The Death Penalty
& # 8211 ; A Necessary Evil Essay, Research Paper
The Death Punishment: a Necessary Evil
Life is the most fantastic gift that God gives us. He besides gives
us the power to make what we wish with that life. We can maintain it and guard
it, or we can take it off. It follows that slaying is the worst offense
anyone could of all time perpetrate. It is a offense that no 1 can of all time do right
because one time you take a life off you can ne’er give it back. Punishments
exacted from felons are made to suit the offenses committed. The worst
offense possible should hence have the worst punishment possible. That
punishment is the decease punishment.
Take, for illustration, the instance of a adult male who is caught shoplifting.
He does non merit the same penalty as person who is convicted of
assault and battery. Most people would hold no job holding with
this. Yet many of these same people believe that a cold blooded slayer
deserves the same life sentence as a convicted kidnaper who did non kill
his captive. Granted these are both serious discourtesies, but our system of
jurisprudence plants by grades of earnestness ( Bedau, p.326 ) . The mental harm done
to that captive can be turned around, but the life taken off by the liquidator can
ne’er be given back. They should hence be given a harsher penalty
than life in prison. In footings of justness, we should all acquire what we deserve.
One statement against the decease punishment is that the bible Tells us
non to slay. If this includes wholly people it should include the
authorities. However, the decease punishment is non rather the same as slaying.
It is an exacting of justness. Consequently, the Bible besides says, an oculus
for an oculus, a tooth for a tooth. It could besides state a life for a life as
good. The authorities besides has rights that we as citizens do non hold. As
Mayor Ed Koch says in his essay on the decease punishment, the executing of a
legitimately condemned slayer is no more an act of slaying than is legal
imprisonment an act of snatch. ( Bedau, p.318 )
Peoples who are convicted of slaying more frequently than non hold more
offenses than merely that one slaying under their belt. Their mental province
allows them to perpetrate atrocious Acts of the Apostless and non experience guilty about them ( Bedau, p.322 ) .
There is non much cogent evidence than anyone can alter this head set. Say, for
case, that one of these said liquidators is charged with life in prison.
In gaol they make the attempt to hold a good behaviour. Within 12
old ages they are out on the streets merely to kill once more. Or possibly even
worse, person has been charged with multiple life sentences and there is
no possible manner to acquire out of prison. Because this is the worse
penalty they can hold they are in consequence given a licence to kill
whomever they can acquire their custodies on in prison. The decease punishment demands
P >
to be around as an option for those instances in which the criminally is
probably to kill once more if of all time given the opportunity.
The decease punishment besides has the possible to go a really powerful
hindrance against Acts of the Apostless of slaying ( Grabowski, p 257 ) . Life in prison is about
better than some of the lives that these felons lead. At least they are fed and
kept out of the rain. Death, nevertheless, is a existent penalty no affair how
you look at it. And even if person wanted to decease, there are easier ways
of making that than being put on decease row. The job is that non plenty
of these executings occur to be of any existent usage as a hindrance. In fact,
there was one twelvemonth in which more people were executed in Florida than in
any other province and there homicide rate went up while in the remainder of
America it went down ( Pojman, p.319 ) . Obviously with the Numberss of
executings really taking topographic point ( in Florida it was eight people ) , they
can non make much to halt people from killing. The opportunity of them acquiring
the decease punishment is far excessively improbable.
There is eventually the job of guiltless people acquiring executed.
No 1 will state that this does non go on because it does. It does non
occur really frequently, but even one guiltless individual who is executed is a
awful calamity. However, there are most likely people functioning a life
sentence who are guiltless as good. It is true that these people have more
clip to turn out themselves guiltless, but this does non ever go on. Our
system of jurisprudence is an imperfect one. Bad judgements are made all the clip,
but they can non be helped. It is better to run the hazard of put to deathing an
guiltless individual so to get rid of the decease punishment and run the hazard of so
many more people being murdered by those who get out of gaol or kill
inside the prisons.
Death in any signifier is a atrocious thing. Executions are non in any
manner exempt from this statement. Anyone who witnesses an executing will
Tell you that it is atrocious, but sometimes we are forced to take
between two immoralities. When these times occur we have to make our best to
take the lesser immorality. The decease punishment is such an immorality. There is an
obvious intent for its being and until we can happen a better
replacement, one that is an even lesser immorality, we need to maintain the decease
punishment alive.
Word Count 992
Bibliography
Work Cited
1. Bedau, Hugo Adam. & # 8220 ; The Death Penalty in America. & # 8221 ; New York: Oxford University Press, 1982.
2. Grabowski, John F. & # 8220 ; The Death Penalty. & # 8221 ; San Diego, CA: Lucent Books, c1999.
3. Pojman, Louis P. & # 8220 ; The Death Penalty, For or Against. & # 8221 ; Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, c1998.
4. & # 8220 ; The Death Penalty Information Center. & # 8221 ; The Death Penalty Home Page. March 8 2000 www.essential.org/dpic/feddp.html ( 22 June 2000 ) .
