You are on page 1of 2



<<Capital punishment is as fundamentally wrong as a cure for crime as charity is wrong as a cure for poverty. >> Henry Ford

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IS THE ONLY WAY TO STOP CRIMINALS The capital punishment consist in provoke the death to the condemned by the state, like a penalty for a crime established in the legislation of a country. The capital punishment is the most serious and old sanction that had been exist. This sanction implies a way to see the society and the individual that commits the crime or the convicted. The capital punishment has evolved through the years, in the XI century, the catholic church rejected this penalty because it went against the ethic of the beliefs that had been given by God. Seven centuries later, in the XVIII century, the capital punishment is imposed more strongly. This penalty was used with more frequency and greater cruelty, an example of this was Germany. One of the few philosophers that defended the capital punishment was Rousseau. He said that all malefactor that by attacking the social law, become in a rebel and traitors of his homeland and then the state conservation is incompatible with the conservation of the traitors, in this moment is necessary that one of the two have to perish. We have talked about the application of the capital punishment in Europe but is necessary take into account that this sanction was applied in others continents like Asia and America. In the eastern world, in Greece, in Rome, etc. The penal law in the first half of the XVIII century was characterized for the follow guidelines: a) the first guideline consists in hardening of the law, it means that the capital punishment could be imposed to an individual from age 17 (that is the young had stolen in the court or close of it). b) This guideline exposes that the family of the convicted must be expelled of the country and for it loses their property. Existed more guidelines about the capital punishment but the above are the most important (that is what I think). Is important mention the Catholic Church paper in this topic. After the XVIII century the church accepted the application of the capital punishment just if it was based on the next: 1. The sanction had to be useful for the society 2. The sanction was not to be cruel.

The church time after was involved in the capital punishment, an example of it is the inquisition. In the actually are very few countries that accept the capital punishment and defend it. Based in the above information, I think that capital punishment is not an able way to stop criminals and is no necessary because, of this way, the government would not be giving a good example to his society members because, and that is what I think, the violence produce more violence. So I think that the best solution or the best way to stop criminals is that the state whatever it is must assure a good formation for his citizenship and with this I refer to a good education and a good quality of life. If these needs are supplied, the criminals (that are conscious of their crimes) would not be criminals. Other solution that we could apply first, could be to make that the actual criminals be useful to the community making social work or something. Finally I have to say that the capital punishment dont produce a true change, the criminals exist yet and the economic costs that are given by the state along the trial and it would be detrimental for the society. Bibliography: