Pro Death Penalty Classic Argument.

Subject: Politics & Government
Pages: 3
Words: 665
Reading time:
3 min
Study level: College

The law is a very specific type of classification. It is enacted in such a way that wrong and right, black and white, self-defense, and unjustifiable acts are clearly defined and acted upon. For example, The bouncing check law does not punish a person for the act of issuing a check. It punishes the act of issuing a check that you issued with the full intention of not honoring. The same goes for the death penalty. The punishment is meted out not for the act of killing , which can be done in an act of self-defense, but rather, for the act of murder. the act of murder is clearly defined by the law as ” The unlawful and malicious or premeditated killing of one human being of another. Some opponents of the law argue that the punishment defeats the purpose because the law, in effect, punishes you by committing the same crime for which the criminal was tried and found guilty for. In a way, these opponents are right. But, it is also true that the death penalty was meant primarily to be a deterrent for people killing one another. If you attack somebody with the full intent to kill, then the punishment should be no less.

There are also some anti-death penalty supporters who argue that the law is meant only to fulfill a vengeful act on the part of the family of the victim. Such a belief has its roots in the Law of Moses. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Let the punishment fit the crime. But that is not the case, the murderers are not executed in the same despicable way that they committed the crime. They are allowed countless avenues to try and over turn the verdict, even prove their innocence if that is at all possible. But in the end, the real reason the penalty has to be imposed in order to bring a criminal to justice in such a way that befits the crime committed. Once you take a life, you cannot give it back. It is only fitting that you lose your life as well.

The United State Supreme court has explained their support of the death penalty as a crime against human kind that must be punished. Their statement further indicates that:

Indeed, the decision that capital punishment may be the appropriate sanction in extreme cases is an expression of the community’s belief that certain crimes are themselves so grievous an affront to humanity that the only adequate response may be the penalty of death.

More importantly, the death penalty solves the problem of over crowding in prisons. Most of the crowded prisons we have today are the product of life sentences upon the inmates in states wher the death penalty does not exist, and as such they become a burden to the society and tax payers. It is my opinion that life sentences are unfair because it serves to give the criminal a “live rent free for the rest of your life” card. Whoever came up with the idea of putting criminals away for life and having society shoulder their living expenses for each day they breath? Since when did murder become a life long holiday? The idea of punishing a criminal is to make them repent and never repeat the crime again. The death penalty is in place not for the people who kill in self defense, but rather, it is there to protect society as a whole from repeat offenders, psychotic murderers, stalkers, and anyone else who proves to be a threat to the life and well being of society at large.

Keep in mind that the death penalty punishes the act of violating the basic human right to life. It is not a violation of human rights to take away the rights of a person proven to have violated a human right and the laws of the land in the way most fitting of the crime committed.

Work Cited

“10 Reasons To Abolish The Death Penalty”. Amnesty International. 2004. Web.

“Pro Death Penalty Web Page”. Pro Capital Punishment Page . 2008. Web.

“Why I Support The Death Penalty”. The 2005. Web.

“In Support Of The Death Penalty”. Deterrence ( In Support Of The Death Penalty). 2008. Web.