Argument Against Death Penalty (Essay Sample)

Death Penalty
Student name
Institution
Death Penalty
Death penalty, also called capital punishment refers to the legal process in which a person is killed deliberately due to crime he or she committed. Capital punishment has brought a lot of controversies globally. Various people, individually or groups, hold different opinions regarding the death penalty. Some view that human life is sacred and should be given due respect regardless of the crime committed by an individual. In regard to this, they argue that the death penalty is wrong and should not be practiced in any state. On the other hand, some individuals and groups believe that criminals ought to pay for their illegals actions with their lives. They hold that this mode of punishment is effective in reducing the level of crimes in a nation or state (Winters,1997). However, in consideration of various negative issues outweighing merits associated with capital punishment, this paper provides an argument against it.
Death penalty does not fully provide solution to criminal actions. The reason for imprisonment is not only to punish the wrongdoers, but also to make them reform and adopt lives conforming to the state or any nation's law. In view of this, the death penalty should never be taken as an option in punishing wrong-doers regardless of the magnitude of the crime committed. This is because executing criminals does not make them learn any lesson. Therefore, all countries should incorporate special programs skewed towards redeeming the lives of the convicts. Some states have special counseling programs in prisons, which give the convict various lessons on the importance of maintaining law and order. Such programs are very crucial to the prisoners because they transform their lives and make them law-abiding citizens. By virtue of counseling programs, criminals come out of prisons better people taking part in constructive activities necessary for building the nation economically, socially and in other aspects of life. Therefore, people should not advocate the death penalty because it denies the convicts chances to reform.
According to human right commission, every individual, regardless of the circumstances, has a right to life. Although, people supporting death penalty argue that this form of punishment is effective in ensuring maintenance of law and order, the capital sentence violates the right to life. It is inhuman and degrades humanity. Cardinal McCarick, a Catholic Archbishop argues that "the death penalty diminishes all of us, increases disrespect for human life, and offers the tragic illusion that we can teach that killing is wrong by killing". No one has a right to take away one's life regardless of the situation. God is the only one with the mandate of deciding on when one should die. Therefore, Killing humanity in the name of delivering justice against crime, is not only a disrespect to convicts but also to the supernatural being who gives and takes away life.
Although death penalties are reached at through a legal process in courts, it is worth understanding that courts are never perfect. Not all rulings made by the courts are based on substantial evidence. For instance, Timothy Evans of Britain was judged and executed, but later found that he was never guilty (Seal, n.d). Such culpable and ill-founded rulings are catastrophic and diminish the integrity of judicial systems.
Also, the death penalty is costing in comparison to the other modes of punishment. Those in favor of capital punishment maintain the view that it is cheaper to kill a criminal than maintaining him or her. This illusion is practically wrong. Taking an example of a case in New Jersey, records shows that the death penalty cost $253 annually million more than the life sentence. In the same case, it is found that the federal court death penalty cases cost over eight times that of criminal court cases seeking no death penalty. Another point in a case is California's death penalty cases. It is estim...