# data[].attributes.body
Overall, I think that the debate went pretty well. I argued for the death penalty but I don't think that it should continue on. America's justice system is too flawed and there is too much bias within courts. The death penalty could possibly work if the justice system worked as intended, but it does not. This reflects through the numbers of those wrongly convicted and put on death row. This debate really opened my mind into why the death penalty should be abolished.

# data[].attributes.body
This source mentions that a long term sentence is not enough for people committing serious crimes. Also, "Some countries and states that once abolished the death penalty were forced to revert to the punishment when they could not curb the rising rate of crime in their societies." Having this no nonsense approach is what forms a society, like China. The article also mentions other major crimes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Those who support the abolition of the death penalty should reconsider their stand. The government has a duty to curb crime, and the laws of the country should be allowed to do so.

Human rights advocates, in most cases, are only armchair critics. In this country, nobody has been handed the death penalty without first undergoing a lengthy trial in accordance with the law provided by the constitution. It's only after a fair trial, when evidence against offenders is beyond any reasonable doubt, that those found guilty of serious crimes are sentenced to death, and only when the law provides for such a punishment.

In the 2016 crime report by Numbeo, a crowd-sourced global database of reported perceived crime rates, Malaysia was ranked in the top 15 out of 118 countries in the world crime index. The general crime index in the country is relatively high - 64.15. The index for those involved or dealing in drugs was 54.20, while the index for violent crimes such as assault and armed robbery was 60.98. The index for bribery was 76.80.

Malaysia was at the top of the list alongside most third-world countries. What does this say about our nation? When narrowed down to the Southeast Asian region, Malaysia was still near the top of the list with a crime index of 65.56. Vietnam, Cambodia and Indonesia had significantly lower indices at 53.45, 52.72 and 52.16 respectively.

Unsurprisingly, given its stricter laws, our neighbour Singapore took the last spot with a skimpy index of only 16.49 in Southeast Asia. It was second last in the world rankings. Singapore has some of the lowest crime rates in the world. For certain offences in the city-state, the death penalty is mandatory. More than 400 people were executed in Singapore, mostly for drug trafficking, between 1991 and 2004. The state does not tolerate serious crimes and has prospered despite the criticism it receives from humanitarian groups.
Jail term not a deterrence
The 2016 Crime and Safety Report by the US Department of State Bureau of Diplomatic Security describes serious crimes such as assaults and robbery involving weapons as fairly common in Malaysia. With the escalating number of serious crimes in the country, it is worrying if no significant measures are taken.

A jail term will not be a deterrence to those contemplating committing a serious crime. Murderers, kidnappers, rapists and drug lords should know that if found guilty, they will be given the death penalty. This would make them think twice before indulging in brutal criminal activities.

Some countries and states that once abolished the death penalty were forced to revert to the punishment when they could not curb the rising rate of crime in their societies. Even the US has not abolished the death penalty for serious crimes. States like Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Arizona, California, Utah and Washington still send hardcore criminals to die, by gas inhalation, lethal injection or hanging.

Capital punishment is a legal penalty even in Japan. It is applied for murder, and executions are carried out by hanging. Capital offences in some countries include espionage, treason and death resulting from hijacking or kidnapping. However, they mostly consist of various forms of premeditated murder, committed during a kidnapping or armed robbery, or murder for hire.

China, with a population of over 1.4 billion, also has a no-nonsense approach to those who commit serious crimes. The serious crime rate for such a huge population is relatively low - it's not a good idea to go against the law in China. Crimes like robbery, corruption, murder and rape, among others, are punishable by death. These crimes are considered a "senseless social disease" that will pose a threat to public order. The death penalty is mandatory for murder, drug trafficking, firearm offences, kidnapping, hijacking and even corruption in China.

Capital punishment is also a legal penalty in India and Indonesia. Although the death penalty is enforced only sometimes in grave cases of premeditated murder, it is regularly meted out to drug traffickers, drug dealers, and people in possession of certain quantities of illegal drugs. The Philippine government meanwhile is continuing with its plan to make the death penalty part of its corrective remedy to the serious social ills plaguing the country.

Not that criminals are not cautioned that committing certain crimes can lead to the death penalty. If they still dare commit such crimes, then they should be held responsible and made to face the law. Hardcore criminals should not be allowed to rear their ugly heads. It is the rights of peace-loving people that should be the priority in any society, not the minority aberrant group. When the innocent become victims of horrendous crimes, it's only fair that the criminals are not let off the hook.
Drug traffickers
Drug abuse is a menace in many societies. Severe crimes like rape and murder are committed under the influence of drugs. Drug traffickers are the ones who become wealthy at the expense of the innocent. They are capable of paralysing a nation if they are not reined in. Incidentally, the majority of drug addicts in Malaysia are Malays, followed by Indians and Chinese. The Malay community comprised nearly 80% of drug addicts recorded between 2013 and 2015 by the National Anti-Drugs Agency with Penang topping the list. Some 127,606 drug addicts were recorded between 2013 and 2015 by the National Anti-Drugs Agency.

