This paper critically examines whether death penalty should be mandatory for people who kill others and the reasons behind it.In doing this, the paper examines the positive aspects of the death penalty and summarizes the counterarguments.As such, the proponents argue that death penalty is an effective deterrence to criminals contemplating committing a capital offense.
Matters get complicated given that most victims and the general public live in in an environment of fear whenever such criminals are loose either by unlawful escape from custody or judicial release from custody.
There are arguments that serial killers and murderous have escaped from custody in the past committing more crimes.
The death penalty or capital punishment refers to the lawful punishment of death for a wide variety of offenses.
Experts argue that capital punishment has been used widely from the ancient civilizations to modern criminal justice applications.
With the increase in capital offenses, there are heated debates over the efficacy of death penalty in deterring crime and as a form of retribution justice.
Consequently, scholars and legal experts have come up with contradicting perspectives and divergent theoretical constructs for examining the appropriateness of using the capital punishment for radical crimes.
The proponents of the death penalty argue that in general, the benefits outweigh the disadvantages.
One of the strongest arguments for the death penalty is based on the concept of deterrence of crime.
The use of capital punishment varies from one jurisdiction to the other with several states applying the death penalty while others abolishing it, Banner (2002, p.45).
The infliction of the death penalty has elicited divergent opinions and contradicting perspectives from scholars and experts not only in modern times but also in the ancient history of the punishment Lynn.