The death penalty has long been a topic of discussion in modern law; there has to be some way to deal with sadistic, evil psychopaths who have a high risk of causing the death of innocents. But do we just lock them up in a room for 50 years, or kill them and get it over with? According to the vast majority of countries in the world, the death penalty is a brutal and cruel punishment that should never be employed, no matter how heinous the crime.
But any coin has two sides. Those who argue for the death penalty claim that it is moral to take human life in certain circumstances, because humans aren't animals who aren't unaware of their decisions. Any man who has committed an extreme crime has done so as a "free moral actor" who has the ability to control his own life, and by choosing to commit crime he has sealed his own fate. The death penalty is also an excellent deterrent of crime, since there's nothing to fear more than death itself. After all, why do criminals fight in court for life imprisonment if they would prefer a quick execution? Statistics also augment this argument; research has proven that the death penalty is an effective way of lowering the crime rate in a community. In addition, the death penalty serves due retribution. An eye for an eye has never been considered a way to live one's life, but there should be some kind of deserved punishment for criminal acts, or society would cease to function. The execution of a murderer also provides some solace to the family of the victim. For example, after the 2012 murder of police officer Ryan Bonaminio, 27, his father, Joe Bonaminio read a letter from his daughter pleading for the death penalty to be allowed so she could gain some closure.
However, there are also several flaws with the death penalty. Many ethical systems claim that the murder of any fellow human being is immoral no matter the context, since murder at its core is a sin. This is further complicated by the unfair treatments of rich people and whites compared to poor people and minorities. The death penalty can also be severely excruciating and drawn out if the injection of drugs has an unusual reaction to the chemicals present in a criminals body, as has happened multiple times, most recently in the botched Oklahoma execution of rapist and murderer Clayton Lockett on September 2, 2014. Another facet of the argument is about retribution. What some people call retribution, others call revenge. In the past few years, hundreds of families have talked about their experience with the death penalty system, and how it drew out their suffering and left them feeling horrified and empty when their relative's killer was finally sentenced to death after years of appeals and then had his life ended forever. No matter the hatred one has for the killer of a close friend or family member, they have to think about the blood of a second person being spilled, especially in the name of their friend or relative. Most importantly, however, is the fact that the death penalty is final. There have been more than 87 people freed from death row because they were proven innocent, and that is only the ones we discovered. With a rate of 1 innocent person per 7 guilty, we just cannot continue using this system. Imagine if 1 out of every 8 cars created was a defect; would you ever feel buying a car again?
The death penalty has been an issue I've thought about my entire life. In my middle school years, I was a fervent supporter of capital punishment, but over time, I've realized life imprisonment is simply better. It is more humane, arguably more punishing, less corrosive to society, and doesn't have the chance of condemning and innocent man to death that the death penalty has, to name just a few arguments of an extremely complex and multifaceted issue. I'm happy that the majority of countries in our world share my view, and hope for a future where the death penalty is entirely eliminated.
No comments:
Post a Comment