Capital punishment agree or disagree

You should finish the task within 40 minutes. Without capital punishment the death penalty our lives are less secure and crimes of violence increase. Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

You should write at least words. You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence. Model Answer 1: Agreement: Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society. Before talking about the essential role of the death penalty, you have to think about the meaning, and the purpose, of any kind of punishment.

If you consider that the purpose is to prevent the guilty from being nasty again, you can be seduced by an argumentation in favour of the suppression of capital punishment.

Essay On Capital Punishment – Without Capital Punishment (The Death Penalty)

But you have to think about another aspect of the problem: a punishment is also useful to impress people, to make them fear the law. In fact, let's take the example of a young misfit, which has grown in a violent atmosphere, influenced by older delinquents, etc. He lives in the streets; he's got no aim but to survive. This is the kind of person who could possibly kill someone for money, or even for fun.

Why would he fear prison? Life would be easier for him there. In addition, in many cases, when you behave normally, you can benefit from penalty reductions. This young misfit needs to be impressed; he needs to know that the law is a frontier. When you cross it, you can lose your life. That is why capital punishment helps keep a distance between robbery and murder. If you abolish it, you suppress the difference between these two types of crime, which are completely different.

But there is also a limit to define: even if the death penalty is unavoidable, it would be a crime to apply it to inadequate cases. If there is no premeditation or past facts which can justify such a punishment, it is far too strict to apply the death penalty. That is why the lawmakers have to establish precisely the context in which capital punishment car being pronounced. That is the price to pay to limit violence without using excessive violence. Approximately words This model answer has been prepared by the site developer.Without capital punishment the death penalty our lives are less secure and crimes of violence increase.

Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society. Recommended : Repeated Essay list. Since times immemorial, punishment by death or capital punishment has existed. We have several writings from pre-historic times that give evidence of capital punishment being awarded. But, does that mean that this measure is resulting in lesser incidents of crime? Alternatively, without the death penalty, will our lives be at greater risk?

Penalties exist as an outcome of an act. They serve a purpose, to act as symbolic cases for others to take note of, and in this case, fear. In the recent history, the death sentence was awarded to perpetrators of the infamous rape case in Delhi. Similarly, our judiciary saw Kasab being hanged for his involvement in Mumbai blasts that claimed lives of many. For these cases, there existed a need to hand out tough sentences, and no other quantum of punishment would have been appropriate.

But, despite the argument in favor of punishment by death, statistics show that capital punishment has not negatively impacted the rate of crime. For example, despite being made an example of, incidents of rape have not witnessed any decline. Similarly, a death sentence to Kasab did not deter terrorists from engaging in unlawful activities — for there are infiltration bids across the border that are reported every day.

Clearly, it there does not seem to be a negative correlation between the two. Therefore, to me, capital punishment does not act as a deterrent to perpetrators and cannot be taken as a means to control violence in society.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed. The model answer for Capital Punishment Essay Write about the following topic:.

Liked our Article, Share it:. You may also like. This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.

Accept Read More.

Do you agree or disagree on capital punishment..why or why not?

Necessary Always Enabled.Crime rate is a menace that each country faces. Violent crime has been climbing steadily for a long time and that the future will only bring further increases.

Also, crimes are as much about social failure as individual responsibility. In my point of view, the capital punishment acts as a catalyst to promote fear of law among citizens to deterrent future offenders. In the absence of capital punishment, we will become a law-less society. The crimes we are now witnessing such as rape, murder, pedophilia, genocide cannot be addressed by simple punishments.

These days we are seeing horrific attacks on women, and children and weaker section of society is continued to be targeted. Especially in the case of rape, murder and terror attacks, the situation will not improve unless government send a strong message to the future offenders of its dire consequences. While those against capital punishment argued that there is no empirical data to confirm that this practice of punishing somebody to death is productive in controlling crimes.

Also they believe that our justice system is incapable of administering the capital punishment in a fair manner. Innocent people are the most to be victimized. It is, therefore, essential to conduct a detailed scrutiny of the case before giving the final verdict. When harsh punishment becomes reality in a society, there is a long term decrease in heinous crimes. These days, the law enforcement bodies are struggling to maintain peace and justice in society.

To meet the expectations of a civil society, it is necessary to enforce the idea that punishment will be consequential and commensurate to the crime. In conclusion, it is the time when we have a mechanism to punish the criminals and help the victims. This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website.

Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are as essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website.

These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience. Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly.

