In contrast, the death penalty intends neither to rehabilitate nor dissuade others

from capital crimes. Certainly, the threat of the ultimate penalty may give pause
to a small percentage, but most capital cases involve a defendant who is far from
rational enough to weigh the costs and benefits of his action. Still, this
misconception of the death penalty as a deterrent is one limp argument
constantly trotted out against capital punishment. Many people ask, "If the death
penalty is working, why isn't the murder rate falling" The answer is that the death
penalty is a matter of justice and societal preservation. Some crimes so
abhorrent, the convict does not deserve to continue living. We do not live
completely in the days of Hammurabi's "eye for an eye," but neither have we
come close to a crime-free utopia, which would allow the end of the death
penalty. Instead, we compromise, reserving execution for the most serious
crimes and filtering the decision through a jury of 12 peers and a presiding judge.
The argument of whether the death penalty is effective is an age-old and contentious issue.
Many people believe that “an eye for an eye” mentality is barbaric and goes against basic
human morals. Others are of the opinion that it can be used to prevent further crimes.

People are just beings and can therefore make mistakes, if a prisoner was innocent and
executed nothing can be done to make amends. Although we have modern tools of science,
like DNA testing, there is still a 1% chance that the person could be innocent. If even one
person was wrongfully executed it cannot be effective as one person can contribute greatly
towards society and the killing of just one innocent person negates its effectiveness.

Crime is everywhere. Wherever we look, we find criminals and crime. Criminals have become a part of
our daily lives. Does this mean we let them be the darkness of our society? No, definitely not. Eliminating
crime and criminals is our duty, and we cannot ignore it. Getting the rightly accused to a just punishment
is very important. Some criminals commit a crime because they have no other option to survive, but some
do it for fun. I do not advocate death penalty for everybody. A person, who stole bread from a grocery
store, definitely does not deserve death penalty. However, a serial killer, who kills people for fun or for his
personal gain, definitely deserves death penalty. Death penalty should continue in order to eliminate the
garbage of our society. Not everybody deserves to die, but some people definitely do. I support death
penalty because of several reasons. Firstly, I believe that death penalty serves as a deterrent and helps in
reducing crime. Secondly, it is true that death penalty is irreversible, but it is hard to kill a wrongly
convicted person due to the several chances given to the convicted to prove his innocence. Thirdly, death
penalty assures safety of the society by eliminating these criminals. Finally, I believe in "lex tallionis" - a
life for a life.

Reasons For and Against Capital Punishment

1. Religion: Different religions have different beliefs concerning capital

punishment. Even individual religions have contradictory beliefs. For
 instance, the Bible clear states the death penalty as valid and just, yet at
the same time murder is not allowed and salvation must be offered.
Since not everyone is of the same religion and each person can even
interpret the same religion differently, the role of religion concerning the
death penalty is very unclear. This is why governments should separate
state and church.
2. Morality: The morality of killing a person is also subjective for each
person. Throughout the life of an individual, their beliefs and morality
can and most likely will change.

As we can plainly see, there are several good reasons to support and oppose
capital punishment. Also, there are several bad reasons to be for and against
the death penalty too. Furthermore, the general population has a wide range
of beliefs concerning capital punishment. Even these beliefs of the general
population are subject to change.

In the end, it is what the majority of society currently believes to be moral that
should be reflected by the actions of their government.
Death Penalty Needed to Protect Society

The death penalty is an issue that will continue to be debated over for many years to come. Some believe
the death penalty should be abolished while others believe the death penalty should remain an option.
Although there are things I would change dealing with the death penalty, I do not think it should be
completely abolished. The death penalty should be administered to those who commit heinous crimes,
whether it involves murder or not (Lopez, Camilla p.1).

One can look at judicial history and tell that just because someone is sentenced to the death penalty does
not mean it actually happens. People have become so liberal that they are willing to give everyone a
second chance. People want to give the man who raped and murdered ten women in a matter of days the
same second chance as the little boy who stole a candy bar from the grocery store . It might just be me,
but I see a huge difference in the effect of those crimes on the rest of the population. Women are not
going to live in fear about going to the grocery store because a little boy stole a candy bar, but they are
going to think twice about going shopping by themselves at night when they've heard that a serial rapist
and murderer is among them. I think all crimes should have an equal punishment, but I do not necessarily
believe in the eye for an eye way of thinking. Remorse can so easily be faked which is why, I think,
punishments and sentences have been lightened over the years.

