Yes or no to death penalty

by charles CAUCHON on October 16, 2013 - 12:43pm


‘’ An other chance to end death penalty,’’

I choose an article called;  ‘’ an other chance to end death penalty,’’ it was published in the Washington post this year, in January. This article highlights that the death penalty should be abolish from Maryland State. Mr. O’Malley, who opposes capital punishment, Mr. Miller, the powerful president of the Senate and a supporter of the death penalty, allowed the issue to reach the Senate floor, therefore the governor could not get the 24 votes needed for abolition. Instead they came up with a bill enacted that would limit Maryland’s death penalty to cases where there is DNA evidence, a videotaped confession or a video linking the suspect to a murder. The group in opposition suggest that the nation risks of committing the gravest of injustices: killing innocent people. Furthermore, the death penalty is either forbidden or in abeyance; meaning no one executed in the past five years, in 30 American states. They claim that it should be abolish in order to eliminate a costly, unjust and dysfunctional system. As fewer death penalties are given no arguments seems valuable to keep doing this risky barbarian practice, even if the majority of the members of the senate do not seek for the death penalty to be abolish.

            This interesting and very controversial question has a lot of importance, especially in a world where drugs, and guns have brought people to commit the worst imaginable crimes. On one side victims must have the right to equality if someone voluntary took their lives the murder should be forced to death punishment, which in this case would be fair. When we think of mass murders the questions seems, quite obvious, the thief must be deathly punish. There seems to be no sense of justice for the victims to see that the criminal can walk away from prison after a certain period of time. These people have the right to a certain mental comfort to know that they will never see or hear about the murderer again. Therefore for those who believe that the death punishment is good, values such as fairness, justice, security, equality and mental comfort are not being respected by leaving a murderer alive invading the minds of the relatives of the victim(s).


            On the other side of the dilemma abolishing the death penalty is abolishing the chance that innocent people could be killed. The death penalty takes often too long to be treated and requires too much money, time and effort. Putting someone in prison for the rest of life can be more of a penalty. This barbarian method of saying you kill me, I kill you would lead us to be an incredible selfish society based on immoral values. Further more, last year, 43 people were put to death, less than half the number executed in 1999 and the fewest in two decades. Numbers shows that death penalty is decreasing and there must be a reason since crimes rates keep going. People seem to realise that it is not the right way to act.


From my point of view, I believe that we should not be using death penalty, it shows that we are civilize and that we believe that killing is bad whatever the reasons are. Where are our values of forgiveness or compassion gone? We are still humans and we should act civilized even with the uncivilized people. I think it is better no to have on our mind that our government kills bad people. It is too dangerous to take the risk to kill innocents; What if someone would have convince the judge that you are the murderer of someone you never kill; how would you feel ?