Why the death penalty should be used only in the case of particularly heinous crimes? The heinous crime is the one done with extreme fury and ravage -(dictionary.com). Can the death sentence applied only in heinous case or the others. To figure out it we need to consider the pros and cons arguments. It also depends on the burden you put on the shoulders of people. Whether there are extenuating or aggregative circumstances. Let s look first of all for the pros and cons of the death penalty the examination of which helps to figure out whether it should be used at all or not and why. The cost of this guy in the prison is the responsibility of taxpayers ( balancedpolitics), but the other side is if he gets employed on the road construction instead of the typical worker the government is in benefit. Prisons are a huge amount of the labor force that should be wisely used, but other thing is we have to watch them and think as of consequences if they will run away, it s like Chernobyl in Ukraine in 1986, the consequences of which are famous all over the world. The other reason not to keep is this is cruel or violent (balancedpolitics). It implies that we should think from the standpoint of the victim s family, what they think about that. Yes they want revenge for this murder, but their sibling is gone and nothing can be turned back. Most of the heinous crimes committed by cruel, fearless, out of control people. Should we forgive those and keep them in our society, or should we clean it. Everybody has a right to live, but to live in a civilized society, not a barbarian one. How can we let the assassin go or discharge him if he is insane? What the purpose of seeing him in our society, just because we have dogmas, principles that we have to follow, but what about the endangering of civil people, who wants to live happily without thinking that tomorrow a Bill killer will come and destroy their whole family. Unfortunately for the victim and fortunately for killers the endless appeals ( balancedpolitics.org )- have to deal with quality of Judge s functions and it s not that we should
banned the punishment, but we should also improve the system, so it will operate faster and take quick and right decisions. All these action will take us to the civilized society and turn away form "eye for an eye"(balanced politics) mentality if civilization is to advance. This is the strongest argument, but we have more then 6 billion people on the earth and lot of us think scornfully or jealously about our society we live it. The purpose of people is to compete and become advanced. Some of us use honest methods, some of us don t, but in each of us there is something bad-jealousy, hatred, fury, craftiness, insolency. So in order to move to the advanced civilization we have to eliminate these evil qualities in each of us, is that possible to do even among 500 million people? By what means are we going to do that, put everyone in one church, there will be still intelligent people who will doubt the church s existence and will be disagree with church policy. We have the other way to fight against unfairness by killing people who kill other people to show killing is wrong. - all of us fear to lose the most valuable thing life, so murderer committing the crime thinks: well, if they catch me I will be dead soon, and he looks for the ways to escape-to be admitted mentally ill, or postpone the appeal, etc. He wants to avoid punishment. Is he doing it to become good men and benefit the society bringing welfare? Let s take Birma, the place on the south west of Thailand. There was an article about the kids killing other people and the witnesses tell that there is no way the 12-year old kid can be converted to the ordinary man, because he is a zombie, the main goal for his existence is killing people. We think: oh, little kids we shouldn t be afraid, but he is a machine. His psychology is not formed yet and easy fluctuated, that s why military leaders use them. They have no conscious and can be easily manipulated, the same thing happens with the killers, especially series ones, but to have a control over them is almost impossible. That s why imprisoning them might be worse punishment and it tells us that those people who for banning death penalty are really for making
killers suffer. Good thing for them is they exist taxpayers money and it s opportunity to live and may be escape. Talking about death penalty on a Global level we want to create Favorable image (balanced politics)- I don t agree with that! We still have one of the highest levels of crime in the world and guns control proves it. For the end of 2006 we had 80-85% of population who has guns in their house-this tells us something, right? People are in fear and we should fight it, but the means we use for now are not sufficient. We can t judge those who put people to death, because each of them is responsible for the society he lives in. His mistakes will affect others. We might consider the banning of the penalty if we are talking about the person who is not guilty. It happens in the irresponsible courts, whose task just to imprison someone. If the case is in the court every citizen has to be sure it will be appropriately and fairly solve in order to feel safety and this security should be guaranteed by the Court and Judicial Branch of the government. Putting this killer in the dock the accuser s family will suffer emotionally (balancedpolitics). But what did