Death penalty, might seem an old phenomenon, used in ancient times, when punishment for even the insignificant crimes were terrifying and really cruel. Our ancestry used to cut off an arm for theft or torture a woman in front of the public for cheating. Fortunately, those times have passed. In our modern world even the most brutal criminals are usually sent to the life sentence and only the lowest percentage of them is killed.

Recently, one of the Spanish newspapers has announced a breaking new, that the government of Egypt had made a decision to hang ten people, who killed 74 football fans in the Massacre of Port Said Stadium in 2012. This caused a lot of negative comments from those, who are displeased of such politicians’ choice. People claim, that no one has a right to deprive other’s life, even if that “other” person has killed someone himself. They also say, that such rule might be used in unfair goals by those, who are intolerant to person’s ethnicity and etc. However, their arguments are not really worthy.

First of all, saying that death penalty is violation of human rights is not a point to stand out against this kind of punishment. In the 21 century human rights are being infringed for people’s protection purpose. For example, just half a year ago Russia has launched project, which allows the government to track citizen’s messages and phone calls, to prevent the terroristic attack risk and reduce the criminal statistics. So, if government is seeking to protect us from possible danger by violating human rights, why should we protest against it? What is more 6,530 prisoners escaped from state prisons in 1998, which is almost 1 and a half percent. Someone can say, that 1,5% is a low rate, however imagine more that 6,000 criminals walking along the streets we pass everyday. I do not think someone would be happy to meet them. With this in mind, death penalty guarantees us that a serial killer will never cause any harm to anyone.

Another highlight which is frequently found in death penalty oppositionists’ is discrimination. Since 1977 80% percent of murdered criminals were black people, whose victims were white. This statement does not prove that the permission to deprive a life can be used as an instrument by politicians or racists. To perform mentioned kind of punishment, the police has to have incontestable proofs against the accused person. Modern technology also allows to perform the DNA testing, which can effectively destroy all the doubts regarding person’s guilt. What is more, according to Rilley, “Blacks commit violent crimes at 7 to 10 times the rate that whites do.” Under such circumstances, statistics of black people killed by the government does not make any sense.

Furthermore, death sentence gives the government a chance to control the prison’s overpopulation, which is a growing concern in many countries. Penalreform studies show, that number of prisoners exceeds the official capacity in 115 countries, which is 58 %. When government faces such problem, it tries to reduce the amount of jailed. Some suspected ones get just fines or probation period instead of the punishment which fits the value of the committed crime more than the mentioned above. Such occurrence increases the risk of dangerous law-breakers, who can harm any of us.

To conclude, I would like to say that we should practice death penalty as long as it can save at least one innocent life and reduce the crime rate in our cities.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.