Most Common Capital Crime example essay topic

Capital punishment is the legal killing of a person for the commission of a crime. It is used in practice by around ninety countries at the moment, though more ban it every year. The most common capital crime is murder, though it is used somewhere for most major crimes against the person. I will examine the aims of punishment, and decide if capital punishment is required to serve these aims, and if it is morally right in doing so. The most often cited reason for capital punishment is deterrence. If somebody knows that they will die for a crime then many say this will put them off ever committing it.

If this was true then no executions would ever be carried out, but they are. Most murders are crimes of passion, they are not premeditated. They are usually committed against a member of the murderer's family, and will not be repeated. In the heat of the moment rage can cloud rational thought: out of 145 murderers in Japan, nobody recalls thinking about the death penalty at the time of the crime. The Old Testament seems in some places to support the idea of retribution or "getting back". For example in Genesis 9.6: "Whoso shedd eth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man".

Yet elsewhere God hands out a different punishment for murder. When Cain killed Abel he was cursed to wander the Earth, and marked by God so that no-one would kill him. Here, banishment and exile is the penalty for murder; capital punishment is specifically prohibited. As for retribution, it seems morally wrong to apply such a principle unevenly. Yet society does so. Not all murderers are executed even in countries like America, in fact most aren't.

Danes says that if "the killers should be killed, should rapists be raped, torturers tortured and arsonists burned?" The Pope believes that we should always strive to find an alternative to capital punishment. Christians believe that they should follow the Ten Commandments laid down in the Old Testament. One of these is "Thou shalt not kill". Therefore to execute someone is according to this part of the Bible a great sin. There are so many contradictions on the issue within the Bible that I feel that we must make our own decision on capital punishment based on the facts. Another reason for executing criminals is that it ensures that society is protected for them ever re-offending.

Obviously a life sentence would achieve the same, though there are financial considerations too. Many do not believe that money should come into a moral decision, but if it is money better spent on the relief of suffering elsewhere then I believe it does matter. Execution is cheaper than life imprisonment. Another difference between the two punishments is that many think that death is more lenient than life in most prisons, including murderers. It is becoming increasingly common in the United States for defence lawyers to petition a judge to pass the death penalty. Yet is this an excuse to kill people?

I'm not sure. Another problem in my view with the death penalty is that it is absolutely final: It cannot be reversed. This means that innocent people are sometimes executed, and then found to be innocent though nothing can be done for them. For example in 1950 Timothy Evans was hanged for the murder of his daughter, then found to be innocent. He was pardoned but this seems worthless. If people are imprisoned and then exonerated, they can easily be released and compensated.

It is definitely wrong to kill an innocent criminal, so I believe that capital punishes are wrong to even risk it. Paul believed that the state took its authority from God. Speaking of the state, he wrote: "But if you do wrong be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer". However this idea of state righteousness seems to be faulted by the tyrannical regimes of Hitler and Amin, to name but a few. The death penalty also seems to be in conflict with human rights, if they are taken to be those laid down by the United Nations: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".

Many forms of execution such as electrocution or gassing definitely break this article in my opinion, as they cause much pain, but they are legally practised by the United States of America, a signatory of the Declaration. Another reason that I believe the death penalty cannot be morally right is the way in which it affects third parties. People who have nothing to do with the crime are called upon to kill the criminal. This often leaves them emotionally scarred, especially when they must kill somebody who they have come to realise is essentially a good person, someone who just "lost it". The death penalty inflicts suffering to innocent as well as guilty parties.

In conclusion, I believe that the title statement is false. In my opinion the only excuse for killing is the direct preservation of life. (e.g. shooting someone who is firing a machine gun into a crowd of non-combatants.) To execute is as much of a state endorsement of murder as it is a deterrent. Life is a God given gift that no-one, state nor criminal has the right to take away.