you do while your kid or relative was playing with the gangsters smoking weed or loitering in the neighborhood? We know, you were busy making money, but all of us need devote the time even if Your day schedule is full you still can find the pockets to fill in (Nitzshe). Does accusers family think about the victim s one, I don t think so, because their will is to take this guy out of rope If I were killers dad, I would beg for forgiveness the family of a killed person, because this is my failure for not watching my kid becoming intelligent and well-around person. In case of Possibility of killing the wrong person (balancedpolitics)- it is the issue of flexibility and reliability of the country s system. I agree, there is a chance of it, but each murder, especially series of it, should be thoroughly investigated. If we increase the number of policemen
on the street, people would feel safely, therefore fewer murders would be committed. Finally, when inhabitants of areas will get to used to it, life will be less riskier. By banning the penalty we are running away form the problem instead of solving it. Abolition of punishment can skyrocket the criminality rate. Then it will see logical to militarize the whole population so we would see men walking with rifles and protecting their territory. There are cases that defenders appeal to the diminished responsibility. The next step after the case we put him in the same prison, but for mentally retarded people. I am not saying that we shouldn t give retarded a chance to live among us, but if the person can t fit in the environment we should support him, of course, but if it s not helping, then may be prison is the way. No one has a right to say, that we shouldn t have sympathy (balancedpolitics), but it makes us weaker. We understand each other s situation and feel sorry for him, but when it comes to help, we avoid it, saying: I have a job, that I got to do, or kids or whatever. The argument is when the case involves the killing of our son or daughter, when we become the judge ourselves the sympathy stops and with it words lose its meaning. Some people argue that killing the assassin doesn t bring him to life (balancedpolitics). What kind of life we are talking about here, if you are already on the path of killing people. Remember we are talking right now about the heinous crimes. We don t consider civil cases like John and Smith owed Max Corporation 200,000 dollars. The value of Money can t be compared to life, but for money we commit massacre. Carnage is the crime have been done in condition of fury, hate, and revenge. While executing it we are driven by emotions we can t control, therefore such people should be deserted from the society, because other citizens also like assassins have a right to live happily. There is a good opinion about death penalty by Cynthia G. Oberg. She talks about the system with the help of which murderers, while having the appeal process enjoy the life of
present day comfortable facilities in prisons such as gyms, libraries TV in the cell and other. Sometimes assassins sent to the free college-level classes that most Americans are struggle to afford (glory, Maricopa). While them having good time the victims whom they proclaimed guilty can t say a words in their honor. Instead thier relatives should find some other way to move on and to find peace of mind. R. E. Brown, United Kingdom (bbc) The fighters for abolishing the crime believe the death penalty does not deter crime. (glory.maricopa) while the officials arguing against this provide statistical data that criminals released back into society commit additional felonies. May be those believers want to made a massive genocide-devastate the land by letting all the prisoners be alive and walk down the street. By executing the criminals we 100% eliminate killers possibility to commit another felony (glory. Maricopa). Consider the cost of prisoners maintaining in the cell- Figuring an annual cost increase of 2%, with approximately $75,000 trial and appeal expenses, the total for housing a life without parole prisoner for 50 years is $3.01 million (glory.maricopa). We could spend this money on child, medical care or building roads. Since our country is democratic and use of cheap labor has been abolished long time ago, these prisoners are not working in the mines or on the roads or substituting the hard labor position-they just enjoy the life. Then what s it better to be prisoner and have all the benefits you can t afford or be an honest man who works diligently and getting salary he hardly can live on. It will encourage people to kill and have these benefits, won t it, but their human moral stop them from doing that, unfortunately not all. The length of the appeals often frustrates everyone families of victims, prosecutors and investigators (glory Maricopa). Then if appeal process goes like this what kind of Court can be considered fair? If in all reality the appeal only evaluates the sentence of death (Brinker) then why should I wait so long just to prove that my relative has been killed? This is about
