Capital Punishment- A Matter of Life and Death
Capital Punishment: the penalty of death for the commission of a crime
When turning on the television, radio, or simply opening the local newspaper, we are bombarded with news of arrests, murders, homicides, serial killers, and other such tragedies. It is a rare occasion to go through a day in this world and not hear of these things. So what should be done about this crime rate? There are many issues that address the question of Capital Punishment such as religion, the effect on society, restitution being denied, the possible "wrongly accused", and the rights of the convicted. Hundreds of thousands of people worldwide have been executed in the past years, and in many countries, they still believe that Capital Punishment is the most logical way to punish a person. However, does one person really have the authority to determine the fate of another human being? Too many people are dying; too many lives are being taken unnecessarily and something needs to be done.
The first argument for death penalty is ‘an eye for an eye, a life for a life’. A person who has committed a crime cannot be trusted and has to be killed before any further damage is done. Someone who has taken the life of somebody should have his life taken from him. However there are some exceptions: someone may kill for self-defence or there is a possibility that his intention was not to kill. At other times, illegal crimes may stem from drunkenness or a short-term loss of logic thinking due to anger. Therefore, it is not fair to say ‘an eye for an eye, a life for a life’ because it might not have been the killer’s initial intention to kill.
Opponents of the death penalty claim that the poor and minorities are more likely to receive the death penalty. Unfortunately though, this issue cannot be disputed; the rich are more likely to get off with a lesser sentence as their finances will allow them to appoint the ...