AFFIRMATIVE SIDE

Death Penalty is a capital punishment. It is used today and was used during ancient
times to punish people with a variety of offenses. The bible also advocate death for murder
and other crimes such as kidnapping and stealing. Here in the Philippines, we used to have
Death Penalty, but I believe this death penalty should be issued in all states for those people
who commit heinous crimes.
Death penalty proves to be the best method to eliminate negative elements from the
society forever thus, leading to a more humane society. A criminal is like a rotten apple
among the good ones, he is like a virus to the society, which can even infect others of the
same disease. Like a doctor excise any body parts to save life of a patient likewise, a criminal
is cut out permanently from the society for the wellbeing of the society. Human beings live
in civilized society and do not allow anyone to perform any inhumane act which causes harm
or any type of discomfort to any individual. Death penalty is the best way to remove such
diseased people from the society. Before they could spread their immoral beliefs to other
people in order to justify their act they should be removed from the society. Everybody likes
positive environment and people. And these criminals especially those who perform acts
which lead to hindrance of one’s freedom and pessimism in society can result to the
degradation of society’s peace and orderliness.
This theory of justice which demands for “tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye” is
the strongest argument of the death penalty. When a criminal does an act to fulfill his selfish
motives resulting into personal gains then the equilibrium of justice in society is disturbed.
To maintain this equilibrium the criminal should be punished with the same intensity of
punishment no matter, even if it is death penalty. If the criminal can dare to snatch away
liberty, peace, lives from any individual then the justice says that he should also be deprived
of all these facilities leading to a comfortable life in the society. Death penalty helps curtail
future murderers and because of this we can save more lives. If death penalty exists, repeat
murderers are eliminated and future murders are deterred. Just imagine this, we will live in
a just society. If death penalty wouldn't be issued now, then when? When there are more
criminals lurking? It is said that every minute, there is a chance that an innocent man could
get murdered. We must put a stop to it.
The best method to prevent a person from doing crime is to show him the fear of
consequences of his actions. Like the fear of going to hell after death stops one from doing
any immoral act, same way, fear of death penalty that is, fear of losing life is the greatest fear
for any human. It also acts like a moral to the rest of the mankind. It is just like a stick into
the hands of law to make justice prevail in the society of civilized people. Even life
imprisonment is less feared because in that case, at least the life is saved. But in the case of
death penalty snatching away of the human life is the most terrifying consequence.
Death penalty is the cheapest way to remove the ill from the society. If the criminal is
given life imprisonment, all his expenditure is improvised by the government. Instead of
spending money on criminals this money can be used for the development of the society and
welfare of the people. Lots of people die of hunger; instead of feeding such people
government spend money to feed the criminals, which in turn raises number of cases of
crime in the society.
 The question is whether or not execution of an innocent person is strong enough to
abolish the death penalty. Remember, the death penalty saves lives. Repeat murders are
eliminated and foreseeable murders are deterred. You must consider the victim as well as
the defendant.
Hugo Bedau claims that the execution of the innocent believed guilty is a miscarriage
of justice that must be opposed whenever detected. But such miscarriage of justice do not
warrant abolition at the death penalty. Unless the moral drawbacks of an activity practice,
which include the possible death of innocent lives that might be saved by it, the activity is
warranted. Most human activities like medicine, manufacturing, automobile, and air traffic,
sports, not to mention wars and revolutions, cause death of innocent
bystanders. Nevertheless, advantages outweigh the disadvantages, human activities
including the penal system with all its punishments are morally justified. He also states that
one popular objection to Death penalty is that it gratifies the desire for revenge regarding as
unworthy. The bible quotes the Lord declaring “Vengeance is mine” (Romans 12:19). He
thus legitimized vengeance and reserved it to Himself. However, the Bible also enjoins, “The
murderer shall surely be put to death” (Numbers 35:16-18), recognizing that the death
penalty can be warranted whatever the motive. Religious tradition certainly suggest no less
(p. 330). All religions believe having life is sacred. If we deprive someone else life, he only
suffers minor inconvenience; hence, we cheapen human life—this is where we are at today.
People who oppose death penalty claim that in the implementation of this Death
penalty, innocent men are wrongly executed. According to "ProDeathPenalty" , there has
never been any proof of it. Moreover, our criminal justice system takes extra precautions to
be sure the innocent are protected. What's the use of the judges who were trained in this
field? They also want to make sure who is guilty and not.
Here are some cases which might swooned you to support Death Penalty. The
following six heinous crimes have swayed public opinion -- and legislators -- for and against
the death penalty:
The Lara Licayan case. Convicted kidnappers Rodolfo Lara and Roderick Licayan
were set to be executed by lethal injection in January 2004 for the abduction of Filipino-
Chinese businessman Joseph Thomas Co and his assistant Linda Manaysay in August 1998.
However, the criminal mastermind Pedro Mabansag, Lara’s uncle, was arrested, clearing
Lara’s and Licayan’s names. A Supreme Court decision to reopen the case prevented the
execution from pushing through.
The murder of Coca-Cola Export Corp. finance manager Betti Chua Sy. The kidnap
victim’s body was found in a trash bag in November 2003, sparking calls for the lifting of the
moratorium on judicial executions. During her funeral, Chinese-Filipinos protested in the
streets to call for government action on kidnappings. Statistics at the time showed that
kidnapping-for-ransom was “at a ten-year high... with a victim snatched on average every
three days,” according to the Philippine Star.
The execution of Alex Bartolome. The man was convicted of raping his daughter 100
times from 1993 to 1995, and was executed by lethal injection in January 2000.
 The Leo Echegaray case. In February 1999, the house painter was executed by lethal
injection for raping his 11-year-old stepdaughter. His was the first execution in more than
20 years.
The example of Martial Law. While then President Ferdinand Marcos favored the
electric chair, one execution was carried out by firing squad. “Shortly after the declaration of
Martial Law on September 1972, convicted drug lord Lim Seng was sentenced to death by a
military tribunal. President Ferdinand Marcos ordered the execution shown on live
television as part of his crackdown on crime.”
Thirty-one executions under the Marcos Regime. These included those of Jaime Jose,
Basilio Pineda, and Edgardo Aquino, who were “executed for the gang rape of movie star
Maggie dela Riva in 1972.” The Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism said that
“despite prohibitions against public executions, the execution of the three was done in full
view of the public.”
Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez is adamant that Congress will be doing the right thing in
restoring the death penalty, despite the staunch opposition of the Catholic Church. He said
to just imagine those people who commit heinous crimes. They are like demons. Now, why
would the Church protect evil? Why would they let evil triumph over good? Satan comes in
many robes.
If we do not know whether the death penalty will deter others, we will be confronted
with two uncertainties . If we have the death penalty and achieve no deterrent effect, than,
the life of convicted murderers has been expended in vain (from a deterrent point of view)—
here is a net loss. If we have the death sentence, and deter future murderers, we spared the
lives of future victims-(the prospective murderers gain, too; they are spared punishment
because they were deterred). In this case, the death penalty is a gain, unless the convicted
murderer is valued more highly than that of the unknown victim, or victims.