inefficiency of the system. I understand that the person on the bench might be not guilty, but when the facts are obvious, the system still waits for something irrelevant, thus giving an opportunity for the killer to avoid or extenuate the punishment and again what for, to give this person another chance to kill. Let s see the practical case The recent violent rampage allegedly committed by Christopher Erin Rogers Jr. that left two people dead and three others critically wounded is such an action for Alaska. Accused of using a machete to kill his father and seriously injure his father s fiancée, then fleeing to Anchorage and randomly killing one and shooting two others, the monstrous violence and callous nature of Rogers alleged crimes are again prompting many Alaskans to ponder the death penalty. (frontiersman). This is the state where death penalty wasn t applied again after 1972. There might be reasons to say that this man was mentally ill, or that he was under the drugs, but does it seem to have any sense. How can we justify the person who kills his father the person who raised him, who took care of him, and who gets stubbed in the back by his own son. We can acquit him by brutal treatment of father or discrimination and humiliation, but still he is the Father! The other notorious case was with Mr. Pittman who On Nov. 28, 2001 near Chester, S.C., Chris Pittman, age 12, shot and killed his grandparents with a shotgun. In his written confession he said, "I went into the bedroom. I just aimed at the bed. I shot four times." He was justified for taking prescribed drugs Zoloft The defense argued that Zoloft, and its side effects, impacted Pittman's ability to reason. He heard voices saying "Kill, kill, do it, do it." masspsy.com. This is the case that application of death sentence is doubtful, because he is 15 year old and he has life ahead, but what kind of life. Now he presents the danger to the society and no one will be willing to deal with him. What will be the reaction of people in oppostion to death sentence,
when the assassins describes in details what has been done with brutality, revenge, fury and just calmness, who don t really care what happened and feel no compassion to their victims, how to deal with these killers. Let s appeal to consciousness. We are people, the creatures whose brains grey substance in amount overwhelms the other creatures. We are smart. But let s take monkey; have there be any cases where their sons or daughters killed their parents with sticks or other devices. We haven t seen it and didn t hear about it, but theoretical possibility exists. But us the mostly developed biological organisms, people, how can we do furious killings, where is our consciousness?. If we humans are to rise above the rest of the animal kingdom, than we must show some humanity - Graham Follett, UK (bbc) It seems right now that we support more the killers rather then victims. We are saving a killer, what for, what is he worth right now in society if he annihilated the society step by step morally and physically. Rejecting capital punishment we give opportunity to others to commit crime and think they will go away with it. That s what we thought being kids and we were prone to committing small crimes: "Who cares what I do? I can get away with it. And if they do catch me then so what? I know what the penalty is and it doesn't faze me at all (Rubak) If you are still against the death penalty, then some statistics would be useful. Numbers show other countries including USA suffering from ban of the capital punishment, which increases the crime rate. The latest available statistics Another interesting factor deals with the number of agencies that report data. For example, the State of Alabama (a state with 32 agencies that report hate crimes) did not report a single hate crime. Are we supposed to believe that a state with a history of racial tension did not have a single hate crime in all of 2005? Alabama reported 19,678 cases of violent crime, 374 murders or non-negligent manslaughters, 1,564 rapes, and 11,293
aggravated assaults. But, not a single hate crime? ( corkymcg.wordpress.com), and the victims someone s sons, mothers(wwltv.com), daughters, fathers, the cause of the rising digits is The death penalty has been abolished in the UK for over 35 years and in this time crime has increased dramatically - Edmund Montgomery, UK (bbc). Why does the person commits crime, what are the reasons which push him? We should dig in the root of the problem. Give people something of value, provide programs to make people involved in activities, feeling value which will stop them and think about siblings or a wife or kids. The person who becomes The most dangerous man in the world is the man with nothing to lose Mike Cooke, UK, everything he needs is a little bit of attention. The main argument stand for elimination of death penalty is If society kills its citizens, then it is no better than a murderer - Steve, UK (bbc). People s views, which correspond to pros for punishment, try to preserve society and build harmonious relationships in it. We try to justify the deeds of criminals, but they chose their own way. Everyone from the birth have equal right and decides what to have, what to obtain and how, therefore Criminals were given a chance to live in a civilized society and chose not to -Kristin Casey, USA (bbc), then why to keep them here. There are cases when the person needs to be saved or cured, because he really didn t know what he was doing, but it occurs randomly. Talking about imprisoning of murders, keeping them for the expense of taxpayers, what are we doing that for? Remember the greatest movie of all time, the Shawshank escape those criminals who got out of prison. Some of them went to work in the grocery store, they commited suicide. The reason was isolation and no opportunity to keep up with time, especially now with high technology age. There is no one who is willing to employ the series killer, giving him opportunity to live, no one wants this social outcast to rise and treat, therefore government has to take care of it. If we are not going to sentence people then we need
