Introduction
Colloquially known as the death penalty, capital punishment has been a highly controversial issue, which has rocked sociologists, criminal investigators, justice, law and order to such an extent that its implications have raised questions. The principle of the sanctity of human life dissuades a person from having an uncontrollable desire for punishment that is inhuman. The topic that I would like to propose is that capital punishment is immoral.
Main body
The question of immorality or morality is raised when decisions on social acceptability and cultural codes are put to test. In the light of the above presumption, the view of Immanuel Kant is noteworthy. He maintains that if an offender “has committed murder, he must die. No possible substitute can satisfy justice. For there is no parallel between death and even the most miserable life so that there is no equality of crime and retribution unless the perpetrator is judicially put to death (at all events without any maltreatment which might make humanity an object of horror in the person of the sufferer).” (Kant).
Though Kant has explicitly stated his view point, it only acknowledges the fact that crime should be punished but the degree of punishment should vary. The Code of Hammurabi proposed different punishments and compensation according to class and groups. History is subject to ordeals ranging from mass deaths due to regicide and deaths due to individual claims. The routes of capital punishments can be traced back to 1697 B.C and the argument over its effectiveness and morality continue to be in the heat of controversy even today. (Student Essay on Capital Punishment, Friend or Foe).
It would not be a futile exercise to interpret capital punishment in the light of religion before proceeding to the subject of my argument. Buddhism denounces capital punishment. Chapter 10 of the Dharmapada decries inhuman punishment. Judaism severely opposes capital punishment. Christianity, on the other hand, affirms that the guilty should be punished in proposition to their crime. Murder and treason are especially morally heinous. The concept is adjusted in the Bible as ‘thou shalt give life for life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe (Exod 21:23 to 25).” (Kant).
Abolitionists all over the world argue that the death penalty is evil doubled. On the other hand, retributionists argue that death penalty is just. The famous 18th century abolitionist Cesare De Beccaria claims, “the death penalty cannot be useful because of the example of barbarity it gives to men…it seems to me absurd that the laws…which punish homicide should themselves commit it.” (Kant). Mahatma Gandhi, once said, “An eye for an eye only leaves the whole world blind.”
This view is held by the pacifists who believe that violence breeds violence which should only propagate crime among youth and children alike. On the contrary, retributionists prefer death sentence as appropriate to the misdeeds. In objection to this stand, I would like to mention that hatred leads to hatred while love and compassion can change minds.
It would be justifiable if every country that upholds democratic values gives space for patient hearing of cases that demand severe punishment. As human beings it would be better to react humanely in dire circumstances as no person is a born criminal. Circumstances and unavoidable situations twist the lives of hapless victims who later become targets of social justice. It should be possible for every government to react in humane manner respecting democratic ideals. In this case, I believe that life imprisonment would serve a better compensation as it gives the criminal a chance for atonement.
In earlier times, capital punishment in the form of corporal punishment, shunning, banishment etc were carried out. Later, they give way to heinous, cruel and inhumane practices as breaking wheel, boiling to death, flaying, slow slicing, disembowelment, crucifixion, impalement, crushing, stoning, execution by burning, dismemberment, sawing, decapitation, scaphism or neck lasing. It is truly grotesque to be subjected to such heinous punishments. Wither has gone the compassion of the human heart! Of late, punishments as decapitation, electrocution, firing squad, shooting, gas chamber, hanging, lethal injection etc have found their way into retentionist countries as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the U.S. Though countries as Australia and New Zealand have abolished capital punishments, the United States, Japan, India, Africa and the Caribbean islands have retained capital punishment for murder, espionage, treason, rape, adultery, sodomy and apostasy. It seems the countries would not pardon the wrong doers. Christ said, ‘Hate the sin, not the sinners’. It means every individual has to be given the chance of redemption.
Yet another drawback to capital punishment is its brutalizing effect – the disregard for sanctity of life. Every government should formulate the right policies to enhance reducing the harmful effects of capital punishments. Quite often, such punishments are spectator packed that causes shame to the family. They become the object of public ridicule, having to face public disregard and living as outcasts. This is further detrimental to the mental health of the family members of the criminals. They have to face social and political insecurities which would subsequently weaken the morale of the family. This could cultivate second generation criminals in whose mind the seeds of hatred, born out of the desire for revenge, would cost many other innocent lives.
Though economists believe that the death sentence would cut costs drastically, they fail to realize that one life lost would mean no chance to uplift these members of the society. Counseling centers have to be opened and forums and discussions should give a sympathetic ear to correct behavioral problems. It is mandatory that life is precious and a life not lived truly should deserve every chance of rejuvenation. Countries that give importance to such punishments should tone down and believe in the innate goodness of mankind. Police and other law enforcing institutions should play a major role in tracking down criminals and providing social security to them. They should collaborate with medico officials and psychological treatments should be provided. In this regard, law should enforce strict rules wherein human life can be saved. Yet another stumbling block to be overcome is the social stigma that would remain in the lives of the family of the accused. No finger should be raised and they should be able to lead normal lives. The accused should be given the opportunity to meet family members, loved and dear ones rather than guns and objects of punishment. This would create a healthy atmosphere and would definitely be a catalyst in changing the attitude of the criminals in a positive manner. This way either criminal admits their faults and they do not remain hard hearted. Some criminals do realize their mistakes and show interest in redemption.
Over the years, such punishments have deserved a second place and countries are making efforts to change their stand. But serious crimes have not yet received an ultimate solution to the punishment that has to be meted out. Taking into consideration the age of the criminal, it is a relief that juvenile criminals have been saved from capital punishment. All is not done. It can be rightly argued that capital punishment is second degree and should be removed from the pages of law and order. Every individual should be given the chance to make amendments for the wrong he has done. Special courts of hearing comprising of senior most judges should precide of the hearing of the cases and allow the criminals a chance to open up.
Conclusion
To conclude, I firmly believe that laws are made by man, for man – for the betterment of human kind. Bestial injustice in the form of punishments for crimes committed would only grow branches and would not root out the stem that caused the destruction. It is high time that every country sits down to save the wasted energies of individuals and instills humane values. Due regard to values would cultivate universal brotherhood that would enhance political and social goodwill among people and the countries of the world. This would further create a healthy atmosphere wherein every individual would be able to live and let others live. This utopian ideal of society should not remain within the pages of this essay. Can this ideal be realized? The answer lies in the throbbing hearts of the million.
Works Cited
Kant, Immanuel. Death Penalty. Book Rags. 2008. Web.
Kant, Immanuel. Death Penalty: Retributive Arguments.. Book Rags. 2006. Web.
Student Essay on Capital Punishment, Friend or Foe. Book Rags. 2006. Web.