages Of Death Penalty Many death sentences are implemented in criminal justice systems that treat the rich better and the poor treated as guilty even if they are innocent. This is a wicked condition that makes disallowing the death penalty on good grounds not only defendable but vital for those refusing to admit unjust or unequal administration of the sentence. Death penalty treats the human race members as if they are objects people can play with and discard. No evidence reveals that death penalty reduces crime than life imprisonment (Badinter, 2004). The states having death penalty laws have no lower murder or crime rates than the states that do not have these laws. There are possibilities that innocent people including mental persons are found guilty and put to death. Putting death penalty to a criminal may not un-turn the crimes committed. Death penalty is said to be a brutal form of government and old fashioned way. Countries that continue to employ this method are termed to be hostile (Ghandhi, 2010). Conclusion In justice, the incentive is the indignation virtue that answers injury with injuries for public wellness. Justice is the primary resolution of just punishments such as protection, deterrence and rehabilitation that have lesser status in punishments than justice. There is no justice system that can give results said to be 100% correct every time (Harold, 2008). Every system relying on human testimonies for proof must have mistakes. People are supposed to be vigilant in uncovering and avoiding such mistake. The system of justice in use rightfully wants higher standards for cases of death penalty. Moreover, the risks of carrying out mistakes with the unexpected due processes used in cases of death penalty are very small (Harold, 2008). There are no reliable evidences showing that innocent people have ever been executed since the reactivation of death penalty in 1976. Inevitability of mistakes is not supposed to serve as grounds of eliminating the death penalty. Many people opposing death penalty state that costs incurred in a death penalty are very expensive that people must choose life imprisonment. These allegations are not true. Justice for all estimated that life imprisonment cases may cost more than the death penalty cases. References Stuart, B. (2002). The Death Penalty: an American History. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Badinter, R. (2004). The Death Penalty: beyond abolition. New York: Manhattan Pub. Co. Corey Lang, B. (2000). Punishment, property and justice: philosophical foundations of the death penalty and welfare controversies. Aldershot: Ashgate/Dartmouth. Ghandhi,S. (2010). Blackstone’s international human rights documents. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Di Tella, R., Edwards, S., and Schargrodsky. (2010). The economics of crime: lessons for and from Latin America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Borgida, E., and Fiske, S. (2008). Beyond common sense: psychological science in the courtroom. Malden: Blaxkwell Publishers. Harold, W. (2008). The Economics of Crime: an introduction to rational crime analysis. London: Routledge. Read More