Essay On Capital Punishment In Canada
Shelly Clemente #5
Oppose Capital Punishment
Be it resolved that capital punishment be legalised in Canada. The death penalty was officially abolished in Canada in 1976 when the Canadian government held a free vote in Parliament to eradicate it from the Criminal Code and over sixty countries around the world have done the same. According to a poll conducted by Angus Reid, a Canadian sociologist, 21 percent of Canadians feel that murderers can be rehabilitated and 54 percent feel that although the convicted murderer has taken a life, it still is not justifiable to take the murderer’s life as the punishment. Capital punishment should not be legalised because it does not provide a useful purpose to society, it does not promote the rehabilitation of criminals and it is more retributive than restorative.
Capital punishment is not in any way advantageous, if not an inconvenience, to society. After having reviewed numerous studies of the costs of the death penalty in the United States, Dr. Richard C. Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center, had found that it costs more than life imprisonment. The costs consists of all that is needed for a regular trial plus more trial time, experts, attorneys, two trials for guilt and punishment and multiple appeals while the inmates are held a high security confinement centers, which costs a lot of money …show more content…
that ultimately comes from taxpayers. In general, killing a person is not humane, yet that is the definition of capital punishment. According to Amnesty International, “the death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights,” since the criminal’s right to live is ignored. Therefore if the government began to reinstate this punishment, there might be distrust within the citizens of the country. In addition, capital punishment is useless in the sense that it will not resurrect the victim, nor will it provide closure to their relations. Criminal trials and the execution usually offer a temporary sense of closure, however many crime victims have stated that the continuous repetition of their unfortunate stories, the formal legal rules and the years between appeals have only increased stress and have postponed their emotional recovery. Overall the death penalty only creates more distress for humanity rather than peace.
Through the use of capital punishment, the rehabilitation of the criminal into a useful citizen of society is not possible. Education provided within the prison allows the convicts to stay updated on society and lets them enhance their knowledge. This is crucial because studies show that numerous criminals do not have a strong basic grade school foundation. Without an education, it would be extremely difficult for them to acquire jobs, therefore they return to their life of crime. Additionally, rehabilitation guarantees that the criminals are socially adjusted. Psychological assessments are used to test for mental or physical disabilities. Many convicts are capable of returning to society as fairly well-balanced citizens, if they choose to participate in counseling and further assessments. With the use of capital punishment, criminals sentenced to death would not be able to be rehabilitated. The different stages of rehabilitation would have many positive effects for the inmates and their families since their criminal behaviour would be cared for and they could function in everyday life. Rehabilitation of criminals is a far better solution in contrast to the death penalty.
Finally, capital punishment is less a form of justice, but more a form of revenge. The death penalty is based on the concept of retribution: “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life.” Retribution does not protect society, instead it is a way of satisfying anger. Retribution is when punishment is seen as the best solution to a crime. According to Raymond A. Schroth, Jesuit Priest and Community Professor of the Humanities at St.Peter’s College, revenge is not a good emotion since it creates a need for violence. More specifically, the need to kill the person who has killed someone you love, which would ultimately continue the cycle of violence which would unfortunately destroy the victim in addition to the criminal. Rather than seeking revenge, the victim and the offender should take the time to figure out the best solution. Therefore in the future, the victim might be able to forgive the criminal instead of continuing the cycle of violence. However, that is not possible with capital punishment because forgiveness takes a long time, something they don’t have when the criminal is scheduled to be executed. Seeking out revenge is won’t bring justice to the victim because it will only lead to unresolved problems with can no longer be solved when the offender has been executed.
The life of the criminal will never compensate for the life of the victim and will not provide permanent closure.
Without the death penalty there would be plenty of time to see justice served correctly and it gives the victim’s family more time to heal and prepare to face the offender. Naturally, capital punishment should not be reinstated in Canada because the effects of an execution do not benefit society, rehabilitating the offender is not an option because of the short time available and it promotes violence and vengeful emotions which may lead to an infinite cycle of violent
behaviour.
Shelly Clemente #5
Support Capital Punishment
Be it resolved that capital punishment be legalised in Canada. The death penalty was officially abolished in Canada in 1976 when the Canadian government held a free vote in Parliament to eradicate it from the Criminal Code and over sixty countries around the world have done the same. According to a poll conducted by Angus Reid, a Canadian sociologist, 58 percent of Canadians see the death penalty as a murder deterrent, 55 percent believe that is a convicted murderer has taken a life, this punishment is justifiable and 42 percent believe that it will provide closure for the families of the victims. The death penalty should be legalised since it gives closure to the families that have suffered and to civilians, it is an effective form of crime deterrence and it provides retribution to the criminal.
