The death penalty has always been a question of discussion. In my opinion, the death penalty is inadequate, as it leads to the punishment of not guilty people, feeling of insecurity, negative attitudes in the society, high volume of stress, cruelty of the execution process, and violation of ethical principles. The comparison between the cases of China and the United States of America helps to see the problem from the different perspectives and compare the consequences of the issue in the modern society. Additionally, the examples of the real cases help to understand the vital influence of the issue on all people, who are related to it.
According to Moore, a significant amount of the incorrect decisions occurs due to the insufficient “assistance of counsel” in the United States (51). To prove the situation, the author provides examples of several cases when the decision was wrong and led to the death penalty. To my mind, the examples of the cases give the evidence of the lack of the counsel’s assistance. Not taking in account the evidence was the main reason for the unfair decisions (Moore 53). However, some people believe that the death penalty is reasonable in the United States, as criminals have to be punished. Moore suggests that the death penalty reduces the amount of committed crimes (63).
Moreover, China implies that restricting the control and decision making for the death penalty will increase the level of safety in China (Xinhua News Agency 1). In my opinion, the death penalty is not a suitable way of the punishment, as some contradictions might be present. The decision might be wrong and lead to the death of the innocent suspects.
The death penalty in China also plays an important role, and it can be considered as the most strict form of punishment. There might be differences in the regional decision-making. A similar situation happened in China since in different provinces the death penalty was executed in dissimilar cases (Xinhua News Agency 1). Moreover, the only “high profile cases” were sent to the Supreme Court for the further consideration (Xinhua News Agency 1). Other cases were not understood as critical, but some of the victims were imposed to the capital punishment. To my mind, it is the reason of the chaotic decision-making process.
The citizens experienced the lack of safety, as there was no structural guidance for the reasoning of the death penalty. However, according to the government of China, the capital punishment should continue its existence, but the restrictions have to be adjusted to prevent injustice (Xinhua News Agency 1). The only institution responsible for the final decision will be the Supreme Court (Xinhua News Agency 1). The government of China claims that people will feel safe, as the final decision would be approved by one set of rules (Xinhua News Agency 1). In my opinion, this decision is irrelevant since it is not possible to calm down the society by the introduction of the limitations. People will still be judged only by one system, and it might lead to unjustified capital punishment.
In general, it could be said that in both China and the United States the officials, which implement the death penalty, experience high volumes of stress (Sorell 627). The amount of pressure is extremely high to make the decision. Moreover, the execution of the punishment leads to the negative attitudes in the society about this matter (Sorell 625). As it is against the human and ethical rights to be responsible for the death of a person. Even if a person is convicted of the crime, nobody has the right to decide whether he/she should live or die. Although, the implementation method is not as frightening, as it was in the past. Today doctors apply a medical method for the capital punishment as it reduces the risks and eases the pain (Sorell 627). It makes the criminal’s death fast, and it reduces the experienced amount of suffering.
On the contrary, sometimes it is hard to assume the amount of the dose needed, and a convicted person experiences unbearable pain (Sorell 627). A person dies in agony, and this procedure makes the last minutes or hours of his/her life miserable. In my opinion, Sorell provides an important argument against the execution of the capital punishment. It violates the human rights and makes the capital punishment a question of argument. Taking one’s life is against the law. Consequently, technically, this fact implies that the death penalty is a crime itself. Moreover, since the execution process is cruel, it creates negative attitudes in the society.
Some specialists state that the countries, which encourage the death penalty such as the United States of America and China, lose their cultural heritage and violate the human rights (Amnesty International 9). Moreover, it is also considered as “primitive as government-sponsored execution” (Amnesty International 9). It could be said that it brings government to a lower level of competence, as it could not punish without the implementation of the death penalty. However, some people support the existence of the capital punishment in China and the United States of America. Additionally, in support of this opinion, Moore suggests that the capital punishment reduces the frequencies of the crime, as the criminals who were imposed to the death penalty, could not commit crimes (63). On the contrary, it still violates the human rights and destroys the cultural values of the country. I agree with this statement. According to the ethical principles, one has no power to take away a person’s life.
In conclusion, it could be said that the death penalty is unreasonable and cruel punishment. It has a negative influence on every aspect of life, as it violates the human rights and ethical principles. The government has no right or power to decide whether a person should live or die. Moreover, it ruins the cultural heritage since it is a fierce act. It brings the governmental decisions to the lower stage of proficiency since the similar punishment was implemented in the past.
Additionally, it is unfair as some criminals are imposed to the death penalty without any justifications. Subsequently, people do not feel secure, as the decision-making process might vary depending on the region. However, some people support the existence of the death penalty as it reduces the amount of criminals and the frequencies of crimes. Nonetheless, I do not agree with the arguments for the death penalty. In my opinion, the capital punishment is the main reason for the destructive attitudes in the modern society. As we live in the modern world, it is possible to find other solutions to decrease the crime rate.
Amnesty International. “There Is No Reasonable Justification for the Death Penalty.” The Guelph Mercury 2015: 9. Print.
Moore, Josh. “Death Penalty.” Mercer Law Review 66.1 (2014): 51-64. Print.
Sorell, Tom. “Death Penalty.” Encyclopedia of Bioethics. Ed. Stephen Post. New York: Macmillan, 2004. 625-629. Print.
Xinhua News Agency. “Backgrounder: Death Penalty in China.” Woodside. 2005: 1. Print.