Death Penalty

Death Penalty

[Author’s name]

Death Penalty

Introduction

Today, the issue of death penalty recognized as the one most controversial phenomenon that requires necessary attention. It is important to assess both the sides of the argument to attain a better form of consideration in the end. When it comes to consideration of appropriate punishment for the person with serious offense then there is a school of thoughts. It is argued by some that the death penalty is the ultimate solution to eliminate or either reduce the problem of criminal activities. On the other hand, it is established by another school of thought that there is a need for giving strict punishment to the criminal to make them realize about their serious crime. It is important to identify why the ban on the death penalty is essential to ensure the better handling of the problem of criminal activities. Here, the main focus is to critically analyze with the help of proper argument that why the state of California should ban the practice of the death penalty.

Discussion

It is imperative to assess how much the option of the death penalty can be useful to ensure better prevention for the issue of crimes in the state. It is observed that the approach of the death penalty is recognized as the ultimate option by the criminals as they become unable to closely see the real miseries of life. In other words, it can be established that the death penalty can never consider as the right practical approach as it eventually provides an easy way for the criminals. Killing someone can be a suitable situation for someone to release them from the world punishments. The real struggles of the imprisonment should be experienced by the criminals to recognize the suffering of the others and the victims who directly suffered due to different criminal activities.

The approach of the argument about the issue of the death penalty can never consider complete without illustrating the affirmative argument on this specific practice. The major argument in favor of the death penalty is delivered in the form of issue of brutality. It is argued that the state never needs to be immensely brutal to figure out the issue of criminal activities. It is recognized as an ethical appropriate approach if it is assuring for someone to end life as quickly and peacefully as possible. It is argued that committing a crime never means to torture someone by prolonging the time period of death for the criminal. Assessment of the actual implications of this argument is essential to determine the actual usefulness of the option of the death penalty. Critical consideration of the actual circumstances reveals that criminals have no concern with the approach of mental peace as they already suffering from some form of psychological imbalance (Roy, 2014). There needs to be a lesson for the criminals for their criminal actions and it is only possible by the experience of imprisonment. Any form of sympathy can never be helpful and it only expands their arrogance and insignificant social behavior.

When it comes to giving some form of the lesson to criminals then the death penalty is not the option in any manner. The attempt of any form of criminal activities is the clear example of the imbalance behavior approach of the criminals that can never be rectified by offering the punishment in the form of the death penalty. The mental instability of the criminals makes it unable for them to consider the consequences of the seriousness of the crime. There is a need for some form of a continuous process to give a life lesson to the criminals. Their life in captivity eventually gives them a sense of guilt for their whole life. The element of guilt enhances their chances to rectify their behavior in the rest of their lives and play a positive role in society (Engle, 2019). It is notable to mention that the death penalty has no deterrent effect on the rate of crimes. Researchers observed that the rate of the death penalty in states with capital punishment is higher as compared to states without the death penalty. The death penalty is not a potential option as it cannot bring back a dead person. People are not going to learn about their mistakes if they are straightaway sentenced to death. There should be harsh penalties for them in jails to make them realize about their potential faults. It is highly unethical to place the death penalty on an individual as it will not get him any chance to regret his actions. One must need to understand the fact that the death penalty violates human rights laws. The death row conditions and methods of execution are considered cruel and inhumane. Therefore, it is necessary to establish some potential penalties in order to make someone realize about their cruel activities. Placing other potential penalties than death penalty are proved to be effective in many states of the US.

Conclusion

In a nutshell, it is crucial to mention that the death penalty can never consider as the option to better handle the growing concern of crimes in the state. The phenomenon of death penalty eventually eliminate the chances of rectification and giving a life lesson to the criminals. The end of life eventually eases everything for the criminals as they do not have to suffer from the critical problems of life. Another aspect of consideration is that the practice of the death penalty is recognized as the violation of the basic human rights for all humans. Every individual has the basic right to life that can never be eliminated without the practice of the death penalty.

References

Engle, Jeremy. (2019). Should We Abolish the Death Penalty?. Nytimes.com. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/20/learning/should-we-abolish-the-death-penalty.html

Roy, Gargi. (2014).Is Capital Punishment Acceptable?  Ijhssnet.com. Retrieved from http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_2_Special_Issue_January_2014/8.pdf