“My objection to the death penalty is based on the idea that this is a democracy, and in a democracy the government is me, and if the government kills somebody then I'm killing somebody”- Steve Earle. The death penalty is an issue where many individuals had agreements and disagreements. Whether if one agrees or disagrees, you can not deny the fact that the system is flawed and innocent people can be sacrificed for another's crime. I believe that the Death Penalty should not be re--enacted in Canada for the following reasons, its immorality, due to high cost of executions, and the death penalty goes against the Canadian law.
First, the death penalty proves to be an inhumane act of moral justice. Whether the individual is guilty or innocent,
…show more content…
The Canadian charter of rights and freedom states that Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Therefore every individual has the right to life, and has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. Capital punishments are cruel and unnecessary punishment that should not be supported. Speaking of rights, if the government is dealing with issues or problems of its own, cannot be trusted with the life of its own citizens. According to Samuel Gross, lead author of the study and a University of Michigan Law School professor said “The great majority of innocent people who are sentenced to death are never identified and freed.” How can the citizens maintain their trust in a government where the majority of such cases are hidden from the public eye. As it has been said that two wrongs don't make right. Sending someone on death row, and when proven innocent , it's hidden from the public eye. This goes against all the rights and freedoms of an individual. An eye for an eye should not exist in the government because that encourages more cruelty. The world is not perfect, by reintroducing the death penalty would not help in stopping crimes. Instead the the families of the victims will thirst for revenge. I believe the punishment for crimes such as pre-meditated murder, serial killing, raping and killing a child, killing a police officer should be lifetime in prison. Many argue, for intense crimes the punishment should be death. If everyone believed in such reasons, then peace and harmony would be out of this world. This could also lead into individuals thinking , that if such crimes are punished by death they might as well take matters into their own hands. Therefore promoting more crimes then stopping
The Canadian Justice system is run like a well-oiled machine. It is based on the fair and humane treatment of suspects who remain innocent until proven guilty. There is one big question that has been debated since July 14th, 1976 - should the death penalty have been abolished in Canada? The new younger generation of Canadians seems to agree with me that the death penalty should be resurrected in Canada.
Canada has been a fully abolitionist country since the 10th of December 1998, and has since continued to maintain a strong anti-death penalty attitude (Amnesty, 2015). The last death penalty sentenced under Canada’s Criminal Code was given in 1962 to two convicted felons charged with first degree murder (Amnesty 2015). After the two were hanged, it brought the total number of people executed in Canada to 710, marking the end of an era (Amnesty, 2015). The death penalty has been a fiercely debated topic spanning even before 1867, Canada’s establishment. Notably however, Canada’s Prime Ministers have long opposed the death penalty starting with John Diefenbaker (Amnesty, 2015). Only the second most recent Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, has
Capital punishment is crime's most dreaded consequence, death. Hanging was Canada's form of capital punishment up until 1976 when it was abolished. Webster's Dictionary defines capital punishments as: "The penalty of death for the commission of a crime." (Webster's, 1994, 43). The chance of capital punishment being reinstated in Canada has been very slim up until now. Recently the Canadian Alliance Party has put forth efforts to reinstate it, which has put the controversial topic back up for debate. This has divided many Canadians concerning their beliefs. Capital punishment should never be reinstated in Canada as it is a barbaric practice that is unjust. This essay will clearly demonstrate that reinstating capital punishment would be illegal as it would violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian Bill of Rights and the United Nations Universal Deceleration of Human Rights. In addition, this paper will show that capital punishment is a cruel and barbaric punishment. Finally, this paper will examine how capital punishment does nothing to deter people from committing crimes.
In conclusion, I believe that capital punishment should never be reinstated in Canada. It is a cruel and unjust punishment, where it violates the rights of life and makes amend within the world and may lead to an innocent person executed with the suspect untouched. Also, why ruin a good thing where Canada’s murder/violent crime rate is slowly decreasing within the years because of the abolishment of the death sentence? With the reasons stated above, as well with the fact that the cost of capital punishment is higher and that it is rejected and shunned upon within many religions such as Catholic and Protestant, I think that capital punishment is something that should never even be considered to be reinstated as it is unnecessary and unjust.
Unfortunately, like most Americans, many Canadians believe in the barbaric "an eye for an eye" rule of restitution. This belief is the basis for the argument for the reinstatement of the death penalty. Some believe that the death penalty will deter similar crimes from happening, others believe that they would feel safer if a serious offender would be put to eternal rest. Few, suggests that putting these criminals to death would be more economical then putting them behind bars. But all of these people innately believe that "When you take a life, you give up the right to yours." (Why America kills off killers). Beliefs such as these have kept the United States being the only western, first world, industrialized country to retain the cruel and immoral death penalty. This horrific fact puts the United States Government in line with other major human rights offenders such as China, Rwanda, and North Korea (Why America kills off killers).