The United Nations estimated that for every case, there could be another four unrecorded. This number has not decreased, what more with drugs flowing into the country when no heavy penalties are imposed on drug traffickers. This menace is a slow death to our young population. It has cost the government a lot of money - RM7.9 million was allocated since 2013 for the rehabilitation and treatment of drug addicts. This amount is likely to have increased.

Those who want to get rich quickly by trafficking drugs and are caught overseas under foreign laws and sentenced to death should not be our concern. They should bear the consequences as they were forewarned of the laws of those countries. These traffickers have no basis to appeal to our government for help.

The opinion that even the death penalty has not deterred criminals from committing horrendous crimes cannot be an excuse to get rid of such a law. Does this mean that by abolishing the death penalty, the serious crime rate will decrease? This presumption does not carry water as crime statistics in all nations have not shown this to be the case.

It is true that even with the threat of the death penalty, violent crimes are committed with impunity - drug honchos, traffickers and pushers operate freely; and the threat of gang fights, rape, murder, armed robbery and kidnapping under the influence of drugs as well as drug-related disputes are ever present. But what more if the country abolishes the death penalty? Hell will break loose, and more criminals will dare to commit serious crimes. There will also be a free flow of drugs that will destroy social order.
Wrong signal
The proposal to abolish the death penalty has to be carefully studied. The death penalty is still needed when a country is afflicted with crimes that can create fear among citizens. Humanitarians and others, including practising lawyers, who advocate abolishing the death penalty should not be so concerned about the lives of murderers, brutal rapists, kidnappers and drug traffickers and ignore the countless number of violent and innocent deaths of victims caused by these criminals.

The retention of the death penalty is needed to curb serious crimes. In our local context, there are concerns that the abolition of the death penalty may send the wrong signal that such crimes are not taken seriously enough. Amnesty International, lawyers, politicians and humanitarian groups who are for the abolishment of the death penalty for serious offences should rethink their stand and consider the well-being and rights of those who have become victims, as well as the rights of others who wish to live in peace.

Abolishing the death penalty will only send the wrong signal to those who have the predisposition to commit horrible crimes. Sparing the lives of hardcore criminals for humanitarian reasons will only cause more misery for others. It will see an escalation of serious crimes in our society, further impairing the nation.
Moaz Nair is an FMT reader. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why the death penalty should not be abolished

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Those who support the abolition of the death penalty should reconsider their stand. The government has a duty to curb crime, and the laws of the country should be allowed to do so. Human rights advocates, in most cases, are only armchair critics.

# data[].attributes.body
Part of this article says that the death penalty should not be abolished because it is there to punish those who commit terrible crimes like murder. Similar to the other article, there are certain crimes that justify the death penalty. This article also mentions that the threat of the death penalty should keep justice and serve as a warning to make people not want to commit crimes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Capital punishment - Arguments, Pros/Cons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Capital punishment - Arguments, Pros/Cons: Capital punishment has long engendered considerable debate about both its morality and its effect on criminal behaviour. Contemporary arguments for and against capital punishment fall under three general headings: moral, utilitarian, and practical.

# data[].attributes.body
The source below argues that the death penalty is appropriate, but only in terms of a serious case. The article puts emphasis on a horrible case where two adults were given the death penalty for killing a child. In this case, the death penalty was deserved and there was enough evidence to prove their guilt. This means that the justice system did good and worked as it was intended. The only was that the death penalty can remain appropriate is if the criminal justice system works as intended.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Genny Rojas was four years old when her aunt and uncle, Veronica and Ivan Gonzales, tortured and murdered her. They suspended her alive by a hook on the closet wall in their apartment. They shook her violently, strangled her, beat her with a hairbrush, and handcuffed her for days. She died after she was forced into a scalding bath tub for three minutes. A California jury sentenced Veronica and Ivan to death, and the California Supreme Court upheld their convictions. If anyone deserved the ultimate punishment, they did.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the death penalty should not be abolished. If it is to remain constitutional and allowed within states, it's important that the justice system works correctly. Also, the death penalty should not always be used, only is EXTREME cases. Not just anyone is given the death penalty, only those who have committed the most heinous of crimes.