Free EssaysAnalysisAgainst Death PenaltyBuy an essay
← About BullyingArmy Values →

Buy custom Against Death Penalty essay


With increased crimes and offences across the world, all governments have been implementing different laws to help in maintaining peace and unity. Law enforcement agencies have been formed and given mandate of ensuring that laws are followed fully. Every crime or offense has its penalty which differs from one country to the other. There are different kinds of laws that are being used in different countries in accordance to their constitution. Different kinds of courts have been formed to across the world with International Criminal Court (ICC) being the major international court.

Get a Price Quote:
Type of assignmentWriter level Title of your paper Pages
Spacing Timeframes Currency Total price

Court judgment differs according to crime committed. For instance in sharia law, judgment is in accordance to the offense committed, that is, if you cut your friends hand, you hand will be also cut if proven guilty. In other courts, judgment differs ranging from being imprisoned for certain duration, forced to do community work without payment, life imprisonment or death penalty. Judgment goes hand in with crime committed and constitution of that given country. However, while death penalty is used in courts today, it has raised many questions on whether it should be used or not. There are many people who support that it should be used while others have different opinion renouncing it with all means possible. However, when looking at its impact not only to the victim, but to the victim’s family and the entire society, and how it is executed, death penalty is supposed to be banned. It is therefore due to this fact that this study is aimed at discussing and analyzing reasons as to why death penalty is supposed to be eliminated.


Despite harsh debate that is going on in regard to whether it should be banned or not, death penalty is still being used currently.

Death is used as punishment for certain crimes across the world. Hanging is the main method used to execute this penalty.

However, after looking at its consequences and means of execution, there are increased views and opinions that death penalty should be banned. Death penalty refers to the court ruling that an offender should be hanged for committing certain crime once proven guilty (Yorke, 2008). There are many examples of people who have penalized with death penalty for committing a variety of crimes including mass genocide, forced child labor, terrorist, murder, among others. In the United States of America, we are still using presently death as a penalty for certain offenses. People have a wide range of views on this issue with others regarding it as being barbaric to justice being served better this way. However, death penalty should be banned as a form of punishment due to increased negative effects that it has to the offender, victim, and nation at large.

Reasons as to why death penalty should banned

It is expensive

According to Yorke (2008), the death penalty should be banned because it causes a lot of financial stress on taxpayers. The cost of putting a felon to death in many times more expensive when compared to a criminal serving natural life. This varies from being two to five times more costly to taxpayers. This expenses result in most cases from the proceeding which the court ought to undergo so as to approve this kind of penalty including endless appeals, additional needed processes, and legal squabbling that haul the process out. Secondly, these proceedings could take many years to end, and this is the fact as to why it is not unusual for a convict to spend 15 to 20 years on death row. Great investment comes with a great time; hence we ought to ask ourselves whether it actually essential to keep this penalty when one that is just as if not more, efficient is an option.

It should be banned because the worst imaginable penalty available for us to confer upon a criminal is natural life in prison. With death penalty, the criminal does not require to undergo much pain. This is due to the fact that, a criminal would potentially have decades to think about what he did and are forced to be imprisoned for the rest of their lives with natural life in prison (Yorke, 2008). Criminals will also be staying in a hostile environment with the conditions in prisons, offering an even bigger and more commendable penalty. The fact that criminals will not be viewed as martyrs, but known as evil, uncaring human beings is the other benefit of having life in prison as the most horrible penalty. We don’t want other people to feel empathy towards these kinds of criminals.

It flaws innocent people

Yorke (2008) stipulates that while it is believed that death penalty helps to prevent violent offenses, bring criminals to justice for families of victims, and portray powerful social denunciation for premeditated murder, it does not warranty these outcomes at all and should be banned. When looking at the death penalty systems in action you would realize that the sole purpose which it serves is revenge or retribution. It is basically and seriously flawed in application and there is a grave and enduring risk of executing innocent individuals, in addition to costing much more compared to life in prisons.
The most annoying issue is that innocent people have been sentenced to death. Quite a number of them, 130 persons wrongfully convicted people were sentenced to death and were lucky to be vindicated and released finally. In less than 10% of all homicides, DNA available can’t warranty that we won’t execute innocent people. It is therefore apparent that if an individual is convicted and found innocent later, you can release him from prison and from the grave (Yorke, 2008).

It is impious

Yorke (2008) asserts that suppose death penalty is right then it is good as well, and suppose it is wrong, it is bad as well. Our first anxiety is supposed to be what the Bible teaches in regard to the state placing people to death. Should we find out that, then it will not matter what philosophers, theologians, criminologists and weeping, sociologist, whining and whimpering liberals have to assert in regard to this topic. This is because Genesis 9:6 teaches clearly that suppose a man sheds blood of another person, then government will take his life. Moses also wrote that “whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” Thus, when an individual cold-heartedly takes a life, he does not only assaults society but attacks God as well because man was made in God’s image. Nonetheless, we are also commanded by God not to kill hence, killing is wrong, but even shrewd Sunday school pupils are aware that that verse implies that “Thou shalt do no murder.” And hence, we should not actually murder.

