Essay opposing death sentence
There has been an argument that lifting amnesty on miscreants and vagabonds is barbaric and retrogressive. The same argument is seen on the death penalty, and it has been a controversial issue not only in the USA but also in the rest part of the world. The death sentence has been a verdict to individuals who have committed a capital offence. However, this is not considerably the best way to punish the guilty. It is necessary some sympathy be expressed to the guilty party since they could at one point in life decide to change for the better. The death sentence is not the noblest way to counter ...view middle of the document...
However, instead of death sentence, it cannot hurt to convict the party with a lesser harsh sentence than the death penalty. Such sentence has not been observed so far in the United States even though it is proud of its democracy. Indulgence in this Act has therefore rendered cruel and retrogressive.
There have been several cases where victims were awarded death sentence without a fair trial, and this is a reported on several occasions where victims end up executed. There are sham trials that condemn the accused an appropriate execution which should not be the case. For instance, in the case of Gary Graham of Texas, we are told that e fought for up to 20 years trying to overturn his guilty verdict imposed on him. Eventually, Graham was executed by the Texas court. This sentence culminates from the thought that whoever is in the death row is ultimately guilty of murder. Guilty is not guilty until if it is a prove through a proper trial in the court of law. In some instances, death sentences have been overturned through a re-examination of the case by a superior court of law. Such reason, therefore, implies that there might have been individuals executed for crimes that they had not done.
According to Amnesty International, the death penalty for capital offences not only do they legitimize final acts of violence, but also inevitably claim innocent lives. There is always a chance that an error is corrected, and the victim is willing to change. However, through death sentence, it proves to be final, and the victim may not have another chance to correct his/her mistakes. There is no right reason for one to have a life conviction, and this, therefore, is an excellent reason to do way with it. The death sentence is obviously an act of murder by the government, and hence, it should not have a place in our society. When life is at stake, it is not good to take things lightly and pass sentences that could affect an innocent life. The government should ensure that justice and truth prevails, but not through the death penalty. By any means, if a government supports the death sentence, it surely supports a death of one of its citizens who also have a right to live. There is surely no need to cut off thieves' hands to protect property from being stolen. On the contrary, adulterers are not stoned to stop adultery, yet we take the lives of those who end others lives. Indeed, it's not worthy of a human being who is prone to make such an error to take the life of another citizen. All life is worthy living and this should not be deprived to anyone no matter the offence he or...