Legal status and arguments surrounding capital punishment

Legalizing Death Penalty

Pro-death sentence

In civilized states like the U.S.A., there are various means of punishment that are meted out against offenders and capital punishment is one of them. This goes on in chagrin of many pressure groups who argue that this kind of punishment denies the convicts the chance to change and become good to the society and can also fall on the wrongful conviction. This is just one of the major argument fronted by the campaigners against the death sentence within the U.S.A. And several other countries.

It is important to know that deaths sentence, in as much as it is loathed by many people in several countries, it still persists in majority of the countries. In the U.S.A. alone, at the states level, there are 32 states that still have the death penalty as compared to the 18 states where death penalty has been abolished and at the national level there are more that 58 countries that still practice death penalty and several others on top on these apply it on some selected crimes (Death Penalty Information Center, 2014). This is a clear indication that death sentence has a central role in the deterrence of crime and maintaining the sanity of the society.

The abolitionist claims and reasons for abolishment are distant claims that have remote chances of happening in a refined judicial system like the one in existence within the U.S.A. There are fine measures put in place to ensure there is just conviction after a thorough evaluation at the evidence and it has been overwhelmingly depicted that the person in question actually committed the crime. These are processes that are long and fine and costs the taxpayers a lot of money hence cannot be just rubbished as useless.

There are various reasons again why capital punishment cannot and should not be abolished in USA. Within the U.S.A. death penalty majorly applies to the murder convicts and some other serious capital offences, not any other petty case in the streets. It has been ruled by the Supreme Court that capital punishment is constitutional and not just some cruel and unusual punishment as provided for in the 8th and 14th amendments of the constitution of the United States and this should remain so as it targets only the heinous crimes within the society which if the offenders are not eliminated from the earth, they will live to commit it again, hence for the safety of the society, which is a fundamental aspect in the constitution, death sentence stands appropriate (National Museum of Crime & Punishment, (2008).

Death sentence should also not be abolished considering the damage the criminals leave behind at the crime scene and the community at large. Criminals subjected to death penalties left indelible marks in the lives of the victims. They leave deaths or permanent damages to life and health in cases of violent robbery. There is no reason hence to spare the person who permanently altered the fate and future of another innocent citizen.

Arguments that death penalties are not deterrent of crimes are misplaced. It is logical that the harsher the punishment, the more feared the crime that leads to the punishment or may occasion the punishment. There is no one who would love to die hence many people have avoided crimes that could lead to death sentences. Even the criminals who confess to the crimes that lead to death by electrocution, will cry at the hour of death. This is a sign that if it were possible, the person would not have committed the crime in the first place, hence the same sentiment remains with people who witness and know that death sentence is a possibility to some crimes.

According to Michelle M. (2004), retributive justice is important because it bestows upon the law violators particularly those against humanity the sense of responsibility for their actions. Retribution is mainly concerned with the reinstatement of the victims along with offenders to their lawful position. Methods of retribution using the justice model is a theory that tries to consider the punishment if it is proportionate so as to be the finest possible response to the crime. When an individual breaks any law, he should consequently forfeit something which is of equal value, furthermore the forfeiture must be enacted as required by the justice system. In this manner and to this extent, justice systems at times correctly seek favor for the distressed party or even the society in general.

Some abolitionists also point out the chances of wrong conviction or conviction of people who do not merit the type of judgment. It is worth noting that before the court passes the death penalty, there are several considerations that they have to make. For instance they must make sure, through psychiatric testing that the criminal was in a sound mind at the time he was committing the crime and the court considers the entire emotional disposition and the prompts that the criminal must have had. If the killing or the crime was committed upon extreme provocation, in defense, as a crime of passion or happened on impulse, then it is considered unpremeditated crime that the death penalty does not apply. This allays the fears that convictions and the death penalties are handed down anyhow, the threshold is too high such that indeed most criminals who would ordinarily merit fro death sentence go for life imprisonment or long sentences instead of death penalty.