Death Penalty Is Fair The Death Penalty Is a Fair Punishment for Murder

Arguements have been raised concerning death penalty for a long time now. A lot of people consider death penalty as an immoral, or an unreasonable punishment. (Messerli, 2007) Despite the fact that the death sentences were a constant element of society in the past, which actually initiated from lynching and ended in the modern capital punishment and is still applicable in some states the topic of death penalty is one amongst the most fretfully discussed topics in public. The topic of Capital punishment accompanies several legal, communal and ethical concerns. (Lifton and Mitchell, 2007)

Lots of people are against death penalty. They argue that it is against humanity and immoral and is there any a crime (or series of crimes) so terrible the offender deserves to depart his life? 33 states in America say yes, rest of them answer no. (McCord and Latzer, 2010) People usualy give thousands of arguments against capital punishment: a few of these include, it's barbaric, chauvinistic, redundant, and possess no long lasting effect. However, I am one among the majority, in my opinion capital punishment is nothing but the only fair punishment for an offense such as murder.

It is largely believed that, capital punishment is an absolutely justified and fair judgment for those who commit ruthless crime of taking someone's life. But it has to be confirmed that the sentence should only be applied to those criminals who dared the most awful and vicious crimes like terrorist attackers, national betrayal, or other individuals who commit severe offences that result in loss of many individuals' lives. For such types of crimes, the sentence should be according to the extent of offense, and the responsible persons behind such crimes must be punished accordingly and destroyed

In addition, capital punishment is considered as an effective instrument in preventing our society from prospective criminals and crimes, as death penalty has found to be very useful in warning other potential delinquents in making them realize that ultimately they be caught and punished for committing crime. The death sentence has found to possess the utmost deterrence effect in this regrd, contrary to other kinds of penalties including life-long imprisonment. Consequently, putting the murderers to death is effective in saving the lives of innocent citizens by discouraging rest of the criminals from committing extreme criminal acts.

It's not possible to discuss every aspect of this battle in one paper but it will be tried to cover as many aspects as possible related to the topic. Lets take an example of Texas, which is the leading state in the United States in this regard. According to statistics, 1 out of every 3 capital punishment executions take place in Texas. Due to this, Texas has implementated legislations after legislations, both inside and outside the state. This practice is supported by majority of citizens in Texas, but the case is not the same for Illinois, where thirteen innocent men were sentenced to death mistakenly and as a result, its Governor George Ryan had to postpone capital punishment executions during investigation.

Usually 7 different causes of murder can result in a death sentence. These include murder:

1. Of a child age six or below;

2. Of a public safety official, firefighter, or correctional officer;

3. For hire;

4. during the commission of specified misdeeds such as burglary;

5. committed to escape prison;

6. By a criminal serving a life sentence for any of above mentioned crimes; and

7. A group of individuals. (Mandery, 2011)

By reducing the types of murders for which the death sentence might be imposed, and by arranging separate sentencing hearings where judges and juries evaluate proofs of aggravating or mitigating conditions, the U.S. laws guarantee, that the death penalty would not be mistakenly or needlessly imposed.

Every murder is and its cause is different from the other. Executions are carried out for the worst cases and serve evident functions at the end. (Zimring and Hawkins, 1989) These also impact minor crimes and discourage marginal criminals from committing major crimes. Burglars, for intance, should be encouraged to not kill victims and witnesses. Murderers should be encouraged...

Security Guards must be protected from killers. A death sentence does not isolate someone from society. Only fatality brings such disconnection from society.
Even the capital punishment is not sufficient sometimes to repay offender of most serious crime. For instance, Jeffrey Dahmer, who killed innocent boys and young children in Milwaukee was given no death sentence in Wisconsin, he merely got imprisonment for life punishment from the court. (Mandery, 2011) However, he was given a death sentence by his fellow prisoners, who killed him in prison. A lot of people believe, the fellow prioners did the right thing, even if it is most of the times considered unacceptable to take law into one's hands. Emotion varies from one person to other, but government must take in to consideration that if too many criminals will walk on the streets or the system will become extremely flexible, citizens will start dealing with criminals that government would not like.

In their publication, McCord and Latzer (2010) state that even state prosecutors considers it as the hardest thing to write a death sentence for a human being and let him die, specially, when they are well aware of the fact that a stroke of their pen can save someone's life. Rather than being illogical and unreliable, the current U.S. law works like a filter, that reserve the right to sentence death for the worst criminals. This is evidently true for case in Illinois. During year 1996, a list of 174 serior offenders who have committed murders was prepared by the state prosecutors. Later on, all of them were given a death sentence by the state judges. (McCord and Latzer, 2010) It was observed that this penalty brought a positive change in the society and a huge difference in the number of crimes particularly murders, was recorded by FBI and the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics.

It was revealed that 20% of these offenders committed murders along with a rape or sexual attack, in contrast to 1% of rest of the murderers; 10% committed murders while robbery or shop stealing in contrast to 1% of rest of the murderers; 13% of them were accused for killing a child, in contrast to 4% of rest of the murderers, 37% of these murders involved more than a single fatality, in contrast to 4% of rest of the murderers. (Zimring and Hawkins, 1989)

Among these the first murderer was guilty of killing a couple of police officers; the second offender murdered a law enforcement officer by bringing him under his automobile; the third murderer was accused of beating an old lady to death with her own stick; the fourth committed muder of four persons in a theft involving drugs; the fifth killed a few months old daughter of his girlfriend by discontinue her provisions and exposing her to extremely low temperature; the sixth murderer killed an old man in the course of a theft; the seventh shot dead an old lady while wearing clothes like a priest; the eighth shot dead one man and injured another man in course of a robbery, the ninth murderer was accused of raping and then killing middle aged lady while she was walked on the road; and the tenth murderer shot to death three people in an argument about money. (Mandery, 2011)

These all were serious crimes, these were no family disagreements that got uncontrollable. These were vicious, merciless murders, that were committed along with other felonies, and mostly involved crime against the most susceptible individuals. By executing these offenders, the government made it clear to rest of the criminals too that they hold every right to sentence death penalty for the worst criminal behaviors.

The question arises, does…