The issue of Death penalty is one of most debated issues of the world. A number of people say the death penalty as legal murder by the state while there are many who argue in the favor of death penalty. This paper intends to discuss whether death penalty is necessary or not along with discussing other related aspects of the subject matter.
People who argue in favor of death penalty say that death penalty is necessary and it discourages criminals from committing heinous crimes. People say that in heinous crimes, only death penalty is the appropriate punishment and there is no need to show kindness on criminals who commit these heinous crimes. Punishing criminals for heinous crimes spreads a massage that crime will not be tolerated and it creates a fear among criminals. Apart from this aspect, punishing the criminals of such heinous crimes consoles those who lost their relatives in such crimes which is also a very necessary aspect of the justice.
Those who oppose death penalty cite, Mohandas Gandhi who says “an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind” (Oberst, p 87). People of this school of thought say that state has no right to take anyone’s life because we cannot give life to anyone. These people opine that death penalty is not a new concept and has been practicing since the beginning but it has not deterred the criminals from committing heinous crimes. Criminals still commit heinous crimes and improving their behavior, and not killing them, is the duty of the state.
After having observed the abovementioned analysis, it is good to say that death penalty is a complicated subject. Focus should be on improving the behavior of people and not on killing them. On the other hand, death penalty is necessary in some rarely heinous matters.
Works Cited
Haney, Craig. Death by Design:Capital Punishment As a Social Psychological System: Capital. New Year: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Oberst, Karen L. But I Tell You: Jesus Introduces a Better Way to Live. Newberg: Barclay Press, 2007.
