# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Capital punishment is still enforced in many countries, such as the USA and China. We discuss the pros and cons of death penalty and whether it should be abolished. If you care about this issue, leave your comments and share the debate.
Harsh punishments

Capital punishment is at the centre of one of the most significant moral debates in modern societies. Theorists and proponents of, both, utilitarian and retributive justice have historically discussed whether it is morally acceptable for the state to execute people, and if so under what circumstances. Although the death penalty has been abolished, either by law or practice, by more than 140 countries, it is still used in a big part of the world. According to Amnesty international, the number of countries implementing executions each year over the last couple of years is 22.

China has been consistently the country with the most executions and the USA is among the five top executioners. Murder and drug-trafficking are the most common crimes punishable by death, although in some countries adultery, witchcraft, or political activism can also incur capital punishment. Lethal injections, hanging, shooting, and electrocutions are some of the most common methods used for the death penalty.

Death penalty pros and cons

One of the most common justifications for the death penalty in the Western world is that it acts as a deterrent of capital crimes, as the fear of death and the horror of the execution might prevent people from committing serious crimes.

It is also considered to be the appropriate retribution and deserved punishment for really horrific crimes. Criminals who commit capital crimes have reached a point where rehabilitation is impossible and for some life in prison might increase criminal behaviour. The death penalty, therefore, prevents crimes for recurring and protects society.

Further moral arguments suggest that capital punishment provides closure for the families of the victims and that punishment should fit the crime in order for justice to be served.

Finally, there are practical arguments put forward. The death penalty helps ease overpopulation in prisons and it ensures that less tax payers' money is spent for the maintenance of individuals that have acted against society in the most violent way.

It can also be used as an important negotiating tool for the police and the justice system, as where the possible sentence is death, the prisoner has the strongest possible incentive to try to get their sentence reduced, and therefore are likely to help with investigations.

These arguments are rebuked by opponents of capital punishment.

Executions, they argue, are cruel and immoral. Human life is valuable and everybody has a right to live. No one has the right to take away a human life, not even organised states.

Human rights activists argue that death penalty is a form of revenge against offenders and revenge is not necessarily about social justice.

Another important argument supported by abolitionists is that the death penalty discriminates against minorities and the poor, as it is people from these groups that are more likely to be sentenced to death. For example, although African Americans make up only about 13% of the US population, almost 50% of convicts on the death row are African American.

There is also always the possibility of a wrongful verdict that might irrevocably sent innocent people to the death row.

Finally, opponents of capital punishment argue that empirical reality disproves some of the arguments of defenders of the death penalty. There is no proof that the death penalty or long prison sentences have a strong deterrent effect. Crime rates are no lower in countries with death penalty.

Furthermore, the costs of carrying out a death sentence can be much more expensive than keeping a criminal in jail, due to legal costs, number of appeals but also security and incarceration costs.

It is for these reasons that opponents of the sentence ask for the death penalty to be abolished.

Where do you stand in this debate? After looking at death penalty's pros and cons, do you consider that capital punishment is a fair and appropriate measure for atrocious crimes or is it inhumane and should be banned?
Watch these videos on the death penalty pros and cons debate
Is capital punishment a fair and appropriate measure for atrocious crimes or should it be banned? Vote and tell us why. If you care about this issue explain your angle in the forum and bring other people to discuss and vote

If you change your mind, you can change your vote simply by clicking on another option.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Death penalty pros and cons: should it be abolished?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Capital punishment is still enforced in many countries, such as the USA and China. We discuss the pros and cons of death penalty and whether it should be abolished. If you care about this issue, leave your comments and share the debate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate (Published 2007)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Studies indicating that executions are a deterrent against future murders have been the subject of sharp criticism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Since 1977, one year after the US Supreme Court reaffirmed the constitutionality of the death penalty, more than 1,480 people have been executed, primarily by means of lethal injection. Most death penalty cases involve the execution of murderers although capital punishment can also be applied for treason, espionage, and other crimes.

Proponents of the death penalty say it is an important tool for preserving law and order, deters crime, and costs less than life imprisonment. They argue that retribution or "an eye for an eye" honors the victim, helps console grieving families, and ensures that the perpetrators of heinous crimes never have an opportunity to cause future tragedy.

Opponents of capital punishment say it has no deterrent effect on crime, wrongly gives governments the power to take human life, and perpetuates social injustices by disproportionately targeting people of color (racist) and people who cannot afford good attorneys (classist). They say lifetime jail sentences are a more severe and less expensive punishment than death.

PROS & CONS BY CATEGORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Death Penalty - Pros & Cons - ProCon.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The pros and cons of the death penalty debate include aguments for and against life imprisonment, crime deterrence, and methods like hanging.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
FOR the death penalty

AGAINST the death penalty

1. JUSTICE...

An eye for an eye. The death penalty is reserved for the most heinous of crimes, such as murder. Why should a murderer be allowed to live out the rest of their lives in relative comfort, paid for by the public? To continue to house, clothe and feed them for the remainder of their natural life at taxpayer expense makes a mockery of justice. They gave up their right to life when they took the life of another person, and justice can only be served by their lawful execution.

1. MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE...

You cannot un-execute someone. Miscarriages of justice are bad enough, but the wrongful execution of an innocent person takes it to the extremes. If someone is wrongfully imprisoned they can at least be released and compensated by the state. If they are executed, however, then a posthumous pardon won't be much comfort.

2. DETERRENCE

The death penalty saves lives. Would-be murderers have a better reason to think twice if they know their life is on the line. Ultimately, only the most severe punishment possible will dissuade the most violent crimes. Only then will it be clear that the good guys aren't messing around, because taking an innocent life would mean forfeiting your own.

2. TOO MUCH POWER TO THE STATE

The three countries that executed the most people in 2016 were China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. There's a reason why the death penalty is favoured in authoritarian regimes: it is the ultimate form of state control. Troublesome political dissidents can be mixed in with criminals and drug dealers on death row, and any criticism can be deflected as being "soft on crime".

3. CLOSURE

The execution of a criminal is the best way to provide closure to the family of their victim. They can finally put the crime behind them and move on, knowing that there is no possibility of the person who took away their loved one ever leaving prison and walking free.

3. KILLING IS WRONG

Two wrongs do not make a right. Taking a human life is unethical, whether it is a crime or whether it is done in the name of 'justice'. Everyone's right to life should be protected by law, including criminals. We should aim to set the example that killing is always wrong and that there are always alternatives. Life in prison is not a 'soft' option.

IMAGE CREDITS: cc / Flickr - AlexLMX

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arguments for and against the death penalty - Debating Europe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
FOR the death penalty AGAINST the death penalty An eye for an eye. The death penalty is reserved for the most heinous of crimes, such as murder. Why should a murderer be allowed to live out the rest of their lives in relative comfort, paid for by the public?