The debate on the death penalty is a unique and controversial one, however after reviewing the relevant arguments associated with the debate the conclusion is quite clear. The death penalty should be retained. People throughout history have used the death penalty as a means of punishment, and the United States should continue to do so. However the United States should do so in a qualified way. The death penalty should be retained in a manner where the executions aren't considered to be a form pf cruel and unusual punishment, and the system of conviction is functioning at a level where innocent people are not being wrongly convicted. With these two qualifications, I cannot possibly see how there can be any objection to the continuation of capital punishment.
             One of the most important aspects of the death penalty is the "idea that certain criminal acts be paid for by death." This idea of justice is the central reason for justifying the death penalty. The criminal pays both society as a whole and the individual family of the victim. Professor Ernest van den Haag writes, "that to do justice is primarily to punish as deserved, and only secondarily to punish equally." Certain crimes, such as murder, are deserving of the punishment of death. There are several other reasons as to why the death penalty should be retained as well, however the idea that it provides a sense of unparalleled justice for certain crimes is the most important.
             Another reason is that the family of the victim would receive a greater sense of closure and healing from the knowledge that the killer of their loved one is to be executed. The family of the victim is being faced with extreme grief and sadness over the loss of their loved one. In many cases the legal system doesn't seem to be just, in their mind, especially if it allows the killer to sit in a jail cell, while their loved one is lost forever. Their hearts and m...