Running head: DEATH PENALTY 1

Death Penalty

Student´s Name

Institutional Affiliation
DEATH PENALTY 2

Should the death penalty be allowed?

In recent years, most states in the U.S. impose the death penalty as a major form of

punishment, depending on crimes' nature. Capital punishment involves a situation whereby a

court of law convicts an offender to execution using different methods. Notably, the legal penalty

is imposed for homicide, treason, drug trafficking, and attempted murder. In most regions,

capital punishment is allowed for such offenders for various reasons. The most common method

used in the death penalty is lethal injection, where one is injected multiple drugs into the body

system to cause a quick death. However, other means such as hanging, gas chamber, electric

chair, and firing teams are still used in some states. Execution is an effective form of punishment

for offenders who commit heinous deeds as it prevents more criminal acts in the future.

Therefore, I support the concept of death penalties imposed on convicted individuals.

Death penalty is considered to be a brutal move that portrays the uncivilization of a

society. People argue that it is an immoral, discriminatory, and unfair act; thus, it shouldn’t be

considered a fair means of punishment. Discrimination of individuals in court is quite common

in the judicial system. According to research, people of color and Latinos are often sentenced to

capital execution compared to white people (Garrett, 2016). Besides, some offenders are

discriminated against because of their financial capabilities. Poor defendants who lack strong

representation are more likely to be sentenced to capital punishment than those with money or a

good reputation in society. Therefore, the death penalty is regarded as ineffective and

discriminatory since privileged people are favored, thus escaping death row. Additionally, capital

punishment is morally wrong according to religious doctrines as it violates human life. Religion

believes in the power of a Supreme Being who gives and takes life. Therefore, no human being
DEATH PENALTY 3

has the authority to harm or take another person´s life. Pope Francis clearly states that death

penalties are not a viable means of promoting justice in society but encourage individuals'

vengeance.

Capital punishment goes against international human rights laws that prohibit the

intentional torture of an individual. Some states in the U.S. use different methods of execution,

which cause suffering, torment, and pain to the offender. Studies show that an offender faces

physical as well as mental and emotional struggles once they are sentenced to death penalty

(Ryan & III, 2020). Isolation and separation of the offender as they await execution goes against

the constitutional human rights. Permanent anticipation of death rows results to negative mental

health not only to the convicted person but also to their family members. Therefore, according to

the constitution acts on human rights, death penalty should not be embraced as a justifiable

punishment for any individual no matter the nature of their crimes.

Peter Elbow highlights the importance of analyzing both sides of a situation before acting

on it. In his excerpt, he mentions about making conflicting ideas more fruitful hence avoiding

biasness in various situations. I believe that capital punishment should be embraced as it helps

deter crimes in society today. Besides, it saves on finances used to cater for offenders serving life

imprisonment. On the other hand, the cons stated above that opposes capital punishment are

helpful. Precisely, this is because they highlight people´s perspectives on abolishment of

execution which is contrary to my opinion. In today´s world, important decisions have to be

made every day. Therefore, Elbows insights helps an individual consider other perspectives

without biasness before making a decision. Additionally, the reasons stated above, helps in

realization of moral duties and ethical responsibility individuals have to each other. Judicial

systems should render verdicts that are morally acceptable and preserve human rights at all costs.
DEATH PENALTY 4

Heinous crimes such as homicide should have effective forms of punishment which should be

fair to all regardless of one´s finances, and color. Henceforth, death penalties can be abolished

when better and effective jurisdictions are put into place.

In conclusion, Elbows excerpt points out the idea of critically thinking and analyzing

both sides of a situation. Death penalties in most states are imposed on individuals based on their

crimes. Notably, I support this form of punishment for serious crimes such as murder since it acts

as a lesson to others. Besides, execution helps in reducing recidivism in society. On the other

hand, execution is viewed to be ethically wrong and against God´s plan for human beings (Ryan

& III, 2020). The long waiting period of execution results to mental stress to both the offender

and their families. Overall, evaluating both sides of any situation is essential before decision

making.
DEATH PENALTY 5

References

Garrett, B. (2016). The decline of the Virginia (and American) death penalty. Geo. LJ, 105, 661.

Ryan, M. J., & III, W. W. (2020). The Eighth Amendment and its future in a new age of
punishment. Cambridge University Press