question-
Without capital punishment (the death penalty) our lives are less secure and crimes of
violent increase. Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society. To what
extent do you agree or disagree?
answer
Crime is always punishable. Retribution is the method for countering criminals. Some countries have stringent rules, like capital punishment, while other have a lot of flexibility in the judicial system. However, strict laws, like capital punishment, are essential in a society.
Capital punishment is given only in the " rarest of the rare" cases. Its first and foremost objective is safety of other human beings. When a criminal becomes a threat to the society, such that they can commit heinous crimes, then they are given capital punishment. Thus, capital punishment protects the society from hardcore criminals.
Moreover, capital punishment curbs the inspiration and prospects of other hateful crimes. When a criminal mind knows the quantum of punishment, they will fear and not commit such crimes. Thus, the rate of crime and violence is effectively decreased.
Importantly, capital punishment saves a lot of government funding which is wasted in maintenance of these hardcore criminals. Criminals who don't have any chance of improvement or who have a past record of such crimes are, therefore, given capital punishment.
However, the jury giving the verdict are also humans. They have the life of a person at their discretion. They can make mistakes which can sometimes affect an innocent, circumstantially marred criminals. The jury must therefore, take into account the circumstances of committing a crime. For example, if an individual murders someone for self-defence, then such a crime is not heinous. Only deserving criminals, who commit such hateful crimes in their proper senses are subjected to capital punishment.
Capital punishment is essential to control violence in the society. I firmly believe that psychopaths, terrorists or any other criminal who lacks empathy for other human lives deserve capital punishment. Capital punishment helps to safeguard human rights in a strict and effective manner. However, it should be considered as the last option by the jury and all circumstances must be taken into account before pronouncing the final verdict.
Some countries have stringent rules, like capital punishment, while the others have a lot ofmore flexibility in thetheir judicial system. However, strict laws, like capital punishment, are essential infor a society.
After a quick view thought your essay. I have some point to comment about. Your work need a lot more word to expand the important of your contents like more adjective or adverb.
Thank
... method for deterring countering criminals.
Capital punishment is given only in the "rarest of the rare" cases. ---well, in some rare cases innocent people have been executed! I wonder if any amount of crime deterrence is worth even a single wrongful execution.
they will fear and not commit such crimes. Thus, the rate of crime and violence is effectively decreased.---america uses capital punishment, but we also have more murders than a lot of countries that do not use capital punishment! So... maybe it does not deter crime so well after all.
psychopaths---You should not include this word in your argument, because psychopathy is an example of a mental illness, and mentally ill people cannot control their actions.
You write without error! It is very good! I'll recommend an article for you. Google this: Steiker, capital punishment, required, Deterrence, Deontology, and the Death Penalty
hi EF_Susan,
thanks for your feedback.I have written in the conclusion that capital punishment should be considered as the last option with utmost precision before pronouncing the final verdict.so i do consider that no innocent should be given that. However, there is an Indian saying in Hindi,which means-'with all the bad things,sometimes a good thing is also crushed'. So I do believe that life of several innocent persons is much more worthy than one.
- moreover, India and USA both have capital punishment n u do say the right thing that it hasnt stopped criminals from doing so. However, if u ever see about Arab rules, the hand for hand-eye for eye- rule does produce fear in people not to commit crime.so hard punishments do deter criminals,however, they are inhumane and we as humans dont have any right to really judge the righteousness of another human.
-by the way, thankx a tonne for your encouraging words. once i get my satisfactory ielts score, i would love to be a contributor here if ur admin considers me fit for it... This website has helped me more than anything and I am glad that I joined it. Thanks again n please do give me reviews for another 8-9 days...i have my exam on 12th february.
'with all the bad things,sometimes a good thing is also crushed'
Yes, to tell you the truth, I don't have a strong opinion on this because of a feeling of uncertainty. I would play the devil's advocate no matter which argument you made. :-)
What if one innocent life is saved by abolishing the death penalty?
What if one innocent life is saved because of successful deterrence of murder with the use of capital punishment?
Like you said, the value of a life cannot be measured very easily.
In the article I recommended, an observation is made like this: Maybe we could prevent rape by raping rapists as punishment. Maybe we should punish torturers by torturing them! But then again, maybe the dignity of the human spirit makes us want to renounce certain kinds of punishments, like raping rapists. If the punishment always fits the crime, then at the level of society's law we will always be stooping the level of the worst criminals. Or maybe that is not the right way to think about it. I don't know!! :-)
Yes, we would love to have you as a contributor when you are ready!!
