Pena De Muerte

Should there be a Death Penalty?
Everybody has an opinion on should there be a death penalty or not, with more people being in favor of the same. In a bid to join the raging debate, we decided to evaluate some points put forth by those in support of this practice and those who oppose the same.

Capital punishment aka death penalty is undoubtedly one of the most controversial topics in theworld today; no wonder it has left the entire world divided into two groups. The first group - which happens to be the majority, comprises all those people who believe that sentencing a person to death for murder or any other brutal crime is a basic necessity of a crime free society. Contrary to this, the second group of people - which also includes human rights groups and organizations like AmnestyInternational, believe that there is no place for such inhumane practice in the civilized society that we live in.

The Death Penalty Debate

When asked for their opinion on should there be a death penalty, thousands of people will vote in favor of this practice. But if you ask the same people why do they think so, not many people will be able to stand by their opinion with logic. As always,the tragedy is that people take a stand without taking into consideration both sides of the matter. That being totally immature, one has to evaluate death penalty pros and cons - and only then come up with a rational opinion about the issue. Those who are of the opinion that death penalty is necessary have a long list of arguments in favor of this practice at their disposal. On the other hand, thosewho are lobbying for a death penalty free judicial system are armed with numerous reasons against capital punishment.

Those in support of death penalty argue that:
* Our judicial system is more sympathetic towards convicts than it is towards the victims of their heinous crime.
* The practice of sentencing a person convicted for murder to death is necessary as it makes sure thatjustice prevails.
* When a person convicted for crimes like murder, rape or genocide is sentenced to death, it deters other people from resorting to such criminal acts.
* A person convicted for murder roaming around freely (even after he has served his sentence in prison) is no short of a threat for the society.
* The champions of human rights need not pay so much attention to these criminalwho themselves don't respect other people's right of life.
Other than these pro death penalty arguments, the proponents of this practice also have a few questions which need to be given a serious thought before taking stand on this issue:
* Is it justified that we use taxpayer's hard-earned money to make sure that a criminal leads a decent life in prison?
* What's the guarantee that thecriminal won't resort to some heinous crime after completing his term in prison?
* Do we really need to care for the right of a person who himself doesn't respect the rights of fellow humans?
* Do those people who speak about the consequences of death penalty on criminal's family ever think about victim's family members? Don't they deserve justice?
* Are our family members safe withsuch anti-social elements roaming around freely in the society?
Those who oppose death penalty argue that:
* The eye for an eye principle, that the capital punishment is based on, doesn't have a place in civilized society.
* If an innocent man is executed as a part of this form of punishment, he can't be brought back even if he is proved innocent at a later stage.
* Even if thecriminal is sentenced to death, the victim will not come back to life. On the contrary, the criminal's innocent family members will have to bear the brunt of this sentence.
* There is no concrete evidence to suggest that death penalty acts as a deterrent. If it was, it would have brought down crime rate in several countries of Middle East by now.
* The chances of a poor innocent person being...