When someone takes a life, justice needs to be restored by taking their life. When the victim is killed, their relations endure a great amount of suffering and they need closure. What the family members seek is to putting an end to their pain. Families feel that killing the murderer is what he ultimately deserves because that is what he did to their loved one. They do not want revenge, all they want is justice. When someone is killed, it creates an imbalance in the lives of the relations. The family has to wait numerous years just to see the murderer executed. After all those year of agony, the killing is the ultimate form of compensation for them. All families want to see the criminal gone and they wouldn’t want anyone one else to endure what they have. Moreover, when someone is murdered, the citizens of that area feel unsafe because of the news. Through the execution of the murderers, the people in that city will feel safe since the offender has been brought to justice. The death penalty is the most effective way to provide closure for the families and provide the peace of mind of other citizens.
Capital punishment is the only way to ensure that the convict and future murderers will no longer kill more people. Since society’s priority is to prevent future murders, the surest precaution should be used, which in this case the death penalty. When murderers are executed, potential murders will reconsider their choice before killing because they would worry for their own life. According to Ernest van den Haag, professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University wrote: "Even though statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else.” Furthermore, criminologists have analyzed murder rates to see if they increased or decreased in conjunction with murderers being executed. In 1973, Isaac Ehrlich, an American academic researcher and economist, concluded, through a new kind of analysis that for every convict executed, 7 lives were spared since others were deterred from committing murder. Finally, capital punishment is the only guaranteed way to prevent the murderer to recommit his crime. Once the murderer is killed, they will never be able to hurt anyone again. As a crime deterrent and a form in permanent incapacitation, the death penalty aids to prevent future crimes.
The death penalty is the only punishment sufficient enough for the crimes committed. It is said: “an eye for an eye, a life for a life.” That concept should be used in modern society because it is justice and the appropriate punishment for the crime. If the criminal is not killed, he will stay in prison for his entire life with three meals a day, which actually is a comfortable lifestyle. It is unfair because the criminal ended the life of an innocent, while they get to walk around and still be satisfied with their life. For the most brutal crimes, the offenders deserve the severest punishment. Although society’s status prior to the crime cannot be restored, at least the execution will bring closure to the citizens and the families. Only through taking the life of the murderer, it lets society to show that murder is intolerable and will be punished correctly.
Taking life of the criminal is the highest form of punishment and the only way to create justice. The death penalty is the most effective way to deter the murderer from recommitting the crime and it shows the citizens affected by it that murder an insufferable crime and will not be tolerated. The convict should not be allowed to live while they have killed one or more people because that is not justifiable. In addition, the criminal is using resources and services while in prison, which is a use of money, which could ultimately be used to help people in need. Capital punishment should be legalised because it allows future crimes to be prevented, the families’ agony will end and it is the only justice that compensates for the crime.
Bibliography “Abolish the Death Penalty.” Amnesty International Canada. Online.
<http://www.amnesty.ca/our-work/issues/abolish-the-death-penalty> 25 Feb. 2013.
Basket-East, Sabrina. "Counterpoint: Capital Punishment is a Form of Revenge Killing, and Should Remain Illegal." Canadian Points of View Reference Centre. Online. <http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=p3h&AN=28674832&lang=en-ca&site=pov-can> 25 Feb. 2013.
Dahlia Lithwick. “Does Killing Really Give Closure?” Death Penalty Information Center. Online.
<http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/1057> 25 Feb. 2013.
“In Support of the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Curriculum. Online. <http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/student/c/about/arguments/argument2a.htm> 25 Feb. 2013
Mario Canseco. “Canadians Hold Conflicting Views on the Death Penalty.” Angus Reid Public Opinion. Online. <http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/44374/canadians-hold-conflicting-views-on-the-death-penalty/> 25 Feb. 2013.
Moses Wright. “Criminal Rehabilitation – Working Towards a Better Life for Inmates and Their Families.” Ezine Articles. Online. <http://ezinearticles.com/?Criminal-Rehabilitation---Working-Towards-A-Better-Life-For-Inmates-And-Their-Families&id=455250> 25 Feb. 2013.
Pulsifer, Andrew; Renneboog, Richard M.J. "Capital Punishment: An Overview." Canadian Points of View Reference Centre. Online <http://web.ebscohost.com/pov/detail?vid=4&sid=a0236eec-18c7-4ea7-befb-50d4ce9c18fc%40sessionmgr4&hid=27&bdata=Jmxhbmc9ZW4tY2Emc2l0ZT1wb3YtY2Fu#db=p3h&AN=28674830> 21 Feb. 2013.
Various authors. “Top 10 Pros and Cons: Should the Death Penalty be Allowed?” ProCon.org. Online. <http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000#4> 25 Feb. 2013.
