Canada, with a homicide rate of 1.6 in 100 000 people, should not reinstate the death penalty for first-degree murder. There is simply no need. There are other ways to deal with criminals, such as various forms of imprisonment. Yes, they commit heinous crimes, but there are too many problems with the death penalty as oppose to its few benefits. The original use for the death penalty was to incapacitate dangerous people, who were a threat to society. However, that was long ago. Nowadays, there are other methods. Just as a dead man cannot kill, neither can an imprisoned one. It’s no longer true that killing a person is the only sure way of incapacitating them. To add to that point, the death penalty was also once used to suppress political dissent and to intimidate criminals. However, with first-degree murder, this is of no use. A first-degree murder is planned, deliberate, pre-thought. The murderer will not commit the crime until he believes he will not be caught. If the murderer gives no thought to being caught, then the death penalty is still of no use as a deterrent. The fear is not of the death penalty, it is of being caught, wherefore a long-term imprisonment punishment would be of equal effectiveness as the death penalty. Indeed, of the top homicide rates in the USA, 10 out of 11 states continue to use the death penalty. The same applies internationally, to 7 out of the top 10 countries in the world – these top 10 countries, as of 2012 and 2013, being Honduras, Venezuela, the US Virgin Islands, Belize, El Salvador, Guatemala, Jamaica, Lesotho, Swaziland, and Saint Kitts and Nevis. The vast majority of these countries suffer from gang violence, issues with drugs, political protests, civil wars, etc. The death penalty does nothing to suppress first-degree murder. A serious problem with the death penalty is that, according to a long-term study, 1 in 25 condemned and executed will be found innocent after death. It is said that with newfound...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document