All states should institute a moratorium on executions

All s should institute a moratorium on executions Introduction There is no justice in killing and as such this kind of punishment should be abolished lest we become unjust society. Executions have been the way some states are using to apply to hardcore criminals in the name of obtaining justice for the victims of the crimes committed. Due to several heated debates over the issue of executions, some states are considering changing their views on such harsh kind of justice. Some proponents of executions argue that executions save lives by reducing the murderers who are prone to committing murders in large scale. Professor Isaac Ehlrich is on record saying that each prosecution saved eight innocent lives and therefore is highly justified to stop the frequent criminal activities (Fagan 1). I do not agree that argument because it doesn’t have a scientific back up to support this evidence. This type of penalty is the worst from of human injustice since the courts are not always 100 percent efficient since they rely on evidence which sometimes is biased. This may result into wrongful judgment to an innocent party who may face executions for crimes he never committed. This is possible and true since there are several known accused criminals who have been sentenced to execution but appealed against the ruling and the judgments reversed, a demonstration that court judgments do not always reflect the truth. When a person is executed on wrongs he never committed, then it sets a bad precedent for human rights violations which should not be accepted in the modern world. There another letdown of capital punishment is that there is no way to rescind the sentence if the offender is later found innocent unlike other forms of punishment which are possible to reverse. This can be a great injustice to the victims since his life shall have been taken away mistakenly. The emotional distress for family members caused by the fact that their beloved ones are to be killed in their knowledge is quite tormenting. Dezhbakhsh, Rubin, and Shepherd (2) argue that executions are the cheapest way to deal with criminals instead of providing them with life imprisonment. Capital punishment is costly due to appeals which are always in higher courts leading more cost of hiring lawyers due to the horrific nature of such judgments. People do not take such decisions by the courts lightly and this always makes them to appeal for fear of losing their lives or the life of their loved ones. One of the courts strongest vies for capital punishment is that imprisoning a criminal gang is very expensive due to the cost of feeding him and the security details involved in his custody. They argue that a criminal may stay for very many years in prison especially when he is a youthful criminal and this may lead to wasted of public funds. Fagan also argues that the state of Florida spent between $25 million and $50million more per year on capital punishment, clear evidence that capital punishment is more expensive than life sentence. I totally disagree with these arguments, because the life of a person cannot be viewed in terms of economic parameters. In as much as a person may have committed any mistake, there is a possibility of reforming since the mistake may have been done with influence of drugs. Some also argue that there are numerous theological arguments which support executions and therefore is justified by religious leaders. I totally disagree with these arguments because there are also several theological arguments which are against executions. Many theological writings also argue that executions are against their beliefs and are strongly opposed by gods. The family members of the affected criminals are also psychologically affected by their permanent loss of their beloved one. Most people value so much the family ties to an extent that they may find it hard to stay with the knowledge that their beloved one has been executed. Most of them would rather stay with the knowledge that their beloved one has been imprisoned for life since they will be happy that he is alive. The family connections are highly valued among most family and they find pleasure in visiting their loved one in prison where they can easily find him and communicate properly with him. The decision to have executions as a means of punishment is as a result of political initiatives into the judicial system. Since politicians cannot be trusted with such high magnitude decisions since they are likely to misuse it to eliminate their potential enemies hence abuse the process. This is also from the fact that some courts are not independent and may be influenced by external selfish forces who want to settle political foes. Most capital offences are awarded so as to give a stern warning to those who would have committed such crimes in future to shy away from committing similar crimes. I do not accept this argument, since there have been several executions of criminals in various parts of the world and we have not witnessed a decline in criminal gang activities. I think the best way to handle this is to accept that executions is not the best way to handle criminal activities and look for a more effective way to ensure that the criminals are reformed in the most humane way. Conclusion It is prudent when all states institute a moratorium on executions since it’s not a good idea in the contemporary world. The lives which have been taken due to executions have not offered the world as a safe place free from criminal activities since crime is still evident in all the states. Executions should never be given a place in the new society since there are several ways to prevent and address the criminal activities which might take place today. Works Cited Dezhbakhsh, Hashem, Paul H. Rubin, and Joanna Shepherd. Does Capital Punishment Have a Deterrent Effect? New Evidence from Post-moratorium Panel Data. 1999. Web. 12 Sep. 2013. . Fagan, Jeffrey A. “ Capital Punishment: Deterrent Effects & Capital Costs.” Columbia Law School. N. d. Web. 12 Sep. 2013. .