Death Penalty Debate: Arguments and Rebuttals

This assignment delves into the complex debate surrounding the death penalty. It analyzes arguments both for and against capital punishment, providing rebuttals to common positions. The document also discusses various methods of execution and suggests alternative punishments like supporting victims' families and imprisonment.

Case study analysis report

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
TASK...............................................................................................................................................1
Five reasons to not abolish death penalty..............................................................................1
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Death-penalty shows terror by this name only. It is given to those person who do serious crimes
in their life such as killing any one. There are various method of giving executions that are used by
government of different nations such as shooting, beheading, hanging and giving injections like
'humane'. These last method that is of injection is very brutal as people do not die in few minutes.
Instead of that it takes half an hour or in some cases more than that. It has been determined that one
dose of humane is not adequate to kill the person. It takes more than one doze. These methods of
executions are given public-ally in most of the countries which is good as they deserves such kind of
punishment . Government of Australia should give the penalty of death from their nation.
1

INTRODUCTION
Death penalty can be simply defined as punishment of death that is given by court of law for
very serious crime (Hood and Hoyle, 2015). The Supreme Court states that this punishment or rule is not
violating the rule of Eight Amendment which was a ban on cruel and unusual punishment. It is right in
the eyes of law or court. But most of the people are against this law. As this once announced are not
cancelled. The results is hanging of criminal. The present report is based on the rebuttal of abolishment
of the death penalty. In this project, the five reasons to to not abolish death punishment are explained.
TASK
Five reasons to not abolish death penalty
Death penalty means sentenced to death given by court or law. This is a very dangerous
punishment which is given for most serious crime such as murder. This is right according to the law and
supreme court. But different people are not supporting this. They give several reasons to abandon this
law or punishment :
 Law can't take it back : This penalty is irreversible in nature. In most cases, people are flawless
but due to the lack of evidences, he or she is sentenced to death. In various cases, people are
paying for those crimes that they did not committed. Texas man Cameron Todd Willingham was
executed in Texas in the year of 2004 for supposedly setting fire that killed his three daughters
(Mathias, 2013). He was given death-penalty. But after some month, the evidences shows that
he was not guilty and he did not set fire that caused the death of his daughters. But it came too
late. So, by this case, it is very clear that death punishment is not changed once given by the
court. The rebuttal to this statement : But it occurs in some cases. In most of cases offender are
really guilty and it is better to give them punishment. Every one think that crime is bad and it
needed to be stop. Criminals are not thinking before doing any crime. So, to give them lesson it
is better to give death penalty by the government. Every one loves from their lives. May be due
to that fear they stop doing such crimes. This does not means that stopping executions would
stop murders. People who determines to kill any one then at any cost he or she will kill him. If
government do strict punishment to criminals then it might change the thinking of some people.

 It does not deter criminals : This is the second statement for abolishing death penalty. The
punishment of death cannot change the thinking of real criminals. There is no credible indication
or evidence that the penalty of death deters crime effectively in comparison to the punishment
of prison. Murder of any one can be done in three situations. In first situation, one has taken
contract to kill someone. It can be done accidentally without any intention or planned murder. It
can also be done for taking revenge. Therefore, no one can change the mind of criminal in two
cases that is in the case of contract and revenge. But this is not better to kill that murderer. Then
what will be the difference in him or the court (McGann and Sandholtz, 2012). Court can only
change his nature or behaviour by giving him or her time. Law can also give that criminal prison
for some years like 13 or 20 years of prison. This can definitely change their lives. If government
want to give him punishment and wishes to realise them their fault. Then this is the best option
to do so. But if they give them penalty of death then he or she will neither realise their fault nor
make it correct. In-fact, this is a very simple punishment for them as they get instant death. But
it will be better, when they think that they have done wrong and regret on their faults. In
Canada, twenty seven years after abolishing the punishment of death, it has been seen that ,
there is 45 % declination in the murders cases across the overall nation. Hence, the government
of Australia should also prohibit the law of death penalty. Instead of that they can give whole
life imprison or 10 to 12 years of prison.
 Rebuttal to this statement : It is wrong that death punishment will not reform the criminals. The
fear of death reform even dangerous persons. If the above statements says that people do not
change their thinking even due to death penalty and they will do crimes. So, why should
government give them another chance to reform them. Court have to take their lives so that
they do not kill any other person in future. If law make them free only by giving some simple
punishment like prison for some years then there is no guarantee that he or she will not do
crime. In-fact, to take revenge they will do crime again as because they become habitual to do
any type of crime. So, it is better to kill them as they become mentally sick and should not walk
freely in the society as they are dangerous for society. Even if government make them free then
normal people think it is very easy to kill some one and get free from law. And they also think to
do any type of crime. So, government ought to kill those people who are threats for society so
that whole people of society do not even think to do any kind of crime after that.
 There is no humane way to kill : In 2006, a injection named as 'humane' was given to a lady
called Angel Nieves Diaz in order to kill her as she was sentenced to death by the court. But this
2