Oppose Capital Punishment
Be it resolved that capital punishment be legalised in Canada. The death penalty was officially abolished in Canada in 1976 when the Canadian government held a free vote in Parliament to eradicate it from the Criminal Code and over sixty countries around the world have done the same. According to a poll conducted by Angus Reid, a Canadian sociologist, 21 percent of Canadians feel that murderers can be rehabilitated and 54 percent feel that although the convicted murderer has taken a life, it still is not justifiable to take the murderer’s life as the punishment. Capital punishment should not be legalised because it does not provide a useful purpose to society, it does not promote the rehabilitation of criminals and it is more retributive than restorative.
Capital punishment is not in any way advantageous, if not an inconvenience, to society. After having reviewed numerous studies of the costs of the death penalty in the United States, Dr. Richard C. Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center, had found that it costs more than life imprisonment. The costs consists of all that is needed for a regular trial plus more trial time, experts, attorneys, two trials for guilt and punishment and multiple appeals while the inmates are held a high security confinement centers, which costs a lot of money …show more content…
that ultimately comes from taxpayers. In general, killing a person is not humane, yet that is the definition of capital punishment. According to Amnesty International, “the death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights,” since the criminal’s right to live is ignored. Therefore if the government began to reinstate this punishment, there might be distrust within the citizens of the country. In addition, capital punishment is useless in the sense that it will not resurrect the victim, nor will it provide closure to their relations. Criminal trials and the execution usually offer a temporary sense of closure, however many crime victims have stated that the continuous repetition of their unfortunate stories, the formal legal rules and the years between appeals have only increased stress and have postponed their emotional recovery. Overall the death penalty only creates more distress for humanity rather than peace.
Through the use of capital punishment, the rehabilitation of the criminal into a useful citizen of society is not possible. Education provided within the prison allows the convicts to stay updated on society and lets them enhance their knowledge. This is crucial because studies show that numerous criminals do not have a strong basic grade school foundation. Without an education, it would be extremely difficult for them to acquire jobs, therefore they return to their life of crime. Additionally, rehabilitation guarantees that the criminals are socially adjusted. Psychological assessments are used to test for mental or physical disabilities. Many convicts are capable of returning to society as fairly well-balanced citizens, if they choose to participate in counseling and further assessments. With the use of capital punishment, criminals sentenced to death would not be able to be rehabilitated. The different stages of rehabilitation would have many positive effects for the inmates and their families since their criminal behaviour would be cared for and they could function in everyday life. Rehabilitation of criminals is a far better solution in contrast to the death penalty.
Finally, capital punishment is less a form of justice, but more a form of revenge. The death penalty is based on the concept of retribution: “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life.” Retribution does not protect society, instead it is a way of satisfying anger. Retribution is when punishment is seen as the best solution to a crime. According to Raymond A. Schroth, Jesuit Priest and Community Professor of the Humanities at St.Peter’s College, revenge is not a good emotion since it creates a need for violence. More specifically, the need to kill the person who has killed someone you love, which would ultimately continue the cycle of violence which would unfortunately destroy the victim in addition to the criminal. Rather than seeking revenge, the victim and the offender should take the time to figure out the best solution. Therefore in the future, the victim might be able to forgive the criminal instead of continuing the cycle of violence. However, that is not possible with capital punishment because forgiveness takes a long time, something they don’t have when the criminal is scheduled to be executed. Seeking out revenge is won’t bring justice to the victim because it will only lead to unresolved problems with can no longer be solved when the offender has been executed.
The life of the criminal will never compensate for the life of the victim and will not provide permanent closure.
Without the death penalty there would be plenty of time to see justice served correctly and it gives the victim’s family more time to heal and prepare to face the offender. Naturally, capital punishment should not be reinstated in Canada because the effects of an execution do not benefit society, rehabilitating the offender is not an option because of the short time available and it promotes violence and vengeful emotions which may lead to an infinite cycle of violent
behaviour.
Shelly Clemente #5
Support Capital Punishment
Be it resolved that capital punishment be legalised in Canada. The death penalty was officially abolished in Canada in 1976 when the Canadian government held a free vote in Parliament to eradicate it from the Criminal Code and over sixty countries around the world have done the same. According to a poll conducted by Angus Reid, a Canadian sociologist, 58 percent of Canadians see the death penalty as a murder deterrent, 55 percent believe that is a convicted murderer has taken a life, this punishment is justifiable and 42 percent believe that it will provide closure for the families of the victims. The death penalty should be legalised since it gives closure to the families that have suffered and to civilians, it is an effective form of crime deterrence and it provides retribution to the criminal.
