DeathPenalty Should ExistDeathpenalty has a long history and it is always seemed as the most severe penalty.It is easy for death penalty to end the life of a human being, so many peoplethink it is inhuman. However, there also many people who really don’t want toabolish it, such as the victim’s family. Nowadays, most of the countries haveabolished the death penalty, countries which haven’t abolished it are mainlyconcentrate in the Middle East, north Africa and Asia,such as China, the UnitedStates, Japan and India still retain the death penalty. In recent years, thedeath penalty has been aroused people’s attention and the heated discussionstowards it are right on their ways.
In my opinion, the death penalty shouldn’tbe abolished. The followings are my reasons:First, the countries canstrengthen its rule over people by the death penalty. The reason is that thedeath penalty serves to highlight the state’s power over life and death. For aregime like Vietnam’s, the swift carrying out of a death sentence, especiallywhen performed in public, serves to highlight the state’s power over life anddeath and enhance political control over the domestic constituency(Daniel 2016). Some countries which are peaceful think they don’tneed the death penalty to govern people and abolish it.
Second,death penaltycannot be replaced by other punishment. A person should receive death penalty,when he kill people deliberately. when a person kills people, he does notreceive death penalty, but other punishment, such as life imprisonment. Thelife imprisonment is a waste of resource and once the prisoner runs away fromthe jail, it is horrible thing to people. While death penalty won’t make thathappen.
On 22 July 2011 Anders Behring Breivikkilled eight people by detonating a van bomb amid Regjeringskvartalet in Oslo,then shot dead 69 participants of a Workers’ Youth League (AUF) summer camp onthe island of Utøya(Lewis & Cowell 2012). On 24 August 2012 Brevity was adjudged sane and sentenced to containment—aspecial form of a prison sentence that can be extended indefinitely again andagain—with an approximate time frame of 21 years and a minimum time of 10years, the maximum penalty in Norway(Andreas 2014). The judgment is unwiseobviously and most of Norwegians want the boy to be sentenced to death. Ifpeople who cause great harm can walk in the street again?it is very frightened.However the Norwegian law doesn’t have the death penalty. In summary, it isnecessary for country to remain the death penalty to punish people who a greatmistake which isn’t forgiven.
In addition, death penaltyhas always been considered the most effective method for the State to crackdown on grave crimes. Death penalty is the most effective deterrence to gravecrimes, which has been the key basis for the State to retain death penalty.Either in the past or at present, the claimed reasons for preserving deathpenalty by nations unexceptionally include this reason(Rider, 1992). The death penalty candecrease crime rate effectively. Because of the reason, India won’tabolition the death penalty. Law Commission of India once declared that takinginto account the practical situation of India, the disparities in socialeducation and levels of morality and education, the country’s vast area anddemographic diversity, and the urgent need to preserve the rule of law andsocial order, India could not risk experimenting with abolition of the deathpenalty(Daniel 2016).
Theories on criminal behavior provide an ambiguousprediction regard-ing the impact of capital punishment. On the one hand, thethreat of the death penalty may operate to increase the expected costs ofmurder and thus reduce incentives to engage in homicidal behavior. On the otherhand, executions may stimulate more homicides by validating the socialacceptability of re-tributive actions (Shepherd, 2005). But we can use somedate to prove that the death penalty can decrease crime rate. According theresearch conclusion of professor Ehrlich in 1975 of the relationship betweenmurder rate and death penalty execution between 1935 and 1969 in the US, Thehigher the execution rate, the lower the murder rate; one extra execution ofdeath penalty in the crime peak season a year might reduce seven to eightmurders on average(Zhang 2009).
Conclusion of Professor StephenLayson drawn by analyzing murder statistics in the two time periods from 1936to 1977 and from 1934 to 1986 using Ehrlich’s approach in 1985 was as follows:there was negative correlation between murder rate and arrest rate, and betweenthe conviction and the possibility of execution after such conviction, that is,with the increase of probability of these penalty variables, murder ratedropped; at the same time, the exchange value of the estimated penaltyvariables was as follows: Every execution of death penalty could reduce 8.5 to28 murders(Zhang 2009). To a certain extent, the dateprove that the death penalty make crime rate be lower.