The Permissibility of Capital Punishment

- May 17, 2014

Interdiction

Capital punishment is a solution for each person who is involved somehow in a murder except for a killer. Parents of a crime victem will feel much better if the one who took their son's/daughter's life being executed upon his/her crime, also the state might save money of accommodating and feeding and another life if they do not throw the killer into a jail for the rest of his/her life. However, some would claim; it is a horrifying moment to see a human being being put to death (killing them intentionally), so why even discussing the idea of justifying prosecution. In fact, convicts who accused with premeditated murder can be punished by jailed for life, until they die naturally. Therefore, we can save one life instead of losing two, the victim and the murderer, by abandoning capital punishment. Life in prison is the suitable penalty for killers, to keep their danger away from society and keep them breathing; therefore, fairness would be best served. The above claims are almost an extraction of the anti-capital-punishment campaign point of view, although there might be other reasons that support their point of view (preventing death penalty), which will be discussed in following articles. This essay would show the necessity of the contravention sentence, capital punishment.

Religious Reasons

In many religions, capital punishment is an approved method to recompense the guilty party of intentional murder, to repay his duties to the society by sending a warning to whom intention to commit another killing when the first murderer death sentence. In Islam for example, the Qur’an says "...If anyone kills a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all people. And if anyone saves a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all people"[1], and also indicates that “and there is life for you in (the law of) retaliation, O men of understanding, that you may guard yourselves.”[2] However, there is an injection that the life of the murder can be saved with, “the Qur'an legislates the death penalty for murder, although forgiveness and compassion are strongly encouraged. The murder victim's family is given a choice to either insist on the death penalty, or to pardon the perpetrator and accept monetary compensation for their loss (2:178).”[3] Therefore, capital punishment is a right for a victim’s family, and they have the choice to whether exercise it or not.

In Christianity also there is such law, capital punishment, which is ”another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which are the legitimate avengers of crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage and violence. Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord.”[4] As a result, put to death law found to provide security to the society and to repress violence, by using capital punishment to make an example of what would face who intend to commit a murderer. Overall, capital punishment does exist in Islam and Christianity, the two high parentages of followers in modern world, and is mentioned in almost each other religious book.

Logical Evidence

There are many logic reasons that support the capital punishment notion, which present the importance of this remedy. Although Self-defence is permissible in many jurisdictions and seen as right, some might consider death penalty is a crime. One could argue that in self-defense there is no choice for the defendant rather than exercising his or her right to end the danger by killing the attacker. However, there is a choice for the defendant that to give the attacker the chance to harm, even though it seems to be not the suitable solution in this particular situation, but it stills a choice. In fact, by ruling to put a murderer on death row while having the chance and the time to decide whether to end the killer life or not, is might be the best way to stop other people with the intention to commit a murder.

Obviously, keeping a murder for life in prison will cost more than killing him or her for killing someone, the continues of living is way expensive than stop breathing. In addition, by jailing killers, especially in particular prisons or countries where the prisoners enjoy what might be a “luxury stays”, it seems to be that the murder rewarded with a retirement without any pension payments. Therefore, there is no other beneficial and suitable substitution for capital penalty for the society, which repay the debt of intentionally killing a human being and saves nation financial interests.

On the other hand, it seems to be inhuman to discuss money concerns when talking about human being life, money should not be a consideration here. In fact, governments and people should give ultimate effort to defend the right of life to every human being that because we do not have the right to decide about a person whether he lives or not. Moreover, some might say that death should be exclusive right for god; therefore, no one else should exercise this right.

Nevertheless, fairness is not always means to put each person on equal rank, life is meant to be unequal, so it is waste of time to argue about fair chance. If someone commits a crime and intentionally killed another person/s we should punish him with the same amount of his or her deed as long as is possible, and that is an old concept found in ancient cultures and religions. If one claims that the murderer has the right to live, so the victim had the same right, therefore, causing this right to not be exercised by the killed should be the only reason to do the same action to other party (the killer) to let peace and fair prevails in the society.

Losing two lives is more preferred than losing more than two, in other words, by applying capital punishment the level of security is higher than abolishing this option, and as they say “numbers never lie”. In 2012, Saudi Arabia registered 234 homicides while in the same year Australia’s count is 254, even though population of both countries is nearly the same, however, Australian welfare is way better than the Saudi Arabian’s.[5] Therefore, applying capital punishment is likely to make life in future more saver than if there was no such rule.

Conclusion

To sum up, capital punishment is remedy that is more effective than lower sanctions, life in prison for example. Religious precedents and logic reason outweigh the justification of death sentence. Moreover, comparison of crime data between countries that do not have capital punishment and the regions where death sentence is applied support the importance of legalize capital punishment sanction.