“Have you ever thought of how many criminals escape punishment, and yet, the victims never have the chance to do that?” this is the question of J. Edgar Hoover, the late director of Federal Bureau of Investigations in the United States.
If someone was murdered, is it just? Is it not violating human’s right to live? But why should we take the lives also of the killers in return? Think about this, a criminal on a death row still have the chance to prepare for his death, make a will of testament for his family, and even change his life for the remaining days he have. But a victim of murder by stabbing or a victim of rape, theft and other crimes, do they have the chance of preparing for their deaths? Of course they do not have chance anymore. They are killed mercilessly and even worse, their bodies are just thrown elsewhere. Lucky to those victims whose are bodies found and given a proper burial. But what about to those who are not? To those bodies left in a place on earth where no one could see and they are left rotten already, is it humane?
They say that the death penalty condemns the innocent to die. Before any person is executed, there is an extremely strict process to be done by twelve members of carefully selected jury to decide. There, all the proofs of whether the criminal is guilty or not are presented and cautiously tested. Saying that innocents are condemned to die is not a valid argument for in the first place they will not be imprisoned if they are not guilty of the crime. And the department of justice is firm on a life and death situations like a person to be executed on a crime he committed. The one who should be regarded as innocent is not the one who will be executed but the victim who died. The victim is an innocent person mercilessly killed by a murderer. For whatever reason it was, the thing is you should not kill an innocent person.
Thousands of people are attacking death penalty. The first argument that they always raise is an innocent man or woman is sentenced of an execution of the crime he or she did not commit. They say that these people are victims of death penalty and it is unjust for them. Do they not realize and remember the victims who are killed of the murderers? An article from the internet says:
“Out of a sample of 164 paroled Georgia murderers, eight committed subsequent murders within seven years of release. A study of twenty Oregon murderers released on parole in 1979 found that one (i.e., five percent) had committed a subsequent homicide within five years of release. Another study found that of 11,404 persons originally convicted of "willful homicide" and released during 1965 and 1974, 34 were returned to prison for commission of a subsequent criminal homicide during the first year alone.”
If these murderers are executed and penalized for the crimes they did at first, many innocent lives should have been saved. If people will continue to commit such crimes, this world will never be a better place to live in especially for the future generations. Death penalty is just like a lesson to children. In childhood, we learned that in order for you to receive a reward you must do something good and if you do something bad, surely, you will have to do a penalty. That is just the way it is. These laws are created to attain order in the society. Its purpose is not to kill people but to achieve and manage peace and order in the world.
The very notion that one could be cruel while punishing a guilty murderer for murdering an innocent victim is pathetic.
Death penalty is moral and just. We must always remember that no one has to be executed or sentenced to death penalty if no one murders and take lives of the innocent people. Murderers are not innocent people fighting for their lives in prison. Let us put in our mentality that victim rights are more important than criminal rights. DEATH PENALTY YES, MURDER NO!
