регистрация / вход

The Death Penalty 4 Essay Research Paper

The Death Penalty 4 Essay, Research Paper THE DEATH PENALTY: ARGUMENT AGAINST: We have alternatives to capital punishment, we absolutely do not HAVE to kill in order to punish. Killing killers only makes more killers and more victims. It continues the cycle of violence. Since when does two wrongs make a right? Life without parole is the cheaper humane choice of any society.

The Death Penalty 4 Essay, Research Paper

THE DEATH PENALTY:

ARGUMENT AGAINST:

We have alternatives to capital punishment, we absolutely do not HAVE to kill in order to punish. Killing killers only makes more killers and more victims. It continues the cycle of violence. Since when does two wrongs make a right? Life without parole is the cheaper humane choice of any society. When the state kills are we to see this as some form of justified action? That legitimized murder, when carried out by the state, is somewhat less offensive? Death penalty is by no means a logical nor ethical way of punishing individuals. The reality is that the person, criminal, that is supposed to be punished never actually learns anything but only endures a quick death. Killing the criminal will not bring the victim back to life. Killing the person would only make it easier on them. There is strong evidence that the death penalty is not a major deterrent to capitol crimes and it cost the state on average of twice as much to pursue the death penalty than a life sentence without parole.

Capital punishment is an uncivilized method of handling problems that exist in society. It is easier to employ a method that eliminates the criminal; thereby supposedly eliminating the problem. That is not the case. It is wrong to take the life of another human being. What kind of values are conveyed by a culture that kills its own people. Who are we to judge who is deserving of death? It is not the job of humanity to play God by judging and destroying the sanctity of human life. Thou shalt not kill is self-explanatory.

ARGUMENT FOR:

An eye for an eye. Why should a murderer walk free when the victim is buried six feet under. There is an important distinction which is the difference between savagely murdering an innocent person and killing with just cause. A murderer cannot demand his right to life, because he has denied that right of another. He can not demand that which his actions have denied. Society has no choice to eliminate these people by death. We can not accept this type of behavior or allow it to exist. We should rid ourselves of evil people. Forgiveness can be granted by God, not dead murder victims. By punishing someone to death, not only are we sending a message of intolerance to society, but we are also stopping that person from murdering again, because they are deceased. Once a person has crossed the line of immorality, how can we trust this criminal to live in our society? We can not allow the majority of the innocent, law abiding citizens to be in harms way. Therefore, criminals must face severe consequences for their actions, even death.

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ

ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя:

Комментарий