Is the death penalty right?
The United States currently has a death penalty in more than 30 states. Some states do not carry out actual executions, but other states still carry out actual executions. What is the opinion of those who support and oppose the death penalty? First, my opinion is in favor of the death penalty. The state I live in now is the state where the death penalty was abolished.
The death penalty must, under whatever circumstances, be enforced by the public to clarify the reason for the death of the executor and to carry it out in public proceedings. In the past, there were political deaths for political reasons in relation to power, but most of them were justified by the fact that they were law. Until the eighteenth century, penal law was more common than imprisonment, and in social structures where there were many vertical relationships, the ruling class tended to abuse even the heaviest sins in order to fear the dominant. Of course, in the case of theft or other minor crimes, it is common not to use them in consideration of the people's antagonism. In the case of double treason, it was easy to be abused for political reasons, and it was widely used because it could be legally used to eliminate political hostile forces, mainly to consolidate the ruling of the ruling class. The death penalty in this premodern society was mainly open, and the method was very cruel as it had the purpose of social control. Either element of openness or cruelty is usually included and in most cases both. In Mongolia, there was a terrible way of keeping them in wooden crates and starving them to death. Since the death penalty in modern society is for the purpose of social segregation of the victims only, most of the death penalty is private and makes it as painless as possible. However, some countries, such as North Korea and China, carry out executions for social control purposes, and although they do not adopt the same brutal executions as before, public executions remain in some countries. In North Korea, such public executions are mainly shot. Occasionally, brutal punishment is also given to dogs or to remove their skin. Iran and Afghanistan implement the death penalty, known as stone or dialysis, in which a prisoner is half-buried and then thrown into a stone for execution. Human rights groups are criticizing this. Unusually, if a prisoner escapes from a burial place, execution stops: the man asks to the waist and the woman to the chest. In the case of Iran, it has recently been replaced by hangings, which are conscious of the eyes of the international community. However, since the elimination of dialysis, there is no concept of human rights, and hangings are executed in the most painful way. On the other hand, as the judicial system changes from criminal punishment to genealogy and the human rights issue is highlighted, the pros and cons are very divided and are still at the center of controversial debate. In countries where the death penalty has been abolished, voices demanding resurrection in countries where the death penalty is maintained.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Most proponents believe that the death penalty should be preserved from a retributive point of view, and even if the proponents that prevention and rehabilitation are the sole purposes of punishment do not abolish the death penalty, there is no proper alternative.
While everyone thinks that their ideas are the result of rational and rational judgments, the controversy would not have lasted so long if the condemnation of the death penalty was indeed something that could be terminated by rational calculations. When we think about the death penalty, most of us think of 'if there is an absolute value, such as religion or belief', 'I imagine hanging my neck on a rope in front of the death penalty, and I feel like I'm dying. I have been raped and chopped up several times, and when I hear an act of a burned offender, I feel as if my family has been upset. ' We know well that half-human beings are emotional and can't think of anything except this. In this age, a society living under the law, it is not right to oppose the death penalty implemented by expressing emotional opinions in the rational rule of law. On the contrary, injecting an emotional opinion, you might think that I am not going to be executed, but rather someone who almost kills my family. Since emotional ways of thinking are contradictory and dangerous, I think the death penalty should be executed in a rational way that completely excludes emotions.
The death penalty is a very sensitive subject. Because it has a direct connection to the judgment of a person's life. However, I am finally in favor of the death penalty because the death penalty, which is done for the sake of social justice and the law that supports it, is mostly correct.
References
- Bedau, H. A. (2010). The death penalty in America: current controversies. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Early History of the Death Penalty. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/history-of-the-death-penalty/early-history-of-the-death-penalty.
- Garrett, B., & Kovarsky, L. (2018). The death penalty. St. Paul, MN: Foundation Press.
Stuck on your essay?
