An eye for an eye is not a good solution for a peace lover. Think if you are giving punishment in the eye for an eye, then you have to rape to rapists, beat the sadists and we have to burn the arsonists. This would not be possible and this is worst punishment you can give to the convicted. These types of punishments will definitely spoil the forename of the human nature and peace won’t be prevailing if the violence punishment exists in the society.
There are several attempts are taken to clean up the death penalty system. But in common point of view that it would not be so easy. Now death penalties are considered as an unkind one in the legal system. These kinds of punishments are proven to well thought-out plan from the racists who still believe that death of a convicted is the ultimate satisfaction in the society.
Many may think that what is the use of the death penalty when some one committing serious crime. Timothy is the well know person for getting the death penalty in the recent time and he got executed as well. Timothy execution of death penalty is the first one after a long 37 years. Death penalty should be there to punish someone who did a huge crime that affects many people. In the case of Timothy the death penalty is given to him because he involved in the 1995 Oklahoma bomb blast. In that bomb blast 168 persons were killed.
(Source: “The death penalty debate”,
Research studies in the past ten years shows that the homicide killing is some what reduced.
These studies conducted in the various jurisdictions and compared with the number of killings over many years. The murder rates are reducing as compared to the death penalties are raising. Many should understand the death penalties are given to the convicted one and not for personal reasons. These judgments are given to the convicted, keeping in mind the criminal and conviction rates will decrease.
No one can forget this bomb blast; this is a blood bath event that is registered in our minds for ever. Many of us would agree death penalty would be given for this serious crime. President George W Bush said that this should be the punishment could be given to the convicted. Those who lost the lives in the bomb blast may have some satisfaction that the criminal is put under a fair trial. Always Bush has some support towards the death penalty. He is the same man who given death penalty and executed 152 peoples as he is in the office of Texas.
Since for them they have to think that giving death penalty would not reduce such crimes, the reaction would be exactly in the opposite side. These death penalties will increase such crimes in the future. However giving death penalty to a serious crime may have intuited some threat to criminals, but it would not affect the serious criminals like terrorists. Rather it will induce them to do such crimes again and again. They still have to consider the fact the criminal rates are still increasing after many executions given to them.
There are some cases that the death penalties have some positive influence in the society.
Growing number people are now protesting against the death penalty. There are many people in the U.S who are raising the thought against this. Many states in the U.S are considering now to eradicate the death penalty in the Law System. Many votes are in against the death penalty in the survey conducted across the U.S. Recently Five States in the U.S changing their ideas towards removing the death penalty in their legal system.
There is a confident vote taken in March in the state Massachusetts to bring the death penalty again in the system. It is defeated by a broad scope and many voted against the death penalty. I believe that the violence in any form should not be encouraged whether in the death penalty or in any form acts that would give a serious threat or problem to someone. An eye to eye is not a solution for dealing with the death penalty, if the convicted kills some one, it does not mean that he would be thought a lesson by giving death penalty to him. In other words death penalty is not solution to the violence in any society. It increases the violence more and more, in some places it may show some sought of decrease in the crime rates, but eventually in the end you cannot beat crime by doing the same crime to the convicted. It shows that whole legal system is following a violence pattern that would bring more similar cases in the future.
According to John J. Donohue III who is working as a law professor at Yale possessing a doctorate in economics and Justin Wolfers, a famous economist of University of Pennsylvania did said about the death penalty in Stanford Law Review in 2005. The death penalty “is applied so rarely that the number of homicides it can plausibly have caused or deterred cannot reliably be disentangled from the large year-to-year changes in the homicide rate caused by other factors”. These conclusions proposed that the death penalty may have some effects on the homicide deaths, but it is not conclusive to follow. They also said we cannot arrive at a decision to implement the death penalty from those words.
(Source: “Does Death Penalty save Lives? A New Debate”,
“I am definitely against the death penalty on lots of different grounds,” proposed by Joanna M. Shepherd working as a law professor in Emory having a doctorate in economics and has some contributions to quite a few researches and studies and she also added that she accept the fact that people would rather accept some death penalties. Adding to these arguments Professor Wolfers said “To say anything else is to brand you an imbecile”. He strongly condemns and criticizes the studies and researches done in the death penalties in his article Stanford Law Review article. Canada did not put any one to death penalty since 1962. However murder rates in the United States and in Canada bit has same murder rates.
This proves that death penalty eradication will be very effective.
(Source: “Does Death Penalty save Lives? A New Debate”,
Oklahoma is tragic event, no one ever say a word against that. But you cannot change the things that happened by punishing the convicted. Treating the person with morality is a most important one in the legal system. What is Morality? Morality is defined as "the finding the distinction between the right and wrong." As we are humans we are supposed to be deserved for the appraisal and also for punishment for the bad thing we done in certain times. Punishing in violence is the cruelest punishment you can give to the sinned person.
(Source:” The Death Penalty: Morally Defensible?” http://www.hoshuha.com/articles/deathpenalty.html)
One of the victim of the Oklahoma bomb blast said that the easiest targets of the death penalty would be the poor who is having no choice of having the perfect legal ones for them. Did you ever hear the news that the rich peoples are put in to the death penalty. No not at all. Consider in the case of DuPont who killed the Olympic Wrestler got an only few years of sentence. If the convicted was the poor one, the lawyers may have sought the death penalty. Poor need to be given proper assistance in the legal assistance and the convicted must be given punishment in the non-violence way (i.e.) they have to given sentenced for the life term rather than giving death penalty.
(Source: “The Death Penalty Debate”,