to give them something to work on. Encourage them with opportunity to study or enjoy the life even in the prison they can be useful. If we are going to invest money as taxpayers, let s use it wisely. So those for whom it is used will produce qualitative benefits to the society, otherwise it s senseless. I think the problem is more global and it s about looking for people who are in need, like social institutions who makes questionnaires or psychological centers ready to help everyone. The other reason for killing is temptation to excel the series killers in the movies. Lost of murderers said that purpose of their killing was to excel the favorite actor that s why the killing sometimes reaches the highest level of brutality cutting with knifes or tearing apart; movies give them this kind of ideas. We shouldn t eliminate this entertainment, but just to put strong restriction on it will be enough. I have seen a program on TV about series killer, which was shown on regular channel at 7.00, when all people at home with children were resting. The reasons why men appeals for abolition of capital punishment are the cases of self defense, victims who really didn t commit the crime, Why is it that when people have been found innocent after being executed by the state no one stands trial for murder? - R. Hughes, UK (bbc), felonies committed by teenagers, but this reasoning should not cross the border of rationality and irrationality. The other question for those who against death penalty is whether any of them are willing to interact with prisoners and help them. I bet none of them will be doing that, because the first time they will be robbed, they will change the views. People really need help, but may attack you if you help them, help people anyway Mother Teresa. The problem with this quotation is that not so many people are ready for sacrifice. After being hurt most switch to other views forgetting to follow the earlier principles, because it s all about being patience that not all of us having it. My brother was murdered 14 years ago but before the
murder and after, I'm still opposed to the death penalty. Sarah Williams, Italy (bbc), may be is just like the famous Mom or she just thinks rationally. Even by killing all the gangsters you will not extirpate the mentality of people who are still doing killings. You can make a survey among those whose siblings died during 9/11 attack. Ask them how many would be willing to have mercy on those who inflicted the hardest pain on them in the entire life. Will be good to find someone who will stand for terrorists, but they are also people, like us. Before saying whether you for or against the death penalty, put yourself in the shoes of the victim s family and then say being in your senses, not under drugs, or alcohol, or other emotional fluctuation what position you hold. Everyone thinks only for himself. Considering the side on which the execution will happen, they don t want it and we understand the reason. But in order to solve this problem we need to dig the root of it and destroy it. We see the consequence of cancellation of death sentence, but how can we prevent them. If we want to be called civilization then it makes sense to keep away from this method of brutality, but how the others on whom this brutality was executed and who can t turn back the victims suffered from the mistakes of gangsters who make massacre. Think about whether we need this kind of people among us and if yes, are we ready to accept these outcasts and dissimilate them in our society, give them one more chance and how many of them we should give. We have to be aware that those killers will never think about us. In order to bring back criminals to life you have to dig so hard into their soul to pull the good essence of human being, but not for long this sacrifice and patience will last.
Works cited Should the death penalty be banned as a form of punishment? By: Joe Messerli. 11 November 2007 <http://www.balancedpolitics.org/death_penalty.htm> 2005 Hate Crime Statistics. Cork McGraw October 20, 2006 http://corkymcg.wordpress.com/2006/10/20/2005-hate-crime-statistics/ Should the death penalty be abolished? Tuesday, 4 July, 2000, 14:34 GMT 15:34 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/801390.stm The Death Penalty True Cause for Justice. By Cynthia G. Oberg. ENG 101 Section 2664. April 2000. http://glory.gc.maricopa.edu/~mdesoto/101hybrid_new/death_penalty1.htm Death penalty an option for heinous crimes. Frontiersman. Published on Monday, December 10, 2007 10:53 PM AKST http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2007/12/11/opinion/editorials/doc475e405b521c38160 60713.txt 'Zoloft' cases raise questions. By Edward Stern, J.D. June 2005 Issue http://www.masspsy.com/columns/0506_ne_stern.html Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2006 http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heinous D.A. seeks death penalty in 'heinous' crime. WWLTV.com 05:14 PM CDT on Thursday, May 24, 2007 http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/wwl052407khdeathpenalty.6d2387c.html