Nearly all government ought to be secular, although you can get argument both for and against the death penalty in the bible, for those who invoke Christian law in this issue. The New Testament- starring Jesus- is principally anti-death punishment. For instance, Jesus praises mercy in the sermon on the mountain (Mathew 5:7) and rejects tit for tat “an eye for an eye” (Mathew 5:38-39) (Yorke, 2008). James 4:12 stipulates that God is the only one capable of taking life in the name of justice. Jesus himself says in john 8:7 that let he who is not a sinner cast the stone first.

However, while some people argue that the Bible support death penalty, others argue that it denounces death penalty. However, the truth is that the Bible only identifies and recognizes existence of government. Thus, by saying that “suppose a man sheds blood of another person, then government will take his life” it is not meaning that the government will kill him/her. Imprisonment is taking somebody life since he/she will be under government’s control. In the ten commands, god commands us not to kill. Thus, we are supposed to respect laws of the land and government, but don’t kill no matter the crime committed.

Death penalty leads court to be ineffective

Death punishment is supposed to be forbidden due to the fact that it leads our court systems to be much less effective. It is difficult for the court to move a long to other things if it ought to keep on dealing with different actions by the defense due to broad proceedings that are supposed to be held so as for execution to take place (Yorke, 2008). A lot of Judge’s attorney’s and other court workers’ time who have to do other things is monopolized by numerous appeals, motions, hearings, briefs, among others. The court system would move faster and effectively through other cases that are of huge importance as well if it were not for all these obstacles.

Quite a number of countries have used the death punishment to prevent serious offenses.

Nevertheless, the death punishment is not a prevention of violent offenses. For instance, after 24 years on death row, forgiveness is killer’s final appeal. The states which have the highest execution rate have higher violent crime rate following the United States Supreme Court’s lifting of the ban for the death punishment in 1976. Since 1982 to 1991, the national crime rate increased to five percent while the rate of crime in Texas rose to 24% and the violent crime rate by 46% (Yorke, 2008). Texas has over 400 death chain inmates and has killed 11 people. In essence, statistics reveals that the states which have higher executions and support the death penalty have increased aggression crime rates compared to the states which executes fewer criminals or don’t use the death penalty. It is also suggested by these statistics that the death penalty has brutalizing impacts on the society.

According to Yorke (2008), most horrible of all, the death penalty is brutal and cruel penalty, and it carries on the cycle of violence. Death sentence will not put off future violent offenses even though it shows strong social condemnation for monstrous crimes.

Instead, death penalty will hurt mire individuals. For instance, Edna Weaver- whose daughter Tina Lambriola was killed by William Sever, Jr. in New Jersey in 2002- stipulated that she did not only want Sever’s life spared, but also wished that his mother would be spared the pain of losing a child (Yorke, 2008). Weaver said that she didn’t want another mother to feel they she did- it was a feeling that she was unable to put into words…and that at least Sever’s mother would be capable of writing to him, she will be capable of sending things to him. The question has also remained that, if killing is very wrong, how can it be right to kill? Thus, the death penalty is supposed to be banned so as to prevent the cycle of violence.

The other reason that has brought itself out clearly is that more poor people are executed compared to rich people thus, in justice, society should not execute individuals. Many poor people are executed for killing due to the fact that they commit more killings (Yorke, 2008). After all, there are many poor people compared to rich ones. It is also apparent and don’t require to be described that rich people don’t normally have the reasons to murder. Therefore, when a rich individual murders another, he or she should be sentenced to death they way poor people do.

Furthermore, blacks get are more executed compared to whites yet the United States Supreme Court ruled the death punishment does not discriminate against blacks. In addition, it was revealed by a Stamford University study that murderers of whites are more probable to get sentenced to death- whether the killer are blacks or whites- compared to killers of black people- whether the murders are blacks or whites (Yorke, 2008). However, blacks who murder whites are were less probable to get death sentences compared to whites who killed whites.


To be brief, death penalty should be banned. In its place, we should implement other alternative penalties that will affect the criminal alone, and not hiss family and the entire society. After looking its effects, it is apparent that death penalty has been affecting people negatively, promoting violent crime, and delivering justice. Since life imprisonment has proved to be the most effective means of rendering justice to victims, and that it affects criminal alone, it will be important if we adopt in place of death penalty. By adopting life imprisonment, we will have relieved taxpayers from a burden of paying more taxis that are directed towards facilitating long proceedings and hearings followed in handling cases that will lead to death sentence. We will have eliminated pain from families of the criminal and even provide the criminal with an adequate time to review whatever he did. With cases of convicting innocent people being on increase, imprisonment will be providing people accused falsely with a chance to be freed whenever it is proved that they were imprisoned falsely. When therefore, looking at the impacts of death penalty and advantages of life imprisonment as a penalty, you will see that there is actually an urgent need to ban death penalty and adopt use of other penalties.

We are here to help

Buy custom Against Death Penalty essay

Related essays

  1. Army Values
  2. Can Money Buy Happiness
  3. About Bullying
  4. Pygmalion Book Review Sample

True customer stories

The paper you delivered far exceeded my expectations. It didn't need to be revised at all. Your writer followed my instructions exactly, the source material was perfect and the paper was highly organized. I didn't know what to expect and I didn't think I would get such good quality, particularly as my topic was a very complex one.

My sincere thanks


Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy | Delivery Policy