Should Death Penalty be Allowed in Our Country

  Crimes and punishments are always associated with one another. They have become subjects of numerous scientific research studies and literary works. In our society, the criminal activities happen every day, and there are also many kinds of punishments to these criminals. However, among all possible punishments, the death penalty is the most extreme, and likely, the most ineffective and unfair type of punishment for a crime. Therefore, whether death penalty should be allowed in Taiwan has become a big issue. Some people believe this saying, “an eye for an eye”, and thus they support the government’s use of the death penalty. However, I think death penalty should be abolished.

  First, the death penalty doesn’t deter crimes effectively. And many people believe that death penalty can decline the crime rates through its deterrence to people. However, when people are thinking this way, they don’t consider that there are complex social and economic factors that increase crime rates. According to the data for each year taken from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, the murder rates in non-death penalty states in America have remained consistently lower than the states with death penalty. In addition, a survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. Therefore, the role of the death penalty as a way of reducing violence in any society seems to be unconvincing.

  Second, the death penalty is irreversible. In other words, the death penalty puts innocent lives at risk. Once life is taken, it can’t be back anymore. Columbia University researchers tracked all capital convictions from 1973 to 1995, nearly 5800 cases. And they found serious errors in 68 percent. Now you imagine that a person is accused of murdering people and therefore he is sentenced to death. However, the most crucial piece of evidence that leads to his conviction is false confession. Even though he is innocent, his life is still taken by the wrong evidence and thus causes a tragedy in this justice system. Therefore, I would prefer a cautious approach to even the slightest possibility of taking an innocent person’s life because we can’t give life back once it is taken.

  Some those who supports death penalty may argue it is just a waste of social resources and money if we abolish the death penalty and keep criminals in jail for a lifetime. According to Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty, the Criminal code in Taiwan rules that prisoners must labor to supply their own expenses and compensate the family of the victims. However, the death row prisoners are defined as people who won’t return to society and therefore, they don’t have to work for everyone. The things they do in jail is just waiting for execution. Moreover, it is more expensive to execute a person than to keep them in jail for life because the judicial procedure of death penalty is complex so it spends not only lots time but also much litigation costs. Therefore, it seems that death penalty is a waste of social resources and money.

  Based on the arguments above, death penalty doesn’t deter crimes effectively because it doesn’t reduce the rate of crimes in a society. Also, it puts innocent lives at risk an execution because it is irreversible. Moreover, death penalty is a waste of social resources and money. Consequently, the death penalty shouldn’t be allowed in our country.