The Pros And Cons Of The Death Penalty

Murder is wrong. Since childhood, we have been taught this indisputable truth. Ask yourself, then, what is capital punishment? In its simplest form, capital punishment is defined as one person taking the life of another. Coincidentally, that is the definition of murder. There are 36 states with the death penalty, (Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming) and they must change. These states need to abolish it on the grounds that it carries a dangerous risk of punishing

According to The Death Penalty Information Center “The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes. The death penalty was also part of the Fourteenth Century B.C. 's Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C. 's Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C. 's Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement.” Back in the fourteenth and eighteenth century they did not have enough evidence to sentence someone to death. The technology was not advanced enough, so thousands of innocent people have been dying because of this law since the early fourteenth century.

Opposing views for the death penalty is that it is incompatible with human rights and dignity. According to International Commission “The death penalty violates the right to life which happens to be the most basic of all human rights. It also violates the right not to be subjected to torture and other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, the death penalty undermines human dignity which is inherent to every human being.” Deciding whether a person has the right to live or die is not a right any person should have regardless of the

What purpose does a punishment that takes another person’s life teacher or proves? All that this shows is that the mindset of ‘an eye for an eye’ still exists in the world. Humanity must show that it has moved past this primitive way of thinking and be willing to act in a civilized manner when it comes to criminal sentencing even if the accused is an individual that has be linked to truly hiatus crimes. The rationale behind the death penalty does not ever fit a crime. Even if an individual is not capable of being rehabilitated, no one should have the right to sentence someone else to death. Under the current system of justice, the state can set, as a punishment, an action that has been considered to the worst sort of crime that a person can commit. This seems to be completely illogical and contradictory. How can anyone possibly justify carrying out an action that is unanimously agreed upon being wrong? The answer is no one; therefore the death penalty does not morally seem