In America, 67 percent of people favor the death penalty for criminals who have done a crime such as murder and 28 percent oppose that statement, according to the capital punishment poll done by Gallup recently. In addition, about 32 states in the U.S still have the death penalty. This means that more than 50 percent of the U.S states support the death penalty. Numerous amount of people stands with the argument to abolish the death penalty, but in my opinion, I stand against abolishment. Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty is a criminal punishment which the legally appointed administrators sentence a criminal to death by law. Small cases do not receive this capital punishment. Opposing arguments against the death penalty discuss the idea that solving a death should not be by death, but justice must be served either way. People who oppose the death penalty should be taking into account that the person who is sentenced to the death penalty is not just a one-time offense act. Breaking several federal capital offenses are the reason for the death penalty. In a technologically and scientifically advanced current status, there should not be any situation where a person is accidentally pushed towards and convicted of a crime. When practiced in order, correctly, the death penalty is more “beneficial” for the government, builds societal standards, and lets the victims handle the situation. The death penalty should not be abolished, because, in the capital punishment system, there are criminal cases which are not justifiable for another chance, due to the constitutional protection of the victims, common social expectations, and long-term advantages.
The death penalty is a constitutional support and protection of the people and victims. It is in the societal “interest” to create balance in any situation, this includes criminal acts.
When a heinous act has been done there is the constitutional and governmental job to decide the problem in the fairest possible way. The district attorney Dale Cox from Louisiana wrote a statement about what the societal interest is real. Cox’s (2015) research and experience states the following:
I’m a believer that the death penalty serves society’s interest in revenge. I know it’s a hard word to say and people run from it, but I don’t because I think there is a very strong societal interest. I think we need to kill more people. (salon.com article)
He underlines the urge of how people affected by the crime or viewer of the crime actually wait and expect a certain type of “revenge”. It is not morally incorrect if a criminal does the same kind of violent crime without getting caught when they were aware of the deterrence. This means that the acts were done without a “care” for what could have happened next. It also isn’t morally incorrect when several people have been murdered, victimizing a wave of families and friends, ruining their lives. Yet, having the same person live through the days of life in prison with less worry. When there is a terrorist attack affecting the lives of hundreds of people, killing some and injuring several, is it correct for that terrorist’s punishment to be spending the rest of their lives in prison? In the laws of humanity, there is no exception for those who purposefully harm, hurt, and even kill a person for their own selfish benefit. Death resulting from any kind of offense should be held responsible. For the victims, if a person does extreme wrong, violence, and creates danger in a common society without abiding the rules they must be taken responsible for their own actions.
It is true that the costs for the death penalty are higher, but there are much more long-term advantages in it. It is better to spend expenses on capital punishment than taking up space and overpopulating, decreasing healthcare necessities, and letting criminals live without the consequences of the brutal actions they have done. Later, if the criminal were to leave prison, they are a concern to society. These advantages are the reinforcement and practice of the countries constitutional rules and laws. Stricter laws on can help develop a countries crime rate. From the article written by David B.Muhlhausen, there is evidence to the fact that the death penalty promotes a stronger and safer country, which also keeps the criminals behaviors more in check. Muhlhausen discusses the point that the death penalty does decrease the number of murders. Research done at Emory University states that from 3,000 counties, during the years of 1977 to 1996, that on average from each execution there were 18 fewer murders (Muhlhausen, 2014). Studies done at Duke University concludes the fact that the penalty for cases in relation to child murder brought a decrease of 20 percent in the same type of crime rates (Land, 2004). The people will be more aware, which is also an educational opportunity for upcoming generations. In addition, long-term advantages include the perspective that for the victims, it takes the weight of their loss off their shoulders. This is a chance to cope with the reality of what a person has done to another person from the instinct of irrational emotion or out of small entertainment and pleasure. The justice system shows sympathy for criminals more than they are deserved in our society.
Most opposition arguments represent the idea that everyone will die at a certain time, so there should not be any interference through capital punishment, but when a life of a child is taken away by a criminal’s actions, then in that moment this criminal has brought upon them the legal standards and involvement. It doesn’t make sense to argue that a life should not be punished by taking another life when in the first place the person should not have done this act of crime. Is the life of a criminal worth more than the innocent life that was taken in the situation? Globally, there are fewer countries that enforce the death penalty as time goes by due to the unreliable, “benefits”. There is the proof of using the death penalty as an excuse for the government to attack against the people, but that is the dominance and lack of governance. The government should stand with its people, not against them.
The death penalty does sound socially wrong. It does send the wrong message to people who are not educated and aware of how the death penalty works. Supporting the death penalty does not mean pushing to enforce it as the usual criminal punishment for everything. Not everyone who does a crime will get the death penalty, that would be unfair and morally wrong. The death penalty is for prisoners who have a life sentence for an unforgivably horrific act. There are duties for humans as common sense to show and grow as an individual, community helper, and helpful citizen. When the social law of attack, rape, murder, torture, and any other brutal act is done, the morals a person has is no longer there, because the murder of hundreds of people or rape of young children is not accidental actions. Another chance for prisoners such as parole can give criminals an opportunity to be a danger to our society, which is actually the real wrong message to be a danger to our society.
Lastly, I stand with the statement that the death penalty should not be abolished because in the world we should have strict laws for those who choose to break it by brutally hurting and creating emotional and physical damage on others to an extreme state. Morally, victims should be given the fair treatment of what has been done to them or someone they know, for the safety of the community and environment those who are an extreme danger to our society should not be allowed to be held in prison for no reason. They should not take up space and overcrowd prisons either. If a crime is done, there should be justice, for the right situations. Capital punishment is not for every case of illegal acts, there should be more education and awareness on it. Arguments against capital punishment could be correct but to a certain extent. Over 50 percent of the American states pursue the death penalty as a punishment and that is for a reason. In the U.S News, there is an article which stated, “Americans have consistently supported capital punishment by a 2-to-1 ration in murder cases” (Muhlhausen, 2014), the principles that heinous crimes should be handled with penalties extremely strict is a common agreement among Americans. Decreasing crime rates and protecting victims through deterrence is a good idea as it promotes safety and care, but capital punishment should be approached correctly without abuse of power and unfair treatment of anyone by the state.