In other cases, the choice of the method was warranted by the time of crime: The French Revolution introduced a more humane execution method, the guillotine that cut off the heads of the condemned. The duke cancelled the penalty and ordered to destroy all the instruments of murder in his nation after being influenced by the book the Italian Cesare Beccaria Dei Delitti e Delle Pene "On Crimes and Punishments".
The anniversary of the decree is since celebrated as a holiday in Tuscany. In , as reports Amnesty International, 3, people in 25 nations were executed.
China accounts for the bulk of these executions - 3, cases. Kuwait is the leader in the number of executions per , residents - compared to in China and in Iran, the runner-up on the total number, Wikipedia. In most nations, death penalty is used to punish criminals for war crimes or serious crimes associated with physical injury. In Asia Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand it is used to punish for drug-related crimes, even though these crimes are mot related to physical injury. As part of anti-death penalty movement, this call to repeal this measure has been upheld by various international organizations.
Some international conventions such as the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Sixth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights have been adopted, although they only bind nations that have ratified them.
Organizations like the European Union demand from new members the abolition of death penalty as a condition of entry. Thus, there is a significant pressure on nations to cancel it. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are two prominent organisations fighting against death penalty. The issues involved in the discussion of death penalty usually focus around two main parts. First, this punishment is analysed from a purely utilitarian perspective in an effort to find out whether application of capital punishment really helps to deter crime and reduce the risk of recidivism, when criminals commit repeated crimes.
The evidence for this is sought in crime rates in regions and nations where executions are carried out. Second, supporters or opponents of death penalty need to find out whether this penalty can be acknowledged on moral grounds, solving the problem of whether human beings are justified in killing other human beings.
Although the arguments stated remain basically the same throughout history of the discussion, evidence can vary, and the findings, although controversial, can tilt the public opinion to one or the other side.
Thus, the support for death penalty surges in nations where especially outrageous murders take place. On the contrary, a lower criminal rate reduces the support. Death penalty, in my view, has to be supported on the ground of just retribution for murder. Still, I do not believe in death as a form of punishment for drug dealers, however heinous their activities might be, since they did not violate human lives.
Political crimes should not be punished with death either, as this would open the way to political repression and physical elimination of political rivals, as it happened in Stalin's times in the Soviet Union. However, when a person murders another person, death is the right kind of retribution. This is analogous to penalties imposed for instance for robbery or theft - the criminal often has to forfeit one's possessions for taking the property of another person.
Similarly, it is fair that one who has consciously taken the life of another person should suffer death. Susstein and Adrian Vermeule, the authors suggest that death penalty is morally justified on the basis of distinction between acts and omissions. Most opponents of death penalty argue that it is barbaric for a government to take a human life since there is a difference between an act, such as killing a person, and omission, such as refraining from the act.
But, researchers argue, by forbidding official penalty, government officials de facto allow numerous private killings that are left unpunished. Therefore, punishing the criminals is a necessary part of any state policy. The interests of victims or potential victims of murders cannot be overlooked in order to consider the interests of the criminals guilty of the most heinous crime - taking a person's life. One of the most important arguments in favor of death penalty is the fact that it helps to deter capital crimes.
This issue is debatable since there have been suggestions that application of death penalty has no serious effects on the rate of murders, for instance. Besides, opponents of death penalty claim that it is not possible to deter so-called crimes-of-passion committed in an emotionally affected state when a person is not capable of thinking about future punishment.
However, there is evidence that application of capital punishment can indeed prevent crimes, even those that are committed by intimates. A study by Joanna M. To find this relationship, she looks at monthly murder and execution data using least squares and negative binomial estimations. Her conclusion is that one execution helps to avert three killings on average. Capital punishment also has an effect on murders by intimates and crimes of passion.
The influence is evidenced by rates of crimes committed by victims of both European and Afro-American descent. The deterring effect of death penalty, however, was found to be reduced by longer waits on the death row. The paper, in evaluating the deterrent effect of capital punishment, adjusts the data for the influence of simultaneity and therefore comes up with estimates of a deterrent effect that greatly those of previous findings. Besides, he has established that it is the announcement of death penalty that drives the effect.
The above-mentioned findings suggest that the deterrent effect of capital punishment is present and should not be neglected. If the killing of one criminal can prevent at least three, or fourteen deaths, by different calculations, this opportunity has to be exploited.
Many religions, such as my own, Catholicism, follow the rules that God sent to use through the Ten Commandments. Murdering any person, no matter what the individual has been convicted of, is a mortal sin. Therefore, God will punish anyone who aids in executing people. I believe that religious beliefs, such as the Ten Commandments, are the corner stone for our law system.
My next reason against the death penalty is that taxpayers waste too much of their money with the death penalty. The average death penalty case is appealed three times. This means that the taxpayers must pay for the same trial to be heard three times.
This is a very expensive practice. Also, the average convicted murder spends 12 years on death row. A handful of evidence from a strong lawyer could sentence someone to life in prison, and even the death penalty. This is followed by a counter argument, with supporting reasons. For illustration purposes, a brief persuasive essay on this topic is as follows:. Serious offenses like murder and rape generally attract a death penalty.
It is perceived that in executing death penalty, serious offenses are denounced. There cannot be denying the fact that crime is highly prevalent in modern societies. This leaves innocent citizens with profound fear of robbery attacks, beastly rapes, and murders. More often than not, for example, the victims of horrible rapes are children and elderly women.
The pain of losing a loved one or a close colleague to violent robbers and murderers is so unbearable that one wishes the perpetrators could be hanged. It is very worrying that the people who commit these heinous crimes have been in and out jail severally.
Thus, it helps very little if the court system keeps sentencing a serial murderer to imprisonment. Imposing a death penalty will clean all killers and rapists from the society. It might sound irreligious to sentence an offender to death; disobedience to laws is denounced in all religions. Is it okay to see our young girls lose their dignity to insufferable criminals who have no justification for the acts they commit?
Let every one be answerable for his or her actions.
Example Persuasive Paper on the Death Penalty Introduction Death penalty has been an inalienable part of human society and its legal system for centuries, regarded as a necessary deterrent to dangerous crimes and a way to liberate the community from dangerous criminals.
This assignment instructed students to write a persuasive essay which argues for a specific viewpoint or a specific action to be taken on a societal issue. I argued for a specific stance to be taken on the issue of the death penalty. The audience for this essay is the opinion section of the.
Nov 20, · 3. Persuasive Essay About Death Penalty Death Penalty Essay - Words. Life in Prison without Parole The death penalty is a subject that has been on debate for many years now. In the United States, seventeen of the fifty states have abolished the use of the death penalty. In this essay, death penalty becomes a very controversial issue to discuss, many people support it and many people don’t. Personally, I think death penalty is the most ferocious way of punishing a criminal.
Death Penalty Essay. Death Penalty Since the creation of humans, crime has been prevalent in our history. The most heinous crime a human could commit is and will always be murder. For a long time, the death penalty was the go-to punishment for murder. Persuasive Death Penalty Essay. Persuasive Death Penalty Essay When turning on the television, radio, or simply opening the local newspaper, one is bombarded with news of arrests, murders, homicides, and other such tragedies.