Death Penalty Debate Pro

Death Penalty Debate – Pro
Capital punishment or the death penalty is a legal process whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. The judicial decree that someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence, while the actual enforcement is an execution. Crimes that can result in a death penalty are known as capital crimes or capital offences. 58 countries maintain the death penalty in both law and practice. it as a way of deterring crimes.
Death Penalty for Heinous Crimes ( Republic Act No. 7659) "AN ACT TO IMPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY ON CERTAIN HEINOUS CRIMES, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE THE REVISED PENAL CODE, AS AMENDED, OTHER SPECIAL LAWS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES"

The death penalty gives closure to the victim's families who have suffered so much.
The death penalty can also help provide closure for the victim's family and friends, who will no longer have to fear the return of this criminal into society. They will not have to worry about parole or the chance of escape, and will thus be able to achieve a greater degree of closure.
Mary Heidcamp, a Chicago woman whose mother's killer faced the death penalty before the State Governor commuted the sentences to life in prison, stated 'we were looking forward to the death penalty. I'm just so disappointed in the system'1. Other victims' families deemed the decision a 'mockery', that 'justice is not done'1. It creates another form of crime deterrent.
The state has a responsibility to protect the lives of innocent citizens, and enacting the death penalty may save lives by reducing the rate of violent crime.
The reasoning here is simple- fear of execution can play a powerful motivating role in convincing potential murderers not to carry out their acts. While the prospect of life in prison may be frightening, surely death is a more daunting prospect. Thus, the risk of execution can change the cost-benefit calculus in the mind of murderers-to be so that the act is no longer worthwhile for them1.
Numerous studies support the deterrent effect of the death penalty. A 1985 study by Stephen K. Layson at the University of North Carolina showed that a single execution deters 18 murders. Another influential study, which looked at over 3,054 counties over two decades, further found support for the claim that murder rates tend to fall as executions rise2.
On top of this, there are ways to make the death penalty an even more effective deterrent than it is today. For instance, reducing the wait time on death row prior to execution can dramatically increase its deterrent effect in the United States1.
In short, the death penalty can- and does- save the lives of innocent people.
Justice is better served.
Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims.
It provides a deterrent for prisoners already serving a life sentence.
DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a person's guilt or innocence.
Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill.
It contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system.
The death penalty can help ease the problem of overcrowded prisons in many countries, where keeping people for life in prison contributes to expensive and at times unconstitutional overcrowding1.
In 2011, California prison overcrowding was so problematic that a district court panel ordered authorities to release or transfer more than 33,000 inmates. This decision was held up by the U.S. Supreme Court, which argued that the conditions in the overcrowded prisons are so overwhelming that they constitute cruel and unusual punishment2. Similarly, in the United Kingdom two thirds of prisons in England and Wales have been deemed overcrowded3.
As such, the death penalty may be preferable to life in prison since it helps alleviate a pressing problem in the criminal justice system. It is better to execute those who deserve it than to be forced to release dangerous offenders into society because prisons are overcrowded by people serving life sentences.
Execution prevents the accused from committing further crimes.
The death penalty is the only way to ensure that criminals do not escape back into society or commit further crimes while in prison.
While in prison, it is not uncommon for those receiving life in jail sentences to commit homicide, suicide, or other crimes while in jail, since there is no worse punishment they can receive1. Putting dangerous murderers in prison endangers other prisoners and the guards who must watch them.
The other advantage of execution is that it prevents the possibly of an escape from prison. Even the highest security detention facilities can have escapees2. Thus, the only way to be absolutely certain that a convicted murder can no longer hurt others is to execute them.
The death penalty should apply as punishment for first-degree murder; an eye for an eye.

The worst crimes deserve the most severe sanctions; first-degree murder involves the intentional slaughter of another human being. There are crimes that are more visceral, but there are none that are more deadly. Such a heinous crime can only be punished, in a just and fair manner, with the death penalty.
As Time put it, 'there is a zero-sum symmetry to capital punishment that is simple and satisfying enough to feel like human instinct: the worst possible crime deserves no less than the worst possible punishment' 1.Human life is sacred; there must be a deterrent mechanism in place that ensures that those violating that fundamental precept are punished. Capital punishment symbolizes the value and importance placed upon the maintenance of the sanctity of human life. Any lesser sentence would fail in this duty.

The present situation of the Philippines now is that the country is obviously suffering from poverty. Addition to this, Philippines’ crime rate is still high.
With these issues that devastates the country today, death penalty can be a solution. If death penalty shall be implemented once again in the country, crime rates will possibly decrease. For this can somehow “discourage” criminals to kill because fear will be instill in their minds, that is if they still have fear.
Since death penalty can lessen criminals, the population of the Philippines will decrease as well. This is an advantage because the current situation of the country is still under the line of overpopulation.
Lifetime imprisonment does not only waste the government’s money for their food and security rather shall impose to the countrymen that the government is serious about the number of crimes happening in the country. Justice, as we know, can be bought in the Philippines. It is always unfair when a rich criminal is imprisoned than a marginalized criminal forced to did such action because of poverty. Death penalty can erase this gap.
The criminals does not only ruin their own reputation but also of the place they came from. Take for example the Maguindanao massacre, are the Ampatuans the only feared of the people or even the place itself? Thus, these killers of the society pollutes the image of the place they came from.
Punishment shall be imposed to the criminals with high record in the government. However, this does not include those people who have killed only an individual. This can apply to grave massacres, or related crimes.
When death penalty will be impose in the country, the possibility that the freed criminals can kill another person be lessen. Let us not forget that the four walls of religion do not only make who we are. It is only a part of our life. The best for the society shall be implemented in whatever ways.
Death Penalty is not against morality it is just implemented to prevent the high rate of the crime because “Prevention is better than cure.”