kind of punishment was very brutal or cruel. In this method of execution, the criminal was given
an injection known as 'humane' to make them die. But when this was given to that lady, it took
more than thirty minutes and even two doses was given to her after that she died ( Finlay, 2011).
This shows a demon or cruel face of government as it gives a lot of pain to a criminal and they
make them feel the real scene of death. The other brutal methods of execution that was taken
in use consist of shooting, hanging and beheading. Such type of death was given only to run the
wheel of violence as this does not provide justice to the family of victims. In-fact, this is not right
to kill the person by giving them such type of severing death. This game of terror has to be stop
by government. They should think about the life of criminals as they are also a human. It is
another matter that he or she committed any serious crime. But if government really wants to
change or decrease the crimes from their country, then they should alter the way of giving
punishment. They can give the criminals punishment as a penalty of paying large amount of
money to the families of victims. They can also order them to survive their whole life behind
bars. This type of punishment realises them their faults when they have to live whole life
without their family members in a prison.
 Rebuttal of this statement : The above statement states that execution should not given by
injecting injection like 'Humane'. But it is a better way to give them punishment . They should
also realise the pain of death as they also do the same thing to other person by killing them
brutally or cruelly. In some cases due to dowry, bride gets burn kill by the family member of
bridegroom. They do not realise the pain from which she dies. So, it is also good to realise the
killers the taste of death by killing them slowly so that they realise their faults. Giving injections
of 'humane', beheading, shooting, hanging are some of the best way of giving death-penalty
which learns criminals a lesson of their crimes. So, that no one even think about doing crime in
their dreams.
 It makes a public spectacle of an individual's death : Executions in some of the nations are
frequently undertaken in in-front of people or highly public manner. In Iran, criminals are given
execution public-ally which spread terror of death in all people which is not right. In- fact, in
some places of United States, live broadcasts of lethal injections are being represented to the
people. It has been seen that in some cases, single dose of injections was not adequate to kill a
human. It also takes a lot of time for dying that person and this happens in a public place so that
the common people feel fear to do such type of things in future. As per UN experts of human
rights, there is no good effect of executions in public and there is also no requirement of doing
3

so. This only enhances the cruelty, inhuman and shameful nature of this punishment. If
government think seriously about this then they recognise each and every kind of executions are
violated the right to life. So, this should not happen. Government has to stop this cruel game of
killing people. They should treat them like a human. Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui was a Amnesty
International's Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa (Smith, 2012). According to
his view point, executions that are given public-ally are a gross insult of humanity or human
dignity. This cannot be tolerated any more.
 Rebuttal of this statements : Giving executions in front of people is a best way to remove the
thinking of doing crimes from all the civilians of the country. Australian government should give
death-penalty to criminals public-ally so that other people present at that place feel fear of
death and do not commit such crimes in future. This will make a good environment which will
be free from crimes like reap, murder, kidnapping, etc. Rapist should kill cruelly by the method
of beheading so that no other man even think about misbehaving with any girl. By this way, girl
or females will feel safe and secure while travelling any where alone at any time (day or night).
Is it is not against humanity to kill a man or to rape a single girl by more than one person. If it is
not inhumanity then death-penalty to those criminals is also not against humanity. It is totally
correct to give death punishment to such people who do not value lives of other people and kill
them brutally without thinking about their family members.
 There is better way to help the families of murder victims : By giving executions to criminals do
not support the and end up the pain of the family or relatives of victim. In order to minimise the
burden of families of victims, government can order murderer to give help to them by giving 50
percent of their total earning to them. This can decrease the tension of livelihood to the widow
of victim as she was not capable of running the home or taking care of her children. This is a
better option instead of executing them and also making their family handicapped in terms of a
guardian who can earn money for their family.
 Rebuttal to this statement : The family member of murder victims are undergoing in such a
situations of trauma and loss (Liebman and Clarke, 2011). No one cannot fulfil that loss even
after paying his whole life for that. Money will not return the lives of any one. This also do not
minimise the pain of the family members of victims. So, it is better to kill that criminal who is
responsible for such a drastic condition. In addition, government of Australia should implement
a rule that the family members of murderer have to give certain amount of money to the
victims' family.
4

CONCLUSION
From the above based report, it can be concluded that death penalty should not be prohibited
from the law of government as it is good to maintain a safe and secure society which will be free from
crimes as well as criminals. Different methods of executions are explained in this project. Five reasons to
abolish this death-penalty and their rebuttal is also described here. Government can take another
punishment like taking care of the families of victims by earning money for them, giving prison to
offender, etc.
REFERENCES
Books & journal
Hood, R. & Hoyle, C. (2015). The death penalty: A worldwide perspective. OUP Oxford.
Mathias, M. D. (2013). The sacralization of the individual: Human rights and the abolition of the death
penalty. American Journal of Sociology. 118(5).1246-1283.
McGann, A. & Sandholtz, W. (2012). Patterns of death penalty abolition, 1960–2005: Domestic and
international factors. International Studies Quarterly. 56(2). 275-289.
Finlay, L. (2011). Exporting the Death Penalty-Reconciling International Police Cooperation and the
Abolition of the Death Penalty in Australia. Sydney L. Rev..33. 95.
Smith, R. J. (2012). The geography of the death penalty and its ramifications. BUL Rev.. 92. 227.
Liebman, J. S..& Clarke, P. (2011). Minority Practice, Majority's Burden: The Death Penalty Today. Ohio
St. J. Crim. L.. 9. 255.
Entzeroth, L. S. (2011). The end of the beginning: The politics of death and the American death penalty
regime in the twenty-first century. Or. L. Rev.. 90. 797.
Steiker, C. S. & Steiker, J. M. (2013). The death penalty and mass incarceration: Convergences and
divergences. Am. J. Crim. L.. 41. 189.
5

Online
The Facts: 13 Reasons to Oppose the Death Penalty. 2017. [Online]. Available
through:<https://oadp.org/facts/13-reasons>. [Accessed on 23rd September 2017].
6