Cons of Capital Punishment
Capital punishment has been around for years and the debate whether it is moral and justified is always being addressed. Most people can agree that one is either for or against the death penalty. This section of the paper will present arguments supporting the view that an “eye for an eye” is not a valid method of obtaining justice for crimes committed. Is it our job to decide who gets to live and die, and more importantly, is something as severe even evident through written laws? Here are some of the cons why capital punishment should be abolished from our civilization.
Playing God ?
First off, is it our duty as civilians, or humans for that matter, to ...view middle of the document...
“Killing a person is not humane, even if the criminal is not humane. ("The Pros And Cons Of Capital Punishment", 2006-2013).” The death penalty violates the right of every individual to LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Now to kill an animal that has killed a living thing is different, and no human should be treated like an animal. “It is barbaric and violates the "cruel and unusual" clause in the Bill of Rights (Messerli, n.d.).” The 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prevents the use of "cruel and unusual punishment". Many would interpret the death penalty as violating this restriction. But in the end two wrongs do not make a right. The life of someone can’t compensate for the crime committed. An “eye for an eye” is a barbaric punishment, that hasn’t been deemed as logical by any human being, unless you are looking for vigilantly justice, in that case that is the perfect way to punish someone.
Not only are there other options available such as life in prison, I would think that would be worse than killing the person. Having that individual live the rest of his miserable life behind bars, and having the guilt of what he did to add to it all. Not to mention depending on the act of violence he committed the inmates will hear about what...