Two major claims: death penalty serves as a deterrent and death penalty is morally justified because murderers can’t live and you have a right to kill them.
The most severe of all sentences: death. Also known as capital punishment, this is the
... execute should not be made lightly, and tests should be done to ensure the right person is being punished for the crime that was committed. Taking away the person’s life who is responsible for the death of another person cannot bring the victim back and does not solve anything. Various people all over the world believe that the death penalty should not be supported and that it should be abolished. Many reasons exist for the abolition of the death penalty to take place including cost issues, religious issues, whether or not it acts as a deterrent, executing innocents and the harshness of the execution. Some may say the people who committed the most heinous crimes deserve to have justice served to them. However, even murderers are humans and should be treated fairly and justly. All people, even the guilty have a right to live; regardless of the crimes they committed.
Implementation of the death penalty has been shown to deter more effectively then maximum sentencing that the Canadian judicial system offers. Of course the debate of whether or not to use the “lock ‘em up, throw away the key” mentality on offenders has been going back and forth for a long time. But we are now seeing more effective treatments through rehabilitation efforts, which I think is beginning to steer some people away from that way of thinking. For example, although the sex offender registry is an alright deterrent for sex offenders, that fact that you need not re-register when moving to a new province, is an example of how deterrence in Canada still has a few kinks to work out; in order to make it a more well-rounded
The death penalty should be allowed. Here are some reasons to back up my strong thesis statement. It is the only just punishment in some criminal cases. Some people prefer prison over death. Lastly life in prison can be considered cruel and unusual punishment.
The death penalty is the lawful killing of a human being after a trial by
Lamourie, T., & Parkinson, D. (2007, September 17). Canadian Coalition Against the Death Penalty: Toronto Patterson. Retrieved from http://ccadp.org/torontopatterson.htm
The Death Penalty should be discontinued to the families, human rights, and statistics. The families of the victim and the family of the one, who committed the crime, have no closure at all. The death penalty is killing a human for being convicted of a terrible crime one family may think its right but both suffer by their lost ones. “Although true closure is never really possible for the families, studies have shown that the continual process, along with the returning to court for many years, force families to confront the gruesome details of the crime many times over, making it impossible to get on with their lives. As difficult as that is the question is weather the victims needs are met effectively by killing someone else and causing another family grief and pain as well as adding to the cycle of violence.” (Progress) As both families do not want to see each other because they all have pain and hate for one another. They both relive the last memories of their loved one and they can’t help but cry and stare at the pictures they were once happy in. The families both have sadness when its their loved ones birthday. If the victim is married or have kids, their kids suffer and the husband/wife suffer as well. Although the families will never get there loved one back they still suffer on what had happen. Both families blame one another for having to take flowers, to their dead family member or visit their family member in a cemetery because of what happen. None of them is truly happy that they lost a family member. The families miss the person who seemed so happy, and also know that they are in a better place watching over them. Although the families aren’t happy about losing them, but are relieved to know that nothing else can hurt them. As one family feels sorry for the other family, there could be the family that doesn’t care what happens but wants everyone to suffer the way they are suffering about the tragic death of one family member.
Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished Why should the death penalty be abolished? The death penalty should be abolished for many reasons. Many people believe the saying, 'an eye for an eye'. But when will people realize that just because someone may have killed a loved one that the best thing for that person is to die also? People don't realize that they are putting the blood of another person's life on their hands.
Today's system of capital punishment tolerates many inequalities and injustices. The common arguments for the death penalty are filled with holes. Imposing the death penalty is expensive and time consuming. Each year billions of dollars are spent to sentence criminals to death. Perhaps the most frequently raised argument against capital punishment is that of its cost. Other thoughts on the death penalty are to turn criminals away from committing violent acts. A just argument against the death penalty would be that sentencing an individual to death prevents future crimes by other individuals. However, criminals are not afraid of the death penalty. The chance of a criminal being sentenced to death is very slim. The number of inmates actually put to death is far less than it was decades ago. This decrease in number shows that the death penalty is faulty. With that being true, many criminals feel that they can get away with a crime and go unpunished. Also, the less that the death sentence is invoked, the more conflicting it becomes when it is actually used. Alternative can be found to substitute for the death penalty. A huge misconception of the death penalty is that it saves society the costs of keeping inmates imprisoned for long periods of time. Ironically, the cost of the death penalty is far greater than the cost of housing a criminal for life. Appeals on the death penalty become a long, drawn-out and very expensive process. There are those who cry that we, the taxpayers, shouldn't have to "support" condemned people for an entire lifetime in prison-that we should simply "eliminate" them and save ourselves time and money. The truth is that the cost of state killing is up to three times the cost of lifetime imprisonment (Long 80). ...