Capital Punishment The Best Choice For A Modern Society?

Capital punishment is the ultimate punitive practice, sanctioned by the law of some modern
states in the United States, such as Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Virginia, Tennessee, South
Carolina, Arizona, Delaware, Utah, California, even Washington, Florida, as well as other
countries like Egypt or Indonesia, with the outcome that an individual can be literally put to
death or executed by the state, in order to punish him for a serious crime, such as murder,
treason, espionage, genocide or other crimes against humanity, to name a few.
In todays society, most countries have abolished this practice in favor of other punishments,
more humane, such as life imprisonment. However, there are around 58 countries in the world
which are known to be still using this form of punishment for serious offenses. Moreover, more
than half of the worlds population lives in countries in which the capital offense is still applied,
such as China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, even India.
While some people are in favor of this method as a way to effectively keep in place the possible
occurrence of major crime outbursts, most people adhering to the basic principles of human
rights and respect their moral beliefs will condemn this practice vehemently.
The reason is simple: the doctrine of human rights, applied in all countries which are considered
modern, stresses the importance of the basic human right called life. According to the human
rights doctrine, the one who takes the liberty of applying the capital offense punishment
massively disregards the most important right a person can have and opens the room for
vengeance issues from the deceaseds children or brothers, not to say it can make things hard
for deceaseds family that can no longer financially support themselves (if the person executed
was a man who worked to support his family members).
Respecting the right to life of someone, no matter what crime they have committed, means that
the human rights system is thoroughly applied and the society has evolved from the ancient
barbarism which applied the law of the Talion, meaning they used same form of punishment to
those who committed a crime. This way, the wrong committed was perpetuated and the society
entered a vicious cycle which promoted evil and violence.
From the religious point of view, a true Christian will not support this punishment as a way to
retaliate. The capital punishment not only massively disregards one of the Ten Commandments,

which states that Thou shall not kill, but also stands against everything that Christianity is
promoting, such as forgiveness and tolerance. According to the teachings of the Bible, life is
given by God and only God can take it away. Therefore, it is forbidden for someone to take his
own life or the life of another.
There are some moralists who consider that someone who has killed another person deserves
the same fate, since the evil which was caused has disturbed the order of the world and can
only be redeemed by applying the same fate to the wrongdoer. This is usually the case with the
Talions law, as discussed earlier.
Christianity has condemned this practice; since it considers that the life of a person is sacred
and cannot be touched under any circumstances. If someone has violated this sacred value, it
must be punished according to the humans laws, since the Divine law professes forgiveness,
provided that the sinner is repenting for their sins. If they do not show any indication of
atonement, the Christian belief is that the punishment for a serious crime such as murder can
only be given by God, after the sinners death and will consist of an eternal life of damnation,
without the sight of the Creator. Buddhism teaches that murderers shall be rehabilitated if
possible; Buddhist monks usually are in favor of the abolition of this type of punishment, while
others believe that this punishment is a result of ones actions in their past, causing bad karma.
Hinduism teaches non-violence, but also states that even if this form of punishment is applied,
the soul cannot be killed, only its exterior and visible shell, the body. Muslim preaches, in the
Quran, that capital punishment shall be exerted on those who wage war against Allah and His
Messenger and on those who have extramarital affairs, who shall be punished with death by
stoning. Judaism approves, by principle, the death punishment, but in effect this type of
punishment can only be applied with the mutual consent of all the 23 judges of the Sanhedrin,
the council of the Land of Israel, and this type of punishment is considered rather hypothetically,
more like an upper limit in the realm of punishments, which can only be applied by God, not by
mere creatures like humans.
From the psychological point of view, killing as a form of punishment will only create the belief
that life is cheap and can be treated easily, which in effect questions the effectiveness of this
punitive form. Those who live in countries that condone the death sentence and who are
inclined towards this form of aggressive behavior, will be encouraged to take the same stand
against those who do them wrong, similarly as the position of the state against serious
offenders.

Although the citizens of the state which applies the death sentence may be impressed by the
fact that the state has a strong stand against serious offenders, this may not necessarily mean
that the murder rate has decreased, due to the belief previously stated, that life is cheap.
From another point of view, being condemned to the death sentence means subjecting the
person in question to psychological torture, not to say the dignity of the individual is severely
affected. As opposed to other forms of punishment, death sentence is irreversible, which can
make room for wrongful execution of innocent individuals and miscarriage of justice.
Since one of the basic law principles is that better free the guilty than let an innocent person
suffer (or in this case, die), the capital punishment is not something that should be in effect in
any country, since no amount of compensation can redeem the wrong done by an unfair
execution.
From a social point of view, those who oppose the death sentence consider that this form of
punishment is more easily applied to people from ethnic minorities and poor backgrounds.
Although, from the same point of view, death sentence can be of help to prosecutors and the
police when they bargain to obtain a good plea, those who are in favor of capital punishment
consider that it can help deter potential criminals from committing more serious crimes and that
it is a rightful punishment for atrocious crimes.
From a political point of view, death sentence can be used as a means for mass manipulation
and gain more voters, especially if the politician in question aligns himself or herself to the
collective opinion and takes a strong stand against or for it.
In the end, I firmly believe that capital punishment should never be allowed, under any
circumstance, to exist in any of the modern legal systems implemented in todays societies. My
opinion is motivated by the fact that no matter how atrocious the outcome of ones actions is,
the legal system must punish the crime, not the criminal.
Any person, no matter what they did, deserve at least a chance for atoning for their crimes
under strict surveillance, which is not the case if they are condemned to the capital sentence.
This form of punishment puts an end to the criminals life and prevents all possible rehabilitation
and atonement on his part. Not to mention that, for some criminals, death is an easy way out of
their problems, while life imprisonment is the true test of courage when confronted with their
conscience and their guilt.