Custom rom lavender ios

This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information. Nizmy Nizmy 0 Comments.

Nuke documents

Write about the following essay topic: Without capital punishment the death penalty our lives are less secure and crimes of violence increase. Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? You should write at least words. Share this: Tweet. Like this: Like Loading Previous Previous post:. Next Next post:. Essay on capital punishment. Leave a Reply Cancel reply. This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.

Accept Reject Privacy and Cookie Policy. Privacy Overview This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website.Capital punishment is extremely necessary. We should take these people out back and let their victims or victims family beat them to death. This should be televised nationally.

capital punishment agree or disagree

We should send a message to our society that we will not tolerate violent criminals. Doing this would deter crime and save a lot of money. Well, No one likes to die, Don't we? So, This will be like you kill someone and you die-the thing that no one wants to. So, From fear of death, They'll at least think twice in killing someone. Idealy, Capital punishment will create fear that no one will kill anyone.

I never used to agree with capital punishment because I know that some innocent people are wrongly convicted and killed and I thought that 2 wrongs don't make a right. I tried to really imagine how I would feel if somebody I loved was senselessly raped, Murdered etc and how I would feel then.

Some people do well in jail. Some people have been jail birds for thier entire lives and don't even care if they go or not. Sitting in jail for life would not be punishment enough for taking a loved one away from me in the ways that these people had thier lives taken from them.

Sometimes people make mistakes. And I understand that ANY loss of life is sad including the lives of the perpetrator but how is it fair that these murderers get to sit in jail and watch TV and eat and dream and talk to family. Some of them even having conjugal visits and getting married in prison. When they have taken the life of an innocent person and ruined the lives of the those who were left behind.

I don't agree with every single death penalty case - I think the evidence has to be airtight. But I know that if it happened to me I would want justice in the form of death. It is right it is right it is right it is right it is right it is right it is right it is right it is right it is right it is right it is right it is rightit is rightit is rightit is rightit is rightit is rightit is rightit is right.

My dad is the law. He puts people asleep in bed after rape. He likes kids and their parents. He is awesome. His is on a death penalty for sticking it in my but and peeing. It felt good, I love my dad.By punishing murderers with the death penalty, society is also guilty of committing murder.

Therefore, life in prison is a better punishment for murderers. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? There is currently a contentious argument over whether criminals should be imprisoned for committing murders instead of having a capital punishment. I totally agree that offenders ought to spend their lifetime in jails because the punishment of death for a crime does not deter crimes and people have no right to take another human life.

Window open postmessage

The main reason why I believe that incarceration should be implemented for all sorts of crimes is because the death penalty does not stop humans from committing offences. This is due to the fact that many criminals do not think they will be caught and sure that they are able to get away with it. As well as this, executing prisoners often creates a savage culture, and so it may even boost crime rate.

Another reason why I support the notion that killers have to be put behind bars is due to the fact that our society has no prerogative of committing homicide. In conclusion, I absolutely agree that even severe law violators are to be jailed. This is because death sentence is not likely to reduce crime rate, and any person has and inalienable right to life. Given this situation, it seems that the authorities should provide highly qualified rehabilitation for the accused giving them a chance to make a difference in their consecutive social life in the future and for the public to be certain that risks of repetitive offences are significantly decreased or even totally eliminated.

Click here to add your own comments. Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. Without capital punishment the death penalty our lives are less secure and crimes of violence increase. Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree? I thoroughly agree with the proposition, capital punishment should be made mandatory in our society, where crime ratio is being increased day by day because we live in a world where people are not even certain about how they are going to return, either on legs or on shoulders.

There is a law of physics, which is known as "Murphy's Law", which states that "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong". So whose duty is it to make it right again? To start with, the ratio of crime and terrorism is being so increased exponentially. People feel unsafe, even being at their own homes. Criminals show no compassion or mercy to those who are being held by them as captives.British Broadcasting Corporation Home. A breakdown of the arguments given in favour of abolishing or against reintroducing the death penalty.

Everyone thinks human life is valuable. Some of those against capital punishment believe that human life is so valuable that even the worst murderers should not be deprived of the value of their lives.

They believe that the value of the offender's life cannot be destroyed by the offender's bad conduct - even if they have killed someone. Some abolitionists don't go that far. They say that life should be preserved unless there is a very good reason not to, and that the those who are in favour of capital punishment are the ones who have to justify their position.

