Arguments Against Capitol Punishment
Mend it, Don’t End it
Remember when you were 5 years old and that little boy pinched your arm, so naturally you pinched him back? It’s what he deserves, you probably thought. You weren’t wrong either! You get back what you give out. The same idea stands true for capitol punishment. The only proportional consequence to taking away somebody’s life, is to lose your own. This is why I support the resolution that capitol punishment is justified in cases of murder.
Not only is capitol punishment fair, but also it is proven in academic studies to deter crimes in our nation. Academic proof supporting the death penalty has gone unnoticed in the past couple of years. Scientists have been studying the theory of if the cost of something becomes too high; people will change their behavior. Meaning, if by killing somebody your own life gets taken away, will people stop their behavior? The answer has been yes. Several …show more content…
The death penalty adds a sense of confidence and trust in the criminal justice system. This is because capitol punishment is the only proportional punishment to the crimes committed and people in communities want to know that they are protected. It wouldn’t be fair if someone who murdered your family got away with a couple thousand-dollar fine, and was set free. That doesn’t set right for the family of the victim who’s own life was taken away. Capitol punishment is logical because it is used in the right manner. In no cases is it used in an unfair or discriminatory manner and always has sufficient evidence, as well. Governor Lynch of New Hampshire stated, “I believe strongly that there are some crimes so heinous that the death penalty is warranted. As a state, we’ve used our death penalty statute judiciously and cautiously, as is appropriate,” (Putnam). If all states used the death penalty as positive as New Hampshire has, there should be no reason why the death penalty isn’t active in every
Remember when you were 5 years old and that little boy pinched your arm, so naturally you pinched him back? It’s what he deserves, you probably thought. You weren’t wrong either! You get back what you give out. The same idea stands true for capitol punishment. The only proportional consequence to taking away somebody’s life, is to lose your own. This is why I support the resolution that capitol punishment is justified in cases of murder.
Not only is capitol punishment fair, but also it is proven in academic studies to deter crimes in our nation. Academic proof supporting the death penalty has gone unnoticed in the past couple of years. Scientists have been studying the theory of if the cost of something becomes too high; people will change their behavior. Meaning, if by killing somebody your own life gets taken away, will people stop their behavior? The answer has been yes. Several …show more content…
The death penalty adds a sense of confidence and trust in the criminal justice system. This is because capitol punishment is the only proportional punishment to the crimes committed and people in communities want to know that they are protected. It wouldn’t be fair if someone who murdered your family got away with a couple thousand-dollar fine, and was set free. That doesn’t set right for the family of the victim who’s own life was taken away. Capitol punishment is logical because it is used in the right manner. In no cases is it used in an unfair or discriminatory manner and always has sufficient evidence, as well. Governor Lynch of New Hampshire stated, “I believe strongly that there are some crimes so heinous that the death penalty is warranted. As a state, we’ve used our death penalty statute judiciously and cautiously, as is appropriate,” (Putnam). If all states used the death penalty as positive as New Hampshire has, there should be no reason why the death penalty isn’t active in every