George Orwell is a profound author who even in the early 1900's addressed the injustice and moral issue of the death penalty. In his classic piece, "The Hanging", Orwell writes of an execution of a Burmese man that he not only witnessed but also assisted in. If it took Orwell such a vivid account of death to realize the moral issues in the death penalty one wonders what it would take for us in a society where death and violence is publicly advertised in movies, music and TV shows. The pro-death penalty argument is loosing its strength in most of the United States (except Texas and Florida) considering America is one of the only civilized countries in world to continue its use. The use of the death penalty as a deterrent for criminals is not only ineffective, it's an extremely expensive process that is inhumane and immoral.
             Today the use of the death penalty as a deterrent to prevent crimes has had little effect on the murder rate in comparison to countries without the death penalty. One view pro-death can understandably be heard from the families of murder victims. After the tragedy of losing of a loved one, most likely in a brutal fashion, it would be hard for one to think with a clear, rational mind. We allow a victim's family view the execution to help achieve "closure". Some might call this retribution, but isn't retribution just another word for revenge?
             How does a public execution deter would be murderers, if they are not viewed by the public? A society that can accept the death penalty but not witness it must be in denial. If we cannot bear to watch it then maybe this is something that should not be done. This is attributed to the pity and reconsideration we might feel if we were to see a person's body twitch and convulse as every ounce of life left them. A human being's life was in our hands and we consciously made the decision to take it from them. The idea of comm...