The very first thing we need to know is – What A death penalty (Capital Punishment) actually means?? It means punishing a person for the crime he had done in his past by killing him in any suitable way. And now I am quoting a brief history of death penalty via DPIC: “The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the 18th Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which justified and used the death penalty for 25 different types of crimes. The death penalty was also in the 17th Century B.C.’s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes, as well as in the 5th Century B.C.’s Roman law of the Twelve Tablets. Death sentences were carried out by means such as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and implement.”
Now some questions which arises in my mind and what I think about them —
Is death Penalty morally right? Is It Necessary to fight fire with fire?No killing a man is not morally right, although now it is morally accepted by the society that killing a man who kills a man is right. And fighting a fire only increases the fire; we need water to fight a fire.
Is death penalty actually reduces crime rates?
I myself along with hundreds of surveys say that nations without the death penalty have had consistently lower murder rates than those where they punish a person by hanging him, shooting him and beating him to death.
Even if the death penalty did reduce crime rates, Will it then be acceptable?
I don’t think so, I am a peace-loving man and I love every human equally, but that does not mean I want that person to roam free who had done that crime, he should be punished for the crime he had done, but not by capital punishment.
Is it fair in terms of crime done by rich and poor? The death penalty targets the economically disadvantaged those who cannot afford to pay their legal bills. There is a saying in the US “Capital Punishment is for those who have no capital and gets the punishment.” And many stats show that is the truth.
How much does it cost? Is it necessary to spend taxpayers money on criminals??
The amount of work that is involved in taking the case all the way to the supreme court to try to get a stay of execution (These are called appeals) It can sometimes take years to exhaust all appeals. Most of the prisoners on death row do not have the funds to fight in court, and so we the taxpayers foot the bill. Lawyers charge for every stamp, every piece of paper, and every minute they talk about the case no matter to whom that might be. You add all this up, plus the cost of housing, feeding and keeping a prisoner for years, plus the cost of the actual death and funeral and it can add up quickly. It not only costs a bundle of money for the death penalty, it costs a bundle of money to keep a prisoner in jail for a life term. Either way, we the taxpayers foot the bill.
Here are many reasons to support that death penalties are ineffective–
- There are many other alternative punishments for those who had done the crime one of them is imprisonment for life without parole, in which the prisoner should work for his living in the prison.
- What if, Death Penalty is given to the innocent? Yes, there are many cases in which judges gave the death penalty to those who did not commit the crime. What do we say to his widow and children? Do we erect an apologetic tombstone over his grave?
- In many cases, death penalty gave criminals publicity which they don’t even deserve, and this may cause attention seeker kids to do that crime to get famous which causes harm to themselves and their family only.
- There is something indecent in the rituals that surround executions and the excitement they provide to the public. We should worry about those who gather outside the prisons to cheer the executioners on; sometimes the crowd started chanting “KILL HIM, KILL HIM.”
- If we abolish the death penalty in our country, we can be more effective in defending political and religious prisoners who face it abroad.
- The death penalty costs even higher than to keep the criminal in the prison for life.
- The death penalty may prolong sufferings of the victim’s family and close one.
- Capital Punishment does not reduce crime rates. So why should it be necessary?
- The death penalty fails to recognize that guilty people have the potential to change, denying them the opportunity to ever re-join society.
- The death penalty punishes the poor.
Many people support the death penalty as reparation for the wrong done to a victim’s family; they undergo severe trauma and loss which no one should minimize. Executions do not help these people heal nor do they end their pain; the extended process prior to executions prolongs the agony of the family. Families of murder victims would benefit far more if the funds now being used for the costly process of executions were diverted to counseling and other assistance. The harm was now already been done, but encouraging our motives of revenge and avenge which only ends in another killing, extends the chain of violence.
The death penalty is never ever acceptable. It only violates the two of the basic human rights which are right to live and no one should be subject to torture, by the giving death penalty we took away one’s right to life and also subject him to torture sometimes even psychologically by letting him wait for many years to face his death penalty and that wait seems terrifying even if he has done the crime but he is human and should be treated like one. In the end, I just want to say that death penalty should be abolished, not even from our country but from this world. If it is necessary sometimes then it should be in the rarest of the rare cases.
Jai Hind 🇮🇳