Every criminal deserves to be punished in one way or another and there are many ways of

doing so. Some people believe that those who commit grievous crimes such as murder should
be put to death, this is referred to as capital punishment. This essay is aimed at showing why
capital punishment should be put to an end.

Capital punishment is punishment by death for committing a crime. Capital punishment is

often called the death penalty. It is mostly used in convictions for murder. It has also been
used for such crimes as armed robbery, kidnapping, rape and treason. The following are some
of the reasons as to why capital punishment should be abolished.

According to Adams and Brown (2001), the death penalty is a violation of the right to life.
The right to life is the fundamental human right. It is law that no man is supposed to take
away the life of another because it is only through enjoying the right to life that a person may
be able to enjoy all other rights. The right to life is the most important human right and so to
punish someone with the death penalty means violating this right and so is not acceptable.
Capital punishment therefore just has to be abolished.

Bird (1968:40) asserts that enforcement of the death penalty denies the opportunity for
rehabilitation. Many individuals who are charged with crimes that can entail capital
punishment are mentally and/or emotionally unstable. Murders occur often in a moment of
passion, in conjunction with a psychological disability, or due to substance abuse. These
characteristics call for a movement toward rehabilitation rather than execution. Rehabilitation
efforts not only help convicted criminals, they help society in understanding the motivations
behind criminal actions and can prevent similar crimes from occurring in the future.
Conversely, enforcement of the death penalty will not encourage criminals to become
rehabilitated. If an individual knows that their life has a set expiration date, what is the use in
seeking rehabilitation? Moreover, there are no facets within the death penalty that aid in
reform. Rather, capital punishment perpetuates a cycle of violence and death.

Taking the life of another human being through capital punishment only perpetuates a cycle
of violence. Moore (1989) supports that capital punishment promotes the acceptance of
violence by society because the government, which is supposed to promote the dignity and
sanctity of life also commits a violent act against the people they execute.

Death penalty is shown to be inflicted more often on those that are underprivileged and
innocent as opposed to those that are rich and guilty, we cannot choose to support the death
penalty in good conscience. Death penalty should be abolished. Bird (1968) affirms that

1|Page
every year, thousands of people are put on death row for a crime they didn't even commit.
There's no way of knowing if they actually did or not. Crime will always be a part of the
world and there will be better ways to handle it. The wrongful execution of an innocent
person is an injustice that can never be rectified.

Benson (2003) states, “the death penalty is degrading.  It turns states into prescription drug
abusers, killing prisoners with drugs like sodium thiopental”.

Many family members who have lost loved ones to murder feel that the death penalty will not
heal their wounds nor will it end their pain; the extended process prior to executions can
prolong the agony experienced by the family. Funds now being used for the costly process of
executions could be used to help families put their lives back together through counselling,
restitution, crime victim hotlines, and other services addressing their needs. (Benson, 2003)

The Death Penalty Causes Socio-Economic Discrimination. Brown (1983) entails that people
with substantial income can afford the best criminal defence team when going to trial,
whereas those of low socio-economic status cannot. Verdicts are largely dependent on the
quality of one’s defence team, and the price of a good lawyer can equate to that of an entire
mortgage. Almost all defendants in capital cases cannot afford their own attorneys. In many
cases, the appointed attorneys are overworked, underpaid, or lacking the trial experience
required for death penalty cases. There have even been instances in which lawyers appointed
to a death case were so inexperienced that they were completely unprepared for the
sentencing phase of the trial.

We can't justify killing someone if we are punctuating it by saying killing is wrong. Benson
(2003) affirms that from a young age we teach our children that two wrongs don't make a
right, yet the death penalty is trying to do exactly that. Costs are also prohibitive. It costs
more to have someone go through the death penalty process than to keep him in jail for the
rest of his life.

It is a barbaric way to deal with murder. Morally what makes us better if we kill those who
kill? It hypocritical. It would rather have then suffer in jail for the rest of their life without
parole. The death penalty is rather too barbaric and not a solution to the civilised society’s
task of maintaining a system of justice based purely on law. (Moore, 1989).

It is too easy for criminals. In line with Adams and Brown (2001), criminals should be made
to suffer just as much if not more than the person they attacked or attempted to attack. Then

2|Page
let them rot in jail. No second chances, no do-overs. The criminals just have to suffer for their
crimes in jail and not being given an easy way out through death.

Bird (1968) postulates that scientific studies have consistently failed to demonstrate that
executions deter people from committing crime. Moreover, states without the death penalty
have much lower murder rates. It therefore does not make any sense to continue killing when
it does not yield any good fruits.

