Should Australia Reintroduce Capital Punishment?

1357 Words3 Pages

Should Australia reintroduce the exercising of capital punishment?
In 2005, Australians, Myuran Sukumaran and Andrew Chan infamously known as the ringleaders of the Bali Nine were caught with 7 other individuals with the possession of 8.3kilograms of heroin. 10 years later, in 2015, these 9 individuals were executed, under the capital punishment law exercised by the Indonesian government as a repercussion for their crime. Now, our world is home to a great number of notorious criminals who have committed the most heinous of acts and undoubtedly should follow the ramifications for their crimes. This, however, brings about the conversation of whether or not lives should be threatened as a consequence of such acts? This is what the capital punishment …show more content…

It is a controversial topic, one that has long engendered considerable debates about both its morality and its effects on criminal behaviour. Some tend to agree with the notion of capital punishment, stating that it is a justifiable approach that criminals deserve whilst others describe it as a barbaric method that perpetuates the dehumanising of individuals. Australia should definitely be opposed to the idea of reintroducing capital punishment as a socially accepted resolution towards extreme crimes as it does not merely stand as a neither justified nor ethical response to criminal behaviour and serves as a likelihood to irrevocable mistakes.
Capital punishment is practiced as a retributive justification punishment based on the historical ideology “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” insinuating that if one individual kills another, then it is only fitting for that murderer to be killed. Currently, Australia is one of the 96 countries that have abolished the death penalty by law. However, there are 58 countries who still exercise the death penalty with at least 3,117 people …show more content…

As it is true that the judicial system keeps us out of harm’s way, it does, however, raise some eyebrows on the irony that the justice system criticizes the practice of murder by committing the very same act. Growing up we are learnt to not kill and the importance of implementing and teaching our children to not do the same. However, here we are as the ‘progressive society’ we so blatantly proclaim to be, as we still allow the judicial system to choose who lives and who dies all whilst disregarding the hypocritical nature of to what we say our morals are, and in addition we also teach our children that it is okay to kill certain people. So why are there countries that are still advocating the rights of a life by taking it from another? Why is it that we kill people who are killing people to show that killing people is wrong? Because it’s true that we holistically can’t be categorized on the same level as people like Ted Bundy per say -who was a serial killer, kidnapper, rapist, burglar who assaulted and murdered numerous young women and girls during the 1970s- The blatant contradiction, however, of the declaration that such a person deserves to be killed because he had no right to kill, is still overlooked. Because if

Open Document