There is a lot of contention in the public sphere concerning the reinstating of the death penalty. Many feel that the reinstating of the death penalty might be controversial because innocent people that are falsely accused of crimes they did not commit might not be able to reach a timely recourse to prove their innocence. Therefore, I feel that the death penalty should not be reinstated in South Africa, due to its dark history and the negative connotations it draws to the country. In addition, this essay will be looking at the history of countries that constituted the death penalty, the implications of it, and what can be used as an alternative method to ensure law and order, without taking the lives of people whether they are criminals or victims.
Although people feel that reinstating the death penalty would curb crime and deter criminals from committing offenses, according to evidence this is not often the case. “Death-penalty states as a group do not have lower rates of criminal homicide than non-death penalty states.” (Bedau 1973:5). In addition, how can we as a country reinstate something that would bring more death at the hands of innocent people? As a matter of fact, these people that would be ‘killed’ need to be done by someone who has nothing to do with the repercussions of the criminals affected. As a consequence, more people in unfavorable circumstances could possibly be executed for crimes they never committed, which are often not reversible (Van Den Haag 1969:141). It is no surprise that many people could lose their lives, without juries finding the necessary evidence to prove their guilt. Therefore, I feel that people have the right to fight for justice, for the fact that they might be ‘framed’ for something they have never committed. According to (Bedau 1973:5) it is more likely for crimes to witness an increase in countries where the death penalty is constituted in comparison to countries that do not have the death penalty. Moreover, even though a crime is committed in a society where the death penalty is established or not, citizens’ desire to commit an abominable crime might outweigh their fear of being executed for their crimes (Van Den Haag 1969:145). Finally, the psychological and sociological implications might even have worse effects on families that were affected by this government-sanctioned practice.
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
Citizens might feel that capital punishment is useful to benefit the majority. For instance, if people were planning on overthrowing the state, their victorious expectation might far exceed their fear of being put to death by the state (Van Den Haag 1969:145). Nevertheless, capital punishment might cause people to seek revenge for the pain that this practice has placed on their mental capacity. As a consequence, people might not be deterred by this death-threatening penalty if they want to take the law into their own hands by seeking retribution. “An evil deed is not redeemed by an evil deed of retaliation. Justice is never advanced in the taking of a human life. Morality is never upheld by a legalized murder.” (Bedau 1973:15). Furthermore, it does not matter who the victims are of abominable crimes, the death penalty would not restore justice through similar attacks. For this reason, alternative measures such as life sentences might be more appropriate since everyone has the constitutional right to life.
In a civil society, life imprisonment is considered the just and fair punishment practice to bring offenders to the book. Since every citizen has the right to life, it is pivotal that they must be able to prove their innocence, even if it means that they need to do so for the rest of their lives to prove it. According to (Van Den Haag 1969:145) disobedient characters are more inclined to break the law if penalized with strict prison sentences, but this is not quite the opposite if replaced with the death penalty. Furthermore, if any severe form of punishment needs to be implemented to deter criminals, then surely life imprisonment would be more effective, since offenders would be locked away long enough not to do it again (Bedau 1973:5). Consequently, reinstating the death penalty would only leave more families in grief and pain, due to the ineffectiveness that two wrongs do not make it morally permissible to kill another.
Although I fully disagree with the death penalty, however, what I am sure of is that there are a lot of other measures that can be used to deter criminals and bring down the crime rate in South Africa. Moreover, experts suggest that violence should be treated as a public health concern, where people should be assisted and needs to feel appreciated, rather than rejected and considered a societal problem (Larsson 2020). In addition, if people are not supported through their problems this could cause more offenses, in comparison to societies where people are given support structures. According to (Writer 2020) the validation of capital punishment is the same as endorsing cold-blooded murder. In other words, there are better alternative measures to curb violent crimes and criminal activities, and this is supported by experts. Some may challenge that life imprisonment might not be an effective alternative to curb crime in South Africa. However, life imprisonment has been statistically more effective in other countries, but not the same can be said about capital punishment. Nevertheless, my argument is that life sentences are more effective to address crime in South Africa.
Finally, reinstating the death penalty in South Africa would not put an end to crimes, but might even increase it. According to (Bedau 1973:5) “death-penalty states as a group do not have lower rates of criminal homicide than non-death penalty states. During the 1980s, death-penalty states averaged an annual rate of 7.5 criminal homicides per 100,000 of the population; abolition states averaged a rate of 7.4.” In addition, South Africa is also one of the most unequal countries in the world, however, taking poverty out of the criminal equation does not necessarily mean that our crime rate would decline. Countries such as the United States where the death penalty is still in practice, also do not see a reduction in crime despite the fact that they have been able to increase the shortage of job opportunities (Van Den Haag 1969:144). As a consequence, reinstating the death penalty which has caused more damage than good in the past, would be to risk repeating the mistakes we have done in the past, instead of respecting lives whether their a criminal or not through punishing criminals with harsh life sentences.
In my final analysis, it is evident that the reduction in crime is not a result of the death penalty. Moreover, if the death penalty were to be reinstated in South Africa it would not against any evidence better the crime rate. On the contrary, every citizen has the constitutional right to life and that decision does not depend on the state to decide whose life to take. Capital punishment has been practiced by the state before, even though it was done in a different historical background it still has not been effective in the reduction of crime. Nevertheless, despite the ineffectiveness of the death penalty concerning other countries and particularly in South Africa, justice could never be restored if capital punishment is used as a corrective measure, and therefore it should be replaced by implementing harsh life sentences for affected criminals.
Stuck on your essay?
