Law Elimination Argument - Free Essay Sample

Introduction

The death penalty (capital punishment) refers to a federal government disciplinary practice in which individuals receive punishment for alleged crimes through death (Kleinstuber et al., 2016). The verdict stating that a person obtains punishment through death entails a death sentence, wherein the activities involved in implementing such a judgment refers to execution. The death penalty remains a continuous argument in different nations and states, and ideology differs according to the political setting, region, or culture.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The European Union (EU) has a provision in Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU that forbids the death sentence (Schabas, 2019). Furthermore, Protocol 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights intends to eliminate the implementation of capital punishment in its 47 member states. However, the Protocol only influences member states' activity that has endorsed it and excludes countries like Russia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan (Schabas, 2019). The United Nations (UN) came up with a non-binding verdict that advocates for the universal abolition of capital punishment. Nations like China, United States, Nigeria, and Indonesia still practice the death penalty. Other nations include Islamic nations, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan.

History

Execution of offenders and criminals began many years ago up to the 19th century, without an effective penal system. There existed no considerable substitute to guarantee incapacitation and deterrence of lawbreakers. In the ancient period, the executions entailed torture with painful and cruel approaches (Chen, 2017). Communal penalties for offenders comprise of banishment, blood money payment, shunning, and execution. The response to criminalities by neighboring communities, clans, or tribes encompassed a formal apology, blood feuds, compensation, and tribal warfare. A vendetta or blood feud happens when arbitration between communities or families fails, or a system of arbitration does not exist.

The ancient justice system of execution prevailed before the arbitration framework's evolution founded on systematic religion and state participation. The punishment may occur due to crime, code of honor, or land disputes. In early modern and medieval Europe, before the emergence of present prison structures, the death penalty remained a discipline method for even minor crimes (Chen, 2017). The death penalty targeted those assumed to practice witchcraft and sodomy that people claimed undermined Christendom. Recently, the evolution of contemporary nation-states, impartiality emerged as related to the idea of legal and natural rights.

The sensible choice approach, a useful strategy to criminology which vindicates discipline as a method of restriction as different from vengeance, hints back to the Cesare Beccaria. Its agreements based on punishments and crimes (established in 1764) remains the initial comprehensive evaluation of capital punishment and the need to eliminate the death penalty (Chen, 2017). In Germany, during the Nazi period, there existed three forms of capital punishment that included decapitation, hanging, and death by shooting. Contemporary methods of execution since the presentation of firearms involves firing squads. Some authoritarian or communist states use capital punishment as a form of political oppression.

Elimination of Death Penalty

Political transformation as nations changed from dictatorship to democracy has led to most countries abolishing capital punishment. Also, becoming a member of the EU requires a country to abolish the death penalty (Schabas, 2019). However, the United States still retains the death penalty making the issue a contentious subject. Some crusaders believe that juveniles need an exemption from executions. A public execution refers to a form of discipline in which people voluntarily attend an execution to ensure executive accountability (Schabas, 2019). Throughout history, several regimes performed public executions to warn or indicate authority to those under its jurisdiction, whether they remain lawbreakers, political opponents, or enemies. However, most countries have ended the practice.

The death penalty remains a controversial subject since activists regard the practice as inhumane and irreversible. The advocates against the death penalty argue that the practice lacks a deterrent outcome, supports a culture of violence, and discriminates against the poor and the minorities (Schabas, 2019). Those who advocate for the death penalty assert that it discourages crime, ensures that convicted offenders do not carry out crime again, helps prosecutors and investigators in plea bargaining, and remains a just punishment. Advocates of the death penalty claim that the punishment remains morally justified in serious offenses, such as mass murder, genocide, and massacre.

Those against the practice suggest that the death penalty remains an act of revenge that cannot get tolerated. Others assert that approving retribution as a component of justice means that life without liberation remains a satisfactory alternative. Moreover, punishing killing with execution remains an exceptional method for a violent act (Schabas, 2019). Human rights activists have the idea that discipline through execution remains the highest abuse of human rights. Human rights activists argue that the right to life remains a vital component of humanity and leads to psychological torture to the victim and those related to or close to the victim.

Conclusion

The death penalty remains a controversial topic that requires more research to have a global viewpoint on the subject. Religious opinions, international organizations, cultural practices, and governments hold differing views on capital punishment. As people debate on corporal punishment and whether it requires total abolition, the fact remains that it violates the offender's rights and inflicts psychological distress to the offenders. More so, the practice remains irreversible, which means that a wrongfully convicted criminal may receive a death sentence, end up dead, only later for people to realize the individual had not committed the crime.

References

Chen, D. L. (2017). The deterrent effect of the death penalty? Evidence from British commutations during World War I. Evidence from British Commutations during World War I (Feb 26, 2017).
www.papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2816255

Kleinstuber, R., Joy, S., & Mansley, E. A. (2016). Into the abyss: The unintended consequences of death penalty abolition. U. Pa. JL & Soc. Change, 19, 185.
www./heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/hybrid19&section=11

Schabas, W. A. (2019). International law and the abolition of the death penalty. In Comparative Capital Punishment. Edward Elgar Publishing.
www.elgaronline.com/view/edcoll/9781786433244/9781786433244.00022.xml.