Whether the Death Penalty is a Desirable Policy Essay

Whether the Death Penalty is a Desirable Policy - Essay ExampleApparently, death penalty is a arguable debate, with both opposing camps presenting strong positions aimed at justifying their claim. Possibly, no cardinal would like to stand on the neutral ground to advocate for both, or none. The major fray is whether death penalty is a desirable policy for the regimen to implement. Notably, death penalty curtails the rights to life, which the constitution guarantees (Coughlin, 2004, p.99). The human rights activists arrive at played an aggressive role in making sure that the political sympathiess abolish all constitutional provisions and by-laws, which promote death penalty, a move that is prevalence in most parts of the world. In reality, most international studies have shown that death penalty has ceased to be the preferred method of controlling crime (Coughlin, 2004, p.47). Therefore, most governments have shifted their attention to other methods of traffic with crime, witho ut resorting to capital punishment. For this essay, the focus is on whether the death penalty is a desirable policy, while comparing the position in the United landed estate and in Malaysia. Notably, the tenth day of October each year is marked worldwide, as the day against death penalty (Piket, 2011, p.1). In essence, the day is marked with campaigns and conferences to create awareness on the guide to abolish death penalty. This aims at achieving the EUs goal of eliminating the practice in all countries worldwide. The Position of the Death Penalty in the United Kingdom According to the governments death penalty strategy of 2010, The United Kingdom Opposes the death penalty in all circumstances as a matter of principle because we believe it undermines human dignity there is no conclusive evidence of its deterrent value and any miscarriage of justice principal to its imposition is irr ever sosible and irreparable (Hammel, 2011, p.235). The statement is indeed bold and encompasses many aspects about the value of a human being. In the strategy paper, one realizes that the U.K government does non have any provision to warrant any person to terminate the life of another, under all circumstances (Hammel, 2011, p.235). Precisely, this shows the governments trueness to eradicating any legal right to sentence an individual to death. In addition, the U.K government cites that the practice does not guarantee human dignity (Hammel, 2011, p.235). Here, it reveals something very important, that is the human dignity. Terminating ones life is like denying him/her the fundamental right to life, which is basic to all human beings. Perhaps, the U.K government realized that man does not create life, therefore, does not have the authority to terminate it. This implies that there should be alternative means of executing punishment to offenders other than subjecting them to death (Hammel, 2011, p.236). Still considering the statement, the government noted that none has ever ver ified that imposing death penalty causes deterrent behavior. In fact, many studies have concluded that despite the increasing number of shepherds crooks being killed, the executions have not deterred others from joining such crimes (Hammel, 2011, p.236). Therefore, it is clear that imposing death penalty on criminals would be a deterrent to their behavior until an agreeable means of intervention, which is friendlier, is adopted. In addition, the government underscores the need to preserve life, indicating that misuse of justice, whose consequence terminates ones life, is permanent and cannot be altered by all means (Yorke, 2009, p.207). Truly, once a criminal has been executed, he/she cannot be brought back to life. It seems as if the United Kingdom