For the victim's families, and Oklahoma City, and many Americans alike wanted to see the
perpetrator of the Oklahoma City bombings have the same fate that Mr. Timothy McVeigh
executed on the month of May in year 1995. This man was sentenced to death after being
incarcerated for less than four years being put on death row. Did this man deserve to die on the
behalf of over 150 people, including nineteen children? Does this justify his killing? In some
peoples minds it did, and that's why the death penalty should be allowed to stay in rotation for
serious criminals for the heavy crimes they commit.
The use of death in the situation, say a murder or a serial rapist defender should be based
on a number of factors. A few to suggest are how the murder was committed, how sincere or
brash the criminal is, what his or her record is and should the man or woman be sentence to
execution or a life sentence. Opponents to the death penalty say that those who support the death
penalty see it as a solution to violent crime. Granted the facts that those who are put to death are
serious offenders, in reality, executions are seen as appropriate punishment for these certain
criminals committing serious crimes as so the US Supreme Court and advocates of the death
penalty say. Even though most people would agree on that "two wrongs don't make a right" that
the opponents "equate" execution or murder. This position that the opponents take is highly
irrational. So if then execution is equal to murder, is the legal repossession of a car to satisfy a
debt the same as auto theft? Both result in loss of property. Are kidnapping and constitutional
incarceration the same? Both entail "imprisonment" against one's will. As you can see that the
death penalty is been granted the facts that it is highly legitament and reasonable. As murder is
...