Capital Punishment

3 Pages 722 Words

Capital Punishment

A government always should choose the most effective solution to its problems. Encarta Online defines capital punishment as “the legal infliction of death as a penalty for violating criminal law.” This definition focuses around first-degree, cold-blooded murder. Capital punishment should punish first-degree murderers. Furthermore, the death penalty sets an example for criminals, seeks justice for the families of victims, and most importantly keeps our streets safer.
The people who oppose capital punishment think that if a murderer plans to kill, the death penalty will not make a difference in their decision. Murderers may not consider the death penalty before performing these actions. They have a motive in their head, in which they will act upon regardless of the consequences.
Contrary to that belief, capital punishment serves as an example for all murderers who plan to take someone’s life and commit a cold-blooded crime. Murderers should be threatened by capital punishment because it is the inescapable price that they must pay. The government chooses to support the death penalty because it does, in fact scare many people out of committing first-degree murder. By setting such an example the government helps the people and tries to sway murderers from making these bad decisions. The death penalty keeps all people safe from harm and punishes the bad, murderous people by taking them off our streets. The death penalty should serve as a voice of fear for murderers.
The opposing viewpoint might think that the death penalty can never provide justice for families of victims. These people believe that one person was already killed. Killing another person will not solve any of the nations violent problems. They believe it will only bring more violence into the world.
When you lose someone you care about, seeing the murderer suffer the same way the victim has seems like the only solution. The d...