The Ethics of Capital Punishment: Death is not a Right Decision

The death penalty is the act of executing somebody as discipline for particular wrongdoing after an appropriate lawful preliminary. It is a definitive discipline. There is no harsher discipline than the death itself. Supportive and counter considerations against the 'moral part' of capital punishment have been debated for a long time. There are many individuals who advocate that individuals who commit crimes like merciless murder, rape ought to be executed by capital punishment, as much as there are individuals who are against death penalty and defend that individuals who commit serious crimes ought to be treated with proper training rather than being executed. Most of these opinions boil down to one decision: “Does the Death Penalty guide people to good morals?” Although those who advocate the necessity of the death penalty consider the positive effects of the execution the convicts to lead positive effects on others in fact, they do not realize it leads to morally negative effects for individuals.

Death Penalty is not a punishment, death is the end itself. The death penalty has been a vital component of civilization since early times. It has been used by leaders since ancient times to maintain order. Although it is not known exactly when it was first used, it was first implemented in writing by a Hammurabi, a Babylonian king who ruled from 1792 BC to 1750 BC under the Hammurabi laws which is one of the oldest and best preserved written laws in the history. The main idea of these laws is an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Right now, 104 countries – just over half in the world – have formally abolished the death penalty, according to the latest figures, produced by Amnesty International at the end of 2016. In prior times, capital punishment was utilized for an assortment of reasons that today would appear to be uncouth. Some societies utilized the death penalty for infringement, an assortment of sexual wrongdoings, enchantment, and murder. Today, execution is utilized fundamentally for homicide, conspiracy, treason, and adultery. Around the world generally, five different methods of execution are prescribed: Lethal Injection, Electrocution, Lethal Gas, Firing Squad, and Hanging.

Advocates of the death penalty claim that frightening individuals with the dread of execution diminish bad behavior rate and guides individuals to great ethics. While the dread of 'death' sounds a hindrance at first, it will end up being an ordinary thing when it transforms into the norm. Realizing they are going to bite the dust when they get captured, criminals feel that they have nothing else to lose. Despite what might be expected, it may lead people who have accomplished the halting point to go extensively further, before the end, to do substantially more bad behaviors.

The murder rate in non-death penalty states has remained consistently lower than the rate in states with the death penalty, and the gap has grown since 1990.

The height of the bars indicates the crime of murder. As can be seen, the rates of murder in the provinces without execution are extensively lower than in those who are. The statistics in the table are proof that the dread of execution does not positively affect individuals, both in the short distance and long distance, and may even have negative effects. One conflict for the death penalty is that it is a strong obstruction to murder and different awful bad behaviors. Without a doubt, evidence demonstrates the inverse. Consequently, there is no need for Capital Punishment to guide people to good morals. If people who killed people were killed by law, it would be a bad example in people.

Another argument is that prisoners acknowledge how important life is in jail and maintain a distance from wrongdoings that can prompt execution. Advocates assert that witnessing a prisoner’s execution can cause other prisoners to question their life. However, in some cases, it cannot be said that this situation has always been positive. For instance, Robertson, who was a prisoner in Florida, claimed to have killed his cellmate in order to be executed. He says: 'Finally, I got mad and said 'I'm going to go ahead and kill somebody.' It was premeditated. I wanted to get on death row.' For the prisoners, life in prison is embarrassing and it means nothing but the destruction of what they want in life. To be executed for the person who lives in such an environment is praised and respected by other prisoners. The special rights granted to the inmates who are about to be executed, and the chance to be freed from the pressure by execution, encourage prisoners to commit a crime to get on death row. Furthermore, to think that the punishment for the prisoners they deserved is death affects them psychologically and makes them inextricable rather than curable. Prisoners may be faced with losing their own individuality while living with fear of being executed. Prisoners living their last days do not care about the psychology of other prisoners because they have nothing to lose. They can encourage them to be executed, believing death is a good thing. In such cases, prisoners living inside tend to be persuaded by other prisoners.

According to advocates of execution, there should be retribution for heavy crimes, a source of relief for the victim or victim's relatives thus; the state can pay the debt to society for the sake of victim. The state is no different from the killer when it decides on a death sentence for the sake of the victim. The death of criminals does not bring back the lives of the victims. It leads to the transformation of individuals in society into even more wild individuals. It is ordinary that the families of the victims want the killer to die when the first suffering event occurs. Death of the victim does not heal the suffering of relatives of the victims. On the contrary, it leaves deep wounds that cannot be closed. Sometimes when the relatives of the victims realize that the people they have lost will not come back, they think that the murderer who was executed for the sake of revenge can reintegrate into society and use this regret in a good way. For instance When Missouri executed Jeff Ferguson in 2014 for the rape and murder of Kelli Hall, the Hall family, her father said, 'Believed the myth that Ferguson’s execution would close our emotional wounds.' At the time of Ferguson's execution, Jim Hall told reporters 'It's over, thank God.' But, he now says, it wasn't. In an op-ed in the Columbia Daily Tribune, Mr. Hall writes that his family has 'come to deeply regret Ferguson's execution'.

To conclude this persuasive essay, the most important task of a state is to treat a criminal, to ensure that he is remorseful and to be reinstated to society. To pay a person's punishment not by execution, but by compensate his mistakes is the most effective method for both society and individuals. Working in the fields determined by the state, economic contribution to society, transferring the regret to other prisoners by dragging people to the right path is more effective way than execution.