Do you agree or disagree. There is never a reason for death penalty to be used.
In some countries, serious criminals such as serial murderers and terrorist bomber hardly escape death sentence. While many complement on such tough justice, others condemn it mainly for religious reasons. It appears to me that those who are against the death penalty have failed to notice the more humane aspects behind this seemingly inhumane charge. My essay will look at those humane aspects as against those to the opposite.
First of all, death penalty proves to be an effective ‘kill one to warn all’ approach I law enforcement. Crime rates in China have reportedly been fallen to a certain level since the implementation of death penalty. By nature, whether it has to do with the fear caused by uncertainty of afterlife or not, human beings would be afraid of death. Death sentence, in as sense, is kind of psychological approach to put off the evil flame in mankind.
Secondly, some people do deserve this harsh punishment for their wicked act against humanity. A serial murderer who slaughtered dozens of innocent children, a terrorist who launched an attack that killed hundreds—can you figure out a better penalty to resort to for paying the blood these beasts have spilled? Even relatively lighter crime like corruption might result in life long imprisonment, what then, the crime a degree higher like mass murder should be punished with other than ‘an early road to hell’? I just wonder how many people in the world would be willing to spare a terrorist who blasted off 3200 lives in 9.11 attack…
Thirdly, death sentence can serve as a means of psychological therapy and mental compensation for the victims and their loved ones. For instance, the Tokyo Trial, which ended up sentencing to death a group of Japanese chief war criminals, is said to provide an efficient psychological relief for those victimized Asian nations during the war.
Death sentence, apparently, is not aimed against...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document