DEATH PENALTY “Let it be resolved that (LIBRT) death penalty can deter or prevent the criminalities in the

Philippines”
In some countries like India, Nigeria, Iran, Iraq, and UAE, it is legal to kill someone if they have committed a
terrible crime. This is called a death sentence, or the death penalty. The death penalty started way back
Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon. Death sentences were carried out by such
means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement.
In this time, only few countries still uses death penalty as a punishment to those heinous crimes, this is because
we believe that a violence doesn’t need to be repay by another violence. There are numerous of reason why
death penalty is not actually the solution for the terrible increasing crimes in our humankind.
The first one I think about is, death penalty goes against our most basic human right - the right to life. The
death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment that a country can impose to the
culprit. The right to live is not given by people or given by law, we are free to live our life and nobody can
take it away. It is not dependent on any particular culture or government, so it is universal and inalienable.
Death penalty impinges on fundamental human rights. Also this capital punishment, has never proven that
killing murderers stops other people committing similar crimes, The pro argument is that killing people is
wrong, therefore you should kill people for doing it, which just doesn’t make any sense. It just continue the
cycle of violence and what if there are innocent people among condemned criminals and we execute them?
There’s a high probability of innocent people being hanged due to human judgment error and this is already
proven by many cases for example in the USA, since 1973, more than 160 prisoners sent to death row, have
later been exonerated or released from death row on grounds of innocence. Others have been executed
despite serious doubts about their guilt and some are already dead when proven guilty, according to some
accounts, the number might be as high as 4.1%. According to a study cited in Newsweek magazine, one in 25
sentenced to death is innocent. Therefore, death penalty takes a big risk in humanity. The death penalty is an
expression of the absolute power of the state; This is also expensive where only those loaded can afford – this
means poor people can’t get justice? There is also a big argument that this punishment is way beyond in
man’s hand. This will fall to the religious reasons to oppose death penalty, that Christ would oppose the killing
of a human being as punishment for a crime. "This view is supported by the New Testament story about the
woman who faced execution by stoning (John 8:7, "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first
stone"). We don’t have the right to kill someone just because he killed, a crime can’t be a solution to a crime.
This penalty can also be because of personal reasons, this can be use for revenge. The life imprisonment can
be enough to make the offender realize his wrongdoings and make him pay for it. A life spent in prison is a
worse punishment than an execution. I believe during their time in prison criminals may have a change their
perspective and world view. I feel that reformed criminals who spend life in prison could potentially impact
prisoners around them. There are effective rehabilitation programs in prison that can reform prisoners and
help them do good. I conclude that, executing death penalty can’t deter the criminalities in our country or in
any other states. Let me conclude by saying, 'the objective of any society is to live peacefully, let live and help
to live.' If we are meting out death penalties which are, of course violent and take away life, then we are
violating the fundamental principle of society.
draft

- Being killed by lethal injection or being electrocuted is not always smooth and painless, sometimes it causes
a painful death

- No-one has ever proven with numbers that killing murderers stops other people committing similar crimes

-Mistakes are sometimes made in the law - what if someone is killed who is actually innocent?

There is no credible proof that the death penalty works as a deterrent. In the US, in states where the death
penalty has been abolished, there has been no significant change in the rates for serious criminal offenses,
such as murder.

It is is a cruel and unusual punishment, where basic standards of human dignity are compromised or
undermined.

It continues the cycle of violence. Retribution is just another word for revenge— it is essentially just a form of
the flawed thinking that two wrongs can make a right. The pro argument is that killing people is wrong,
therefore you should kill people for doing it, which just doesn’t make sense.

It affects the poorer segments of society and racial minorities disproportionately, in part because they are
unable to afford the costs of good legal support. In the USA, although only 13% of the population is African-
American, 50% of death row prisoners are African-American.

It is an old-fashioned and ignorant solution. America’s image would be improved in places like Europe if the
death penalty were abolished. The places where executions happen regularly include repressive regimes like
Iran, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia.

The justice system is bound to make mistakes. In the case of people who are wrongly imprisoned, they can be
released from prison and given compensation, but a wrongful execution can never righted.

The death penalty is not cost-effective. When all the practical and legal costs are taken into account, it is clear
that the execution is more expensive than imprisoning for life.

A life spent in prison is a worse punishment than an execution. laws can be changed based on many factors:
culture, people, country, and time.

It is the case that people who committed the same crime in different times are sentenced to different
punishments, that means someone who is sentenced to death penalty now might be not sentenced to the
same punishment years from now. What if a condemned criminal in the Philippines were born in Korea, do
you think he is still