Death Penalty Draws Sharp Debates: Morality Factors

Name:
Instructor:
Course:
Date:
Death Penalty
Death penalty is one of the issues that draws sharp debates, with the main factions of the debate being those that are in support of the same and those that feel that it is not effective. This is a morality factor and one that implies on the personal preferences of either of the group. One of the things to consider is the fact that this is not a technical issue nor is it an empirical issue, rather it is moral.
While the punishment can be considered to be a deterrent in cubing the level of crimes that are considered capital, there is not a moral significance that is free standing and an indication of the level of deterrence (Fieser, James). What is more is that, over the years, society has developed a myriad of ways to deter criminals from activities that are socially unacceptable. In some of the cases, punishments such as stoning, corporal punishment have been a keen element of the justice system. However, these are practices that have not by any chance reduced the impact of crime in the society. Ideally, these practices can be considered to be ineffective given that they have been used over the years yet they do not have any significant impact on the levels of crime (Fieser, James).
The most important element associated with death penalties is the fact that they reduce the society to a murderous lot. There are no real impacts on the crime levels which simply means that acts of killing the criminals are perpetuated by the need to sanction uncivilized practices. This is an element that borders moral decadency that developed in such a way that, there are legal scapegoats, where the state takes up the right to take a life. This is no different from a civilian killing another, the only thing that changes is that it is the state that does it with a justification for justice.
There is never social or even personal benefits that are associated with killing a person that has done wrong. If one is killed simply because they took the life of another person, this does not in any way act as a payback. The parties aggrieved by the acts do not actually feel relieved that the criminal has been killed. It simply leaves another level of emptiness parties to deal with. More often than not, parties to a victim will forgive the person that carried a heinous act of killing a loved one rather than see them hanged or killed through lethal injections (Fieser, James). This relative to the deeper understanding of the healing process. By taking the higher moral ground, the family and friends will have won over the perpetrator in more ways than one. If the perpetrator is arrested and jailed, they have the time to reflect on their acts and how the victims reacted. This makes a better human being out of the criminal other than simply killing him or her for the short lived gratification.
This is a subjective matter and some factions feel th...