When someone takes a life, justice needs to be restored by taking their life. When the victim is killed, their relations endure a great amount of suffering and they need closure. What the family members seek is to putting an end to their pain. Families feel that killing the murderer is what he ultimately deserves because that is what he did to their loved one. They do not want revenge, all they want is justice. When someone is killed, it creates an imbalance in the lives of the relations. The family has to wait numerous years just to see the murderer executed. After all those year of agony, the killing is the ultimate form of compensation for them. All families want to see the criminal gone and they wouldn’t want anyone one else to endure what they have. Moreover, when someone is murdered, the citizens of that area feel unsafe because of the news. Through the execution of the murderers, the people in that city will feel safe since the offender has been brought to justice. The death penalty is the most effective way to provide closure for the families and provide the peace of mind of other citizens.
Capital punishment is the only way to ensure that the convict and future murderers will no longer kill more people. Since society’s priority is to prevent future murders, the surest precaution should be used, which in this case the death penalty. When murderers are executed, potential murders will reconsider their choice before killing because they would worry for their own life. According to Ernest van den Haag, professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University wrote: "Even though statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else.” Furthermore, criminologists have analyzed murder rates to see if they increased or decreased in conjunction with murderers being executed. In 1973, Isaac Ehrlich, an American academic researcher and economist, concluded, through a new kind of analysis that for every convict executed, 7 lives were spared since others were deterred from committing murder. Finally, capital punishment is the only guaranteed way to prevent the murderer to recommit his crime. Once the murderer is killed, they will never be able to hurt anyone again. As a crime deterrent and a form in permanent incapacitation, the death penalty aids to prevent future crimes.
The death penalty is the only punishment sufficient enough for the crimes committed. It is said: “an eye for an eye, a life for a life.” That concept should be used in modern society because it is justice and the appropriate punishment for the crime. If the criminal is not killed, he will stay in prison for his entire life with three meals a day, which actually is a comfortable lifestyle. It is unfair because the criminal ended the life of an innocent, while they get to walk around and still be satisfied with their life. For the most brutal crimes, the offenders deserve the severest punishment. Although society’s status prior to the crime cannot be restored, at least the execution will bring closure to the citizens and the families. Only through taking the life of the murderer, it lets society to show that murder is intolerable and will be punished correctly.
Taking life of the criminal is the highest form of punishment and the only way to create justice. The death penalty is the most effective way to deter the murderer from recommitting the crime and it shows the citizens affected by it that murder an insufferable crime and will not be tolerated. The convict should not be allowed to live while they have killed one or more people because that is not justifiable. In addition, the criminal is using resources and services while in prison, which is a use of money, which could ultimately be used to help people in need. Capital punishment should be legalised because it allows future crimes to be prevented, the families’ agony will end and it is the only justice that compensates for the crime.
Bibliography “Abolish the Death Penalty.” Amnesty International Canada. Online.
<http://www.amnesty.ca/our-work/issues/abolish-the-death-penalty> 25 Feb. 2013.
Basket-East, Sabrina. "Counterpoint: Capital Punishment is a Form of Revenge Killing, and Should Remain Illegal." Canadian Points of View Reference Centre. Online. <http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=p3h&AN=28674832&lang=en-ca&site=pov-can> 25 Feb. 2013.
Dahlia Lithwick. “Does Killing Really Give Closure?” Death Penalty Information Center. Online.
<http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/node/1057> 25 Feb. 2013.
“In Support of the Death Penalty.” Death Penalty Curriculum. Online. <http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/student/c/about/arguments/argument2a.htm> 25 Feb. 2013
Mario Canseco. “Canadians Hold Conflicting Views on the Death Penalty.” Angus Reid Public Opinion. Online. <http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/44374/canadians-hold-conflicting-views-on-the-death-penalty/> 25 Feb. 2013.
Moses Wright. “Criminal Rehabilitation – Working Towards a Better Life for Inmates and Their Families.” Ezine Articles. Online. <http://ezinearticles.com/?Criminal-Rehabilitation---Working-Towards-A-Better-Life-For-Inmates-And-Their-Families&id=455250> 25 Feb. 2013.
Pulsifer, Andrew; Renneboog, Richard M.J. "Capital Punishment: An Overview." Canadian Points of View Reference Centre. Online <http://web.ebscohost.com/pov/detail?vid=4&sid=a0236eec-18c7-4ea7-befb-50d4ce9c18fc%40sessionmgr4&hid=27&bdata=Jmxhbmc9ZW4tY2Emc2l0ZT1wb3YtY2Fu#db=p3h&AN=28674830> 21 Feb. 2013.
Various authors. “Top 10 Pros and Cons: Should the Death Penalty be Allowed?” ProCon.org. Online. <http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000#4> 25 Feb. 2013.