Topic: By punishing murderers with the death penalty, society is also guilt of committing murder. Therefore, life in prison is a better punishment for murderers.
"An for an eye will make the whole world blind", stated by Mahatma Gandhi. If I start with this statement, does it mean that I am going to support his quote? No, not necessarily. Because I believe that the eye we are going to take out is worthless seeing this beautiful world anymore. A punishment given to an accused should scare others from committing the mistake again.
Every person has his/her own reasons for the crime he/she has committed. Especially the murderers will have their own framed/unframed set of scene flow. So it is worthless to talk about the reasons for a murder. But it is worth mentioning about the murderer's status before discussing about the punishment. A murderer can be poor person with no one to care for him/her or a murderer can be an aristocrat with superior powers in the society.
Consider, if both kinds of a murderers are produced in front of the jury and say that the jury has sentenced a life time imprisonment for both of them. The indigent person will be in prison for his/her whole life as per the order of the jury. Because there will be no one to claim for him/her for another time to prove he is framed to be a murderer even if he is not. But in the aristocrat's case, it is totally different and he/she knows how to get out of the so called iron gates. After all, he/she has ample amount of time (Life time) to think of eschewing out of the prison. From a pedestrian's perspective, the moral is "Commit a murder if you are a solvent with aristocratic power".
On the other hand, Imagine about sentencing to death for a murderer. This time, both the kinds of murderers will be treated in the same way. The whole world will speak about it and definitely it will be an eye opener and not an eye remover. Now a common question from all directions will come, "What if a murderer is actually an innocent?". My forthright answer for this is "If you want to gain some thing, it is obvious you have lose something". It might be hard to digest, but it is still comestible.
"Tit for tat" is bad when taken over by everyone in the world, but worth doing by a government to make the world green again.
How to Punish Murderers
"An for an eye will make the whole world blind", stated by Mahatma Gandhi. If I start with this statement, does it mean that I am going to support his quote? No, not necessarily. Because I believe that the eye we are going to take out is worthless seeing this beautiful world anymore. A punishment given to an accused should scare others from committing the mistake again.
Every person has his/her own reasons for the crime he/she has committed. Especially the murderers will have their own framed/unframed set of scene flow. So it is worthless to talk about the reasons for a murder. But it is worth mentioning about the murderer's status before discussing about the punishment. A murderer can be poor person with no one to care for him/her or a murderer can be an aristocrat with superior powers in the society.
Consider, if both kinds of a murderers are produced in front of the jury and say that the jury has sentenced a life time imprisonment for both of them. The indigent person will be in prison for his/her whole life as per the order of the jury. Because there will be no one to claim for him/her for another time to prove he is framed to be a murderer even if he is not. But in the aristocrat's case, it is totally different and he/she knows how to get out of the so called iron gates. After all, he/she has ample amount of time (Life time) to think of eschewing out of the prison. From a pedestrian's perspective, the moral is "Commit a murder if you are a solvent with aristocratic power".
On the other hand, Imagine about sentencing to death for a murderer. This time, both the kinds of murderers will be treated in the same way. The whole world will speak about it and definitely it will be an eye opener and not an eye remover. Now a common question from all directions will come, "What if a murderer is actually an innocent?". My forthright answer for this is "If you want to gain some thing, it is obvious you have lose something". It might be hard to digest, but it is still comestible.
"Tit for tat" is bad when taken over by everyone in the world, but worth doing by a government to make the world green again.