There are many cases and points that opponents to the death penalty bring up, but there are also several
good points that pro-death penalty believers argue. Opponents of capital punishment believe the death
penalty is not beneficial, but "we execute those who commit these atrocious crimes so that they do not
have the chance to kill again" (Lopez, p.1). Heinous crimes seem to be no big deal and no shocking
occurrence, like they used to be, which makes me very sad. The headlines are covered with people who
have committed terrible crimes and sit on television laughing about what they've done, knowing they're
not going to receive the death penalty for their crime. The government and the judicial system has now
become a joke to people just as jail houses have become jokes to people living in them. At one point in
time, jail was somewhere a person feared to go. Now, jails have all the luxuries of living at home with
mom and dad, so why not go there? Jail, to some people, is a refuge where they can escape from the
harshness of life. I believe one-fourth, if not one-half, of the crimes committed sending people to jail
deserve a harsher punishment and in some cases, the death penalty. The crime a person has to commit
in order to receive the death penalty has dramatically changed over the past several years. I don't
understand the need to 'think about' determining whether or not a mother who has drowned all of her
children or a man who has been confirmed in having raped, dismembered, and killed five boys under the
age of ten in a matter of weeks should receive the death penalty. I believe there should be no questions
asked and no second thoughts about putting those kinds of people to rest.

I support the idea of the death penalty, but I disagree with some of the procedures taken to actually make
it happen. There have been so many times when a judge sentenced the death penalty and, still, twenty
years later the convicted murderer was sitting on death row. I support the death penalty and agree that
we should keep it, but if it is not going to be carried out within a reasonable amount of time, everyone is
just wasting their time and money, paying tax dollars for "letting the prisoner drag his/her case on" (Lopez,
p.2). Even with jail sentences, that seems to be what happens most of the time anyway, so I think with the
death penalty at least there is some hope to try and prevent heinous crimes from occurring again. I think if
the death penalty was a true deterrent to heinous crimes, we would not have so many problems. I do not
believe the death penalty is a deterrent to any crimes, but I do believe it is a reasonable punishment and
sentence that more people should receive for the crimes they commit.

People have such a lack of respect for the government and the laws it sets that it seems the only way to
deal with such people is to kill them. I know putting to death one serial rapist or murderer is not going to
stop rapes and murders from happening, but at least there will be one less person out in the world
committing heinous crimes than there was before. I believe the death penalty was originally created to be
a deterrent to crime and I believe it could get back to being that if people could see the government taking
steps in that direction. Jail houses have all the luxuries of living at home and I believe that if the death
penalty is abolished people will kill because they want to kill, rape because they want to rape, and steal
because they want to steal knowing that nothing too terrible could possibly happen to them. Jail might not
be their first pick of places to be, but it's certainly not their last when they know they're going to have food,
clothing, and shelter. I do not think the death penalty is used enough to be called our most effective
method of solving crime. In fact, I do not think we have a most effective method at this point. I think if the
government actually made people stay in jail for the amount of time they were assigned in their sentence,
a lot less crime would be happening. People are getting sentenced to life in prison with no chance of
parole and in less than ten years are back on the streets again. How is that safe for the society and how
is that holding to the sentence given them by the judge? That is a lot of the reason why I support the
death penalty. It seems that both sides are being taken lightly but sometimes, if we're lucky, the death
penalty is actually carried out and the thought of that person harming another innocent individual can be
out of our heads for good. Putting someone behind bars for committing a heinous crime for ten years and
then releasing them back to society should not comfort anyone.

Over the years, my opinion on the death penalty has wavered, usually according to how emotional I was
that day. I am not an advocate of killing by any means, but I've learned that in order to better protect
society you might have to go to an extreme. In some cases 'extreme' can be bad, but when talking about
the death penalty, I think this is one of the best extremes there is.