Why Death Sentence Should Be Activated In Every Country

Legal punishments date back to the times of ancient civilizations who implemented these as a mechanism to regulate the illicit behavior of one of its individuals. Ever since its early stages of implementation, the death penalty has been a sanction that has sparked a polarized debate which continues to be relevant to our globalized time. The latter continues to be a controversial topic because it encompasses various fields such as: the philosophical, ethical, religious, political, criminological, legal, etc. Death sentence should be activated in every country if the world because it is an exemplary sentence that deterrents severe crimes, such as murder.

Regardless of the fact that life is a basic fundamental right, such becomes a secondary factor when it hinders collective security since individual rights should not limit the liberties of a majority. Hence, States should be able to claim the right to limit it for those who pose a threat to humanity. Just as an individual is allowed to ethically, morally and legally act in self-defense, so should society through its legal representative. Such reasoning being that the State assumes of the guarantor of life and collective security within democratic territories; therefore, the State should be able to execute those individuals who jeopardize its stability, its tranquility and, above all, its subsistence. Subjection to international treaties should not be a restricting factor since the United States of America — along with other 52 countries — considers the death penalty within its legislation and continues to be an active member of international organizations such as the United Nations, and other human rights entities. Moreover, most Americans find themselves to be in favor of death penalty according to a poll carried out by Pew Research Center convinced by its effectiveness to address murder cases.

It is quite evident that technology has greatly caved into our daily dynamics, such impact is present even in improvements of criminological research. Nowadays, the margin of judicial errors has greatly diminished due to the fact that now forensics have highly reliable instruments, such as DNA testing, at disposal. However, the implementation of the death penalty should uphold to strict mechanisms especially in countries with faulty judicial systems. Death penalty should not be used as a mean to cope with the deficiencies of the previously mentioned, but rather to restore society’s trust in a judicial system that accordingly delivers exemplary punishments. The exemplariness of such a severe sentence will most likely discourage those who intend to overstep the boundaries of society’s behavioral codes. Mulhausen (2007) stated that “Nobel laureate Gary S. Becker's seminal 1968 study of the economics of crime assumed that individuals respond to the costs and benefits of committing crime.” Additionally, contrary to most misconceptions, it is more moderate since death penalty does not targeted as a sentence towards every criminal.

Finally, death penalty coincides with criminal law in the way that both strive to defend society and prevent the injury of legal interests in civil integrity. The death penalty seeks to bring tranquility to society considering that the offender received a proportionate punishment, rather than aiming to give peace to the family of the victim. The viability of its implementation narrows down to determining whether sacrificing humanity is worth having faith in rehabilitated criminals.