According to Benson (2003), no civilian’s job should include killing another person.
Corrections personnel involved in executions, like our military, frequently suffer PTSD from
having to kill. Perhaps there is a reason to have a defensive military, but prisoners pose no
threat to the well-being of our citizens. There is no reason to place the mental health of our
corrections workers at risk simply to pursue vengeance

The Death Penalty is Immoral and Hypocritical. Adams and Brown (2001) states that the late
and great Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi, once said, “An eye for an eye will make the whole
world blind.” There is no arguing that crimes associated with the death penalty–such as
premeditated murder–are reprehensible. However, if we are to agree that taking the life of
another human being can be categorized as the upmost heinous of acts, how can we justify
treating such a crime with a punishment that mirrors the very thing we so adamantly
condemn? It is because of this that support of the death penalty can be deemed as moral
hypocrisy.

In line with Moore (1989), the current criminal justice system operates in a way that is kinder
to people who are wealthy and guilty than those who are poor and innocent. Current prison
conditions have continually reflected racial and socioeconomic biases which make prisoners
of lesser privilege more likely to be sentenced with the death penalty than those of wealthy
upbringings and substantial careers. For this reason, it is especially crucial that the death
penalty be outlawed in order to acquire true justice. In a country where the death penalty is
shown to be inflicted more often on those that are underprivileged and innocent as opposed to
those that are rich and guilty, we cannot choose to support the death penalty in good
conscience.

The Death Penalty Prevents Exoneration. What if an inmate sentenced to death is later found
to be innocent of their convictions? What if the uncovering of this innocence comes after a
lethal injection has already been administered? If a conviction is ever overturned, it can take
decades at the very least. However, there are several documented cases of prisoners being

3|Page
released years after imprisonment. Bird (1968) asserts that life sentences serve as a better
alternative to the death penalty in order to protect the potentially innocent.

Death Penalty is a waste of money. Brown (1983) states that the cost of the death penalty as
opposed to a life sentence without parole is exponential. Due to the extra measures taken in
judicial proceedings, lawyer fees, extended trials, and expert witnesses, costs end up being
higher. Plus the injection chemicals are becoming more and rarer, thus making it more
expensive with each injection. In fact it is cheaper to keep an inmate in prison for life without
parole than it is to kill them. It doesn't make sense to spend more money on a morally
questionable act that has shown no signs of determent.

According to Moore (1989), death penalty encourages racial discrimination. The Death
Penalty has a disparate impact on minorities Capital punishment cases are rife with racial
disparities and injustice. A staggering proportion of guilty verdicts leading to the death
penalty have been influenced by the race of the offender. .

Bird (1968) supports that the Death Penalty is State Sanctioned Revenge, The desire for
revenge is understandable, but it is also based on emotions–particularly those which are
heated and are catalysed not long after a severe incident has occurred. The criminal justice
system is not a place where decisions are meant to be based on passion. The decisions made
in trials are meant to be based on factual evidence and justice. The death of a convicted
criminal will not negate the loss of a loved one. Forgiveness has been shown to be
instrumental in healing and health, as well as in moving forward.

The Death Penalty Violates Medical Ethics and the Hippocratic Oath. In line with Brown
(1983), physicians are required at the site of an execution in order for a lethal injection to be
administered. Based on a physician’s lawful and ethical responsibility to work toward the
preservation of human life, executions’ requirement of medical personnel to be present at the
site of an execution and also to administer lethal injections is at odds with the beliefs.
Medical ethics suffers a gross infraction when a licensed physician chooses to forego oaths
taken as a medical professional in order to participate in the execution of another human
being.

In conclusion, capital punishment is not the best solution for dealing with crime. This is
because it encourages a lot of negativities such as violence, violation of human rights,
revenge, and social economic and racial discrimination. Therefore, capital punishment must
be abolished.

4|Page
 REFFERENCE

Adams .J.N. and Brown, S.R. (2001). Understanding Law.

London: Sweet and Maxwell ltd.

Benson, B. (2003). The Enterprise Of Law; Justice Without State.

Brooklyn: Brooklyn Foundation.

Bird. A. O. (1968). The Idea Of Justice. New York: Fredrick. A. Publishers.

Brown .J. (1983), Issues In Social Policies. London: Routledge and Keagan Paul.

Moore. D. k. (1989), Pardons; Justice, Mercy and the Public Interest.

New York: Oxford University press

5|Page