Everyone has an inalienable human right to life, even those who commit murder; sentencing a person to death and executing them violates that right. This is very similar to the 'value of life' argument, but approached from the perspective of human rights. The counter-argument is that a person can, by their actions, forfeit human rights, and that murderers forfeit their right to life. Another example will make this clear - a person forfeits their right to life if they start a murderous attack and the only way the victim can save their own life is by killing the attacker.

capital punishment agree or disagree

Therefore if any man is dangerous to the community and is subverting it by some sin, the treatment to be commended is his execution in order to preserve the common good Therefore to kill a man who retains his natural worthiness is intrinsically evil, although it may be justifiable to kill a sinner just as it is to kill a beast, for, as Aristotle points out, an evil man is worse than a beast and more harmful.

Aquinas is saying that certain contexts change a bad act killing into a good act killing to repair the violation of justice done by the person killed, and killing a person who has forfeited their natural worthiness by killing. The most common and most cogent argument against capital punishment is that sooner or later, innocent people will get killed, because of mistakes or flaws in the justice system.

capital punishment agree or disagree

Witnesses, where they are part of the processprosecutors and jurors can all make mistakes. When this is coupled with flaws in the system it is inevitable that innocent people will be convicted of crimes. Where capital punishment is used such mistakes cannot be put right. The death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state and will inevitably claim innocent victims. As long as human justice remains fallible, the risk of executing the innocent can never be eliminated.

There is ample evidence that such mistakes are possible: in the USA, people sentenced to death have been found innocent since and released from death row.

Source: Amnesty. The average time on death row before these exonerations was 11 years. Source: Death Penalty Information Center. Things were made worse in the USA when the Supreme Court refused to hold explicitly that the execution of a defendant in the face of significant evidence of innocence would be unconstitutional [Herrera v.

Collins, U. However many US lawyers believe that in practice the court would not permit an execution in a case demonstrating persuasive evidence of "actual innocence". The continuous threat of execution makes the ordeal of those wrongly convicted particularly horrible.

Many people believe that retribution is morally flawed and problematic in concept and practice. The main argument that retribution is immoral is that it is just a sanitised form of vengeance. Scenes of howling mobs attacking prison vans containing those accused of murder on their way to and from court, or chanting aggressively outside prisons when an offender is being executed, suggest that vengeance remains a major ingredient in the public popularity of capital punishment.

But just retribution, designed to re-establish justice, can easily be distinguished from vengeance and vindictiveness. The Victorian legal philosopher James Fitzjames Stephens thought vengeance was an acceptable justification for punishment.

Punishment, he thought, should be inflicted:.I supported capital punishment for a long time, but the more I learned about it, the more I came to oppose it. In the end, several factors changed my mind:. By far the most compelling is this: Sometimes the legal system gets it wrong.

In the last 30 years in the U. No matter how rare it is, the government should not risk executing one single innocent person. Because of higher pre-trial expenses, longer trials, jury sequestration, extra expenses associated with prosecuting a DP case, and the appeals process which is necessary - see reason 1it costs taxpayers MUCH more to execute prisoners than to imprison them for life. The deterrent effect is questionable at best. Violent crime rates are actually higher in death penalty jurisdictions.

This may seem counterintuitive, and there are many theories about why this is Ted Bundy saw it as a challenge, so he chose Florida — the most active execution state at the time — to carry out his final murder spree.

Personally, I think it has to do with the hypocrisy of taking a stand against murder…by killing people. In his words, "I have been looking to be a martyr [for a] long time.

Most governments are supposed to be secular, but for those who invoke Christian law in this debate, you can find arguments both for AND against the death penalty in the Bible. James says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus warns against vengeance which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to. In JohnJesus himself says, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone. I highly doubt, that capital punishment works.

I don't think that the scaring off tactic works.

Volt ammeter shunt wiring diagram

In Iran they cut off the hands of thieves. So the benefit ratio to steal is way low. Yet they still have thieves in Iran. Crime is to a very big part a social problem.

The other problem with the scaring off tactic is that the execution itself has to remain humaine. The only way I could support capital punishment would be, if the relatives of the victim were allowed to torture the murderer to death. That way the victims family would get a just revenge.

capital punishment agree or disagree

I think you're quite unlucky to have to support the death penalty in a debate, because I don't think there are any rational arguments, that support it. So you will probably have to take an emotional approach, contrasting the poor victim and the gruesome murderer.

I wish you the best of luck.


thoughts on “Capital punishment agree or disagree

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *