Death Punishment
In countries such as China, the United States of America, and Iraq, death has been a punishment for legal crimes. Death punishment is a legal execution of offenders’ life through beheading, injection with poison, electrocution, and hanging when they commit a serious crime such as murder and drug trafficking. However, the constitutional amendments and revolution have caused a gradual change in capital punishment, which has significantly reduced the number of executions in various states in the world. There is a lot of debate surrounding the death penalty in the world. As such, I have engaged with my friend to address capital punishment’s ethical and constitutional issues.
Dialogue on Capital Punishment
Me: Death penalty is regarded as a cruel, inhuman, and degrading punitive approach. But it has been the best penalty for murderers, rapists, and drug traffickers. What is your view on the death penalty?
McGregor: Well, I agree with you that capital punishment sounds like the best approach to deal with arch offenders. However, we should consider the ethical issues linked to punishment. Punishment is made to caution the culprit and the potential offenders of a crime. The punishment applicant should be eager to know whether the victim learns from the punishment and changes to become the right person. In capital punishment, I don’t think there is such an opportunity because you cannot know the impact of the penalty when you kill someone.
Me: You have reminded me of something I read in the article from Amnesty International; besides the ethical issues you have just mentioned, Mr. McGregor, the death penalty violates human rights, specifically the Right To Freedom From Mistreatment and the Right to Life (Amnesty International n.p). You can imagine how painful it is to be electrocuted because of drug trafficking. The pain that the death penalty inflicts on offenders does not qualify the crimes committed, considering that justice is sometimes violated and that people are convicted mistakenly. Indeed, I see some sense in your take about this punishment and feel that it should be banned.
McGregor: Happily, my friend, the world, through the human rights fighters and philosophers, has realized the value of life and the need to preserve human rights. Organization and movements such as International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the European Conventional on Human Rights, and the American Convention on Human Rights started different movements aimed at discrediting capital punishment and proposing alternative punishment for capital crime offenders (Amnesty International n.p). I want to reveal to you, my friend, although these organizations and movements argued that capital punishment should only stand for severe crimes; this is a movement that will ultimately remove capital punishment in various regions, even among authoritarian states in history.
Me: True, Mr. McGregor. Indeed, international human rights laws provide that children below the age of 18 should not be subjected to capital punishment regardless of their crimes. Indeed, if you read the amnesty international article, you will know that some states still sentence people under 18 years of age (Amnesty International n.p). Factually, the article provides that about 149 children offenders have been subjected to a death sentence in states such as Iran, the USA, Yemen, China, and Nigeria (Amnesty International n.p). But since the movements for fighting the human rights begun, this value is believed to have drastically reduced.
McGregor: Damn it, the United States of America has joined the race to ban corporal punishment and death penalties and instead opted for other correcting measures. The US constitution effected a ban against Cruel and Unusual Punishment after organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union considered the death sentence as inherently unconstitutional (American Civil Liberties Union n.p). Indeed, I believe that other organizations and human rights defendants will also step up and join the war against capital punishment.
Me: And Mr. McGregor…, can it be right to argue that countries that apply capital punishment today do respect life? Although this execution may not be an individual-made decision, I am convinced that the laws are made by an individual referred to law experts. If these people have the value of life at heart, do you think they can reach a consensus and endorse capital punishment?
McGregor: You are right! And that is why I told you that there are ethical issues related to capital punishment. Suppose you read an article about “The case against the death penalty” from American Civil Liberties Union. In that case, it says that a society with deference for life does not intentionally kill people (American Civil Liberties Union n.p). Such tells us how capital punishment can mirror society’s morals. Indeed, on the question you asked about whether a consensus can be made to kill someone in a moral society, the answer is absolute ‘NO.’ The society produces people who participate in law-making. They employ the ideologies and morals back in their societies in making opinions.
Me: capital punishment is terrible, and it should end altogether. Thanks a lot, Mr. McGregor, for that moment. I am anxious to engage in another dialogue with you on a contemporary issue.
McGregor: thank you too, and welcome. A pleasure to share with you!
Works Cited
American Civil Liberties Union. “The Case against Death Penalty” (2020). Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty
Amnesty International. “Death Penalty” (2020). Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/