Death Penalty

Death Penalty

The death penalty remains among the most contentious issues that continue to raise varied debates in our society today. There have been divisive opinions whereby people support it while others advocate for easier and more lenient strategies for punishing offenders. Also, there is another group that is never decided on whether the “death penalty” should be considered a better way to punish criminals, and this makes them want to do a critical evaluation of the crimes an individual commits before they can share their opinions on whether they would wish to a particular to face the death penalty or not. I do not support the death penalty, and I believe it should be eliminated from the criminal justice system.

According to Bones et al. (715), over the past 50 years, approximately 1,500 people have been executed in America for various crimes such as treason and espionage. As a result, many scholars view these occurrences as evidence that the government mainly considers applying the death penalty to individuals who seem to interfere with its interests instead of ensuring that the guilty are punished. The death penalty is a cruel and unusual way to punish wrongdoers because it deprives the suspect or the offender of their humanity (Alfred). Americans’ support for capital punishment has seen a significant decline since 2004 with both African Americans and the whites showing disinterest in it. Also, cohort effects show that the older generation is against capital punishment than the younger generation. Observing the attitudes of American citizens regarding death penalty over the past three decades, it is clear that a lot has changed showing dissatisfaction with the idea. Following the Fifth Amendment of the American Bill of Rights, everyone has a right to liberty, own property, and live. These rights should not be deprived of citizens without ensuring that the due process of law is appropriately followed (Anderson et al. 835). Hence, the death penalty is a way of stripping an individual of all these rights at once because they are condemned to die. Additionally, even in situations when the criminal justice systems pay close attention to the due process of the law, the practice still appears cruel, considering that it subjects an offender to a painful process like an animal. In the United States, after an offended is condemned to face a death sentence, they must serve fifteen years on death row before their execution arrives. Such long waits tend to make this punishment a deterrent to other criminals contemplating engaging in similar criminal activities (“The Case Against the Death Penalty”). Moreover, it is considered that delayed justice is denied justice, and even at the time of execution, one may not be sure if the victims of the committed crime would feel any implications from the decision because of the timing.

The death penalty should be considered immoral. Different religions do not support this execution as a form of punishment for the offenders. For instance, Christians argue that only God has the power to give life and take it away, and no one should assume that role in His place. Additionally, Christians should read the Bible whenever they need answers regarding a particular problem. For example, in Romans 12:19, “Christians should not consider revenge to pay back their differences when offended; instead, they should submit the matter to God and let Him decide the best punishment for those who wrong them.” Also, In Leviticus 27:17, “anyone who takes another man’s life should as well lose theirs, but since Jesus condemned such teachings, Christians should be ready to forgive those who wrong them, and they could also be forgiven from their sins (Bones et al. 720).” Therefore, if religion is to be taken into account when discussing the suitability of the death sentence, it would mean that prosecutors and the judges who subject offenders to the death penalty are the same as those murderers they charge. Acording to Bones et al. (721), the use of theory of religion has had significant impact on how people view death penalty as punishment for crimes such as killing. As the authors of this article claim, religion has played a major role in shaping policies that governments use to punish criminals  and suggesting improved reforms to ensure that justice is served without necessarily having to put the life of an innocent life at risk. Also, religion has influenced peoples’ opinions and those of the government in towards death penalty.

Even though the death penalty is scary and cruel, it fails to accomplish its intended objective of making offenders avoid engaging in various criminal activities. One of the reasons why the death penalty does not seem to prevent crime as it is expected is that it is highly likely that most criminals do not pay attention to the possible consequences of engaging in particular offenses before committing the crime. According to Anderson et al. (835), there exists no conclusive scientific evidence that strongly supports the idea that the execution of offenders helps prevent similar offenses from being committed in the future. Moreover, researchers have found that individuals who engage in such crimes suffer from serious mental problems in most cases, and such people should be sent to mental asylums, not jail or hanging them (Alfred). Therefore, if society is determined to prevent all possible instances that could earn an individual a death sentence, they should ensure that they report people who portray any form of mental disorders so that they are taken care of in time and taken to rehabilitation centers before their conditions get out of hand. According to “The Case Against the Death Penalty” cannot be administered fairly and it is expensive than having a life in prison. Also, the article notes how people of color who are mentally ill are likely to receive a death penalty than the whites offenders who commit similar crimes. Also, it takes many years before murder cases are finalized and this may cost billions of dollars to manage and it goes against every religion globally.

Medical practitioners who agree to undertake the responsibility of injecting an offender with a lethal injection breach their professional contract. Medical professionals take a Hippocratic Oath back in medical school, which requires them to swear never to give lethal drugs to anyone even when bribed and be ready to advise people on why they should not consider taking such plans (Bones et al. 710). Hence, when a doctor agrees to administer a drug that sends the condemned to their deaths instead of preserving lives as they are trained to do, they violate their code of conduct (Xiong et al. 430). Additionally, as a physician, one is expected to behave enough to suggest that you care about the feelings of the deceased, their families, and their close friends by contemplating the execution implications for them. Therefore, taking such factors into account, it is clear that a doctor should be among the first people to advise the state against undertaking such activities and designing harsher treatments that do not involve taking the offender’s life.

Lastly, the death penalty does not consider that people can consider turning their lives around and becoming better individuals in life. This form of punishment denies an individual a chance to ever reintegrate with other people implying that the accused individuals should be condemned to death and do not deserve a second chance in their lives since they are way beyond redemption. There is a high possibility that most individuals on death row are there because of different factors such as poverty, illiteracy, or have been victims of violence in their lives, which makes it close to impossible to make the best out of their lives (Anderson et al. 835). Numerous people who have at one time been in jail have turned out to be better people who are law-abiding after their release, which is enough evidence that there is still some hope left even in those condemned (Alfred). Therefore, as Xiong et al. (421) note imposing death sentences on offenders is not the best strategy to punish them since it denies them a chance to reform, explore their full potential, and positively contribute to society.

In conclusion, the death sentence is a severe form of punishment and should be banned entirely because it violates various rights that the constitution is bound to protect. Moreover, the death penalty takes away an individual’s humanity, and it is comparable to slaughtering an animal and a complete disregard for human life. While people think it helps prevent others from engaging in similar offenses, there is no evidence to prove this form of thinking, considering that this kind of crime is repeated very often. The death penalty is a contradiction of religious doctrines and immoral. Therefore, the government should consider abolishing this kind of punishment since it is cruel and fails to serve its intended purpose. 

Works Cited

Alfred, R. (n.d.). Why the death penalty should be abolished. Retrieved from https://icomdp.org/why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/

Anderson, Amy L., Robert Lytle, and Philip Schwadel. “Age, period, and cohort effects on death penalty attitudes in the United States, 1974–2014.” Criminology 55.4 (2017): 833-868.

Bones, Paul DC, and Soheil Sabriseilabi. “Sinners in the hands of an angry God: An exploration of religious forces on support for the death penalty.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 57.4 (2018): 707-722.

“The Case Against the Death Penalty.” American Civil Liberties Union. Accessed May 26, 2016. https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty.

Xiong, Moulin, Siyu Liu, and Bin Liang. “Criminal defense and judicial sentencing in China’s death penalty cases.” Psychology, Crime & Law 24.4 (2018): 414-432.