Capital punishment
Introduction
The issue of crime has existed throughout all periods of human history. There have always been people who favored engaging in criminal activities rather than living an honest ethical life. Due to the existence of crime, members of society, through their leaders have come up with ways of punishing those who commit a crime so as to ensure that justice is served. The methods used are not only intended to ensure that justice is served but also as a way of discouraging the criminal from repeating the act and also preventing others from following in their footsteps. According to Bedau and Cassell (14), the methods used, therefore, serve as punishment and tools that ensure the issue of crime is controlled, if not eradicated. Though criminals often conduct immoral actions that deserve punishment, those in charge of serving justice often take the moral ground when serving the punishment. In the past, capital punishment was once considered an ideal form of punishment for certain crimes. However, this belief changed over time to the point where capital punishment was abolished in some countries and avoided in others. It is, however, important to note that criminals do not consider the effects their actions will have on their victims. The methods used to bring the criminals to justice should therefore not consider how they will feel but rather focus on the best method that is equal to the crime that the individual has committed, even if it is capital punishment.
In cases regarding murder, serving the capital punishment ensures that the victims are able to find closure. In most cases, people would argue that a life imprisonment is a sufficient form of punishment for those who commit heinous crimes such as murder (Elsworth 120). Though this might appear as a solution and a way of serving justice, the family of the victim may feel like justice has not been served. The family of the victim feels that life imprisonment is not enough because of the criminal, though in prison, gets to live out their lives. This may be seen as an injustice because they took the life of the victim and the only justice that seems equal to their crime is that their life is taken as well. Capital punishment will thus be ideal to help the family of the victim to find closure. Once the person who committed the crime is dead, the family can finally put an end to the whole issue. Closing such a chapter in their life will help them to find closure and finally move on (Bedau and Cassell 9). Though some people may argue that killing the criminal does not bring the victim back to life, the goal is not to resurrect those that have passed but to ensure that the punishment served equals the crime that was committed.
Any form of punishment is intended to punish the criminal for the crime they commit and thus offer retribution. Punishment and retribution are formed on the grounds that only those who are found to be guilty should be punished; and that the punishment should be equal to the crime they committed (Elsworth 120). Capital punishment thus offers retribution because it ensures that the type of punishment one is given equals the crime that was committed. Every criminal deserves to be punished in a way that equals their crimes, in the case of murder, capital punishment is the most ideal because the criminal pays with their life for the innocent life they took. On the basis of retribution, life imprisonment is not adequate enough because it does not equal the crime that the crime committed. For there to be justice and retribution, the punishment has to be equal, not too lenient or too severe, to the crime that was committed by the offender (Elsworth 121).
Another reason for supporting capital punishment is that it acts as a deterrent to crime (Philips 140). Over the years, the type of punishment such as life imprisonment has served the purpose of not only punishing criminals but also for discouraging them and other members of society from engaging in such criminal activities out of fear of the repercussions that will follow. Though this is effective for some crimes, there are those who need more subtle methods to discourage them from engaging in crimes. Even with the existence of life imprisonment as an acceptable and form of punishment, it fails to deter serious crimes such as murder. Criminals still kill other people and are willing to risk spending life in prison (Guernsey 26). However, capital punishment would serve as a better form of a deterrent because people, including criminals, hold their lives dearly. People are less likely to engage in crimes whose punishment is death and this would go a long way in discouraging criminal activities such as murder.
Other than deterring people from committing crimes, it also discourages criminals who are already serving life imprisonment from engaging in criminal activities (Guernsey 18). Without capital punishment, there is little that the judicial system can do to punish prisoners with such sentences when they engage in criminal activities. Since they are already in prison serving life sentences, the judicial system cannot give them longer sentences, the only thing they can do is deny them some of the few privileges they get in prison. This, however, does not serve as proper punishment for those who end up killing other prisoners. However, in the case where capital punishment is in use, people serving life sentences will be less inclined to commit crime since there is another form of punishment that is more severe than the one they are facing (Bedau and Cassell 5). It, therefore, ensures that even prisoners imprisoned for life do not feel as if they are above the law because there is an extra form of punishment that is yet to be served.
Capital punishment should also be used to switch the role where people believe that the justice system sympathizes more with the criminals rather than the victims. People who are often given life sentences have committed previous crimes before (Philips 142). This shows that despite the various forms of punishment used, the individual is still resulting in crime and is likely to engage in such activities even while in prison. When the justice system still results to give such criminals life imprisonment, it appears as if the system is more interested in preserving the lives of the criminals rather than enacting justice and issuing equal punishment for the crimes they commit. When repeat offenders commit murder, it shows that they do not value human life and have taken up crime as a way of life. By allowing them to continue living, the justice system may be seen as offering sympathy to the criminals and thus not offering justice to the victims (Bedau and Cassell 15). Capital punishment could help to reverse such a view because the victims will get a sense of relief knowing that the criminals paid for their crimes. When a criminal take the life of the victim, it shows that they do not hold any regard for human life. If justice is to be served, their life should be held in the same regard they held those of the victim and this can only be achieved through capital punishment.
Another reason for supporting capital punishment is that it is a permanent solution that ensures that the criminals do not get the chance to repeat the crimes they were convicted of (Guernsey 18). There is the risk that other forms of punishment have loopholes that could result to the criminal finding a way to commit the same crimes, if not worse, that were convicted of. In cases where murderers are given life imprisonment, the criminal may go on to kill other inmates while still in prison. Since some people argue that even prisoners have rights, capital punishment will ensure that their right to life is protected. When people engage in crime, they forfeit certain rights and hence their punishment, people who deserve capital punishment will have thus forfeited their rights and should be punished accordingly. Other than engaging in criminal activities while in prison, there is also the likelihood that prisoners will escape from prison and go back to their life of crime (Guernsey 24). They may embark on a killing spree especially when trying to evade the police and ensure they do not go back to prison. Capital punishment is thus the best type of punishment to ensure that the criminals do not get another chance to engage in crime.
Most people against the use of capital punishment argue that it will result in the killing of innocent people who were wrongly convicted. However, the judicial system has various measures in place to ensure that there is little chance of people being wrongfully convicted (Ellsworth 123). There is a panel of 12 jurors who evaluate the evidence and the case presented in court. For the individual to be found guilty, all the jurors must come to the same conclusion that the accused is guilty of the charges laid against them. There is also DNA testing where tests are conducted to evaluate the evidence used. These tests are very accurate thus ensuring that the accused is actually guilty of the crime. With such methods, those sentenced to capital punishment will thus be guilty and deserving of this form of punishment for their crimes (Ellsworth 123).
Conclusion
Crime has always been part of human society and the punishment given to criminals was meant to punish and discourage further criminal activities. In the modern world, life imprisonment is regarded as an ideal form of punishment for major crimes like rape and murder. Though it is effective in some cases, there are those occurrences where a different type of punishment is required such as capital punishment. People may argue that capital punishment is immoral and unethical because it takes an individual’s right to live. If this were the case, life imprisonment should also be done away with because it infringes. All rights are equal and should be treated as such. Capital punishment is necessary because it has various benefits and could help solve the issue of repeat offenders. However, care should be taken to ensure that those served with capital punishment are indeed guilty and their crime is worthy of such a punishment.
Work Cited
Bedau, Hugo A, and Paul G. Cassell. Debating the Death Penalty: Should America Have Capital Punishment? : The Experts on Both Sides Make Their Case. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Print.
Ellsworth Phoebe and Ross Lee “Public opinion and capital punishment: A close examination of the views of abolitionists and retentionists” Crime & Delinquency. 2003. Pp. 116- 169.
Guernsey, JoAnn B. Death Penalty: Fair Solution or Moral Failure? Minneapolis: Twenty-First Century Books, 2010. Print.
Phillips, David P. “The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: New Evidence on an Old Controversy.” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 86, no. 1, 2000, pp. 139–148. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2778855.
