Name : Marl Dezmond J. Silva Section : Hooke Subject : Purposive Communication Date : Nov. 07, 2020 Year & Course : 1st year – BSMT Why don’t we reinstate the death penalty? The death penalty was set as a punishment for those who committed the crime. The king of Babylon, Hammurabi in the 18th century BC put a death penalty code for almost 25 different crimes and murders were not included in them. The death penalty, also called capital punishment, is when a government or state executes a person, generally but not always because they committed a bad crime. The death penalty is a argumentative and controversial topic. Most countries with the death penalty use it for murderers, and for other serious crimes such as rape, drugs or terrorism. Other countries, especially those with an dictatorial government, yet, also use it for minor crimes such as theft, or for saying bad things about the government. There are many different opinions on the subject of death penalty. Because it is an essential topic, every country has a very strong emotion. Many people say that the death penalty is justified because it scares people away from doing things that are against the law. However many others say that there is the potential to execute an innocent person; one speaks of justice, revenge, and punishment; the other side said the execution was considered as murder or killing. The Philippines has a long history with death penalty, President Fidel Ramos compelled the death penalty in 1993 as a “crime control” measure, however President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo reinstated abolition in 2006 and return with the life to custody. The death penalty was intended to prevent actions deemed inhumane. While the Convention doesn’t take a transparent stance on the execution , many believe that enforcement falls under the sort of punishment described within the document. The death penalty does not appropriately affect certain groups. This is not a good example of blind justice. The poor are also not proportionately affected by the death penalty on a global scale.They are more likely to get good representation and the system is biased against them. Although these groups do not commit the most crimes, they are the ones who receive the most severe punishment. The execution are often used as a tool for control, not justice. In theory, the death penalty is only intended to be used as punishment for the most serious crimes, such as murder. However, in places around the world, governments are using killings for non-lethal crimes. These include drug-related offenses, theft, adultery, profanity, and political crimes. It has become clear that many governments are not interested in justice, but rather restraint and control. Moreover, It makes the people afraid and violates their human rights. It cannot be recovered if new evidence is revealed. What is the difference between the death penalty in prison life and the irreversible punishment. This is a final punishment. However, what if new evidence is found and the inmate appears to be innocent? If the time and circumstances were different, the prisoners would have died for a crime they did not commit. Although they are all innocent, a deeper dive into their cases may reveal discrimination, inadequate representation, and other issues that will prove that they did not receive a fair trial. When the execution is administered , it’s final. Mistakes made cannot be ignored. An innocent person are often released from prison for a criminal offense they didn’t commit, but an execution can’t be reversed. There is no credible evidence that the execution prevents crime more effectively than a jail term. It does not prevent crime. The fact that it does not prevent crime can be the most important reason why the death penalty is wrong. Many people may believe that even if the death penalty is not perfect, it is worth it if it avoids potential criminals. However, polls show that people do not think punishment is being done. If the death penalty is not only inhumane, discriminatory, and unreasonable, but it often claims innocent lives and even avoids crime. In the past history, those who have lost loved ones in horrific crimes have the right to see the person responsible for a fair trial without moving to the death penalty. In opposing the death penalty, we do not try to reduce or justify crime. But as many families who have lost loved ones say, the death penalty does not really alleviate their suffering. It only inflicts suffering on the family of the condemned person. Delivers extreme physical and psychological cruelty. People from other countries await execution in the death row every day. Whatever their crime, whether they are guilty or innocent, their lives are claimed by a justice system that values revenge in rehabilitation. As long as a prisoner remains alive, he may hope for rehabilitation, or to be acquitted if they are later found innocent. Is there a humane and painless way to implement someone? Actually any kind of implementation is inhumane. Deadly injection is usually cited as somehow more humane because, on the surface somehow, it appears less frightening and barbaric than other means of execution like beheading, electrocution, gassing and execution. However, the search for a “humane” way to kill people must see what it really is an attempt to make public enforcement of whose name they carry, and to make it look less attractive of governments enforcing such assassins themselves. We know that the death penalty is not as effective as a barrier. We know that punitive damages cost more than life in prison, taking funds from law enforcement and victim services. We know that there is no way to kill a human being who wants to die. We also know that it does not cause closure and there is evidence that even some of the hardest murders have been fixed enough that their lives behind bars add value to the world. It can bring suffering to innocent parties in the form of trauma, grief, anxiety and suicidal thoughts to correctional officers, wardens, journalists covering cases and the loved ones of the offender. In my previous series about misconceptions, we also learned that innocent men and women can be killed for crimes they did not commit. In general, with or without the death penalty, people will still commit crimes. Just as there have been several studies explaining that the death penalty is an effective form of prevention, there is no shortage of evidence to prove that humans are barriers. The death penalty, therefore, is ineffective and shouldn’t be reinstated.
