Capital Punishment In Canada

Homicide is wrong. We have been taught this unquestionable truth since childhood. One might wonder what Capital punishment is. It is when somebody who is blamed for perpetrating a wrongdoing is killed as a discipline for his or her crime. Capital Punishment has been a questionable theme for a long while. It was utilized as a part of the past as a strategy to make fear, so that potential wrongdoings could be avoided. Capital punishment may have been abolished in Canada, but it is still utilized as a part of numerous different nations till this day. Furthermore the reason this is a dubious point is that is frequently considered as an unethical approach to punish the suspect. The death penalty is ethically wrong and is not the right way to manage

a crime because we need to consider more than simply the criminal side of things. We have to take into consideration that there are other less ruthless sorts of punishment, the incidental murdering of innocent individuals, and how it conflicts with human rights.
There are numerous different alternatives for the death penalty, which likewise work viably in decreasing crime.

Wrongdoing in Canada is genuinely low because of imprisonment and legitimate law authorization, while other nations that do have the death penalty have a higher crime rate. We do not have to utilize the strategy for retribution to punish people, as Ghandi once stated an eye for an eye will make the entire world blind. This essentially implies that if we execute individuals as a method for retribution there would be nobody left. For instance if a man is convicted carrying out a crime in Canada he would be sentenced imprisonment rather than a death penalty, since it has been abolished in Canada. This is a viable discipline in light of the fact that the suspect would be sentenced for his or her existence with no parole.This punishment will be just to all and would not require the life of the suspect. Capital punishment at times could be a cruel punishment, the method of execution vary from fire squad to electrocution which is ethically wrong. The alternate methods avoid these situation so that the suspect does not have to face cruel unethical

punishment.
Capital punishment is also far more expensive then these alternative methods. For instance it cost less to sentence a suspect to prison rather then a death penalty. This is because capital punishment requires a long and complex judge descion. Then after when the suspect is convicted they must also take into account the expenses of the execution. Instead of spending all that money on capital punishment the government should sentence the suspect life in prison and spend the money on our society so that crimes rate decreases. Therefore capital punishment is not a viable punishment because it is expensive
The next point is that the incidental murdering of innocent individual.

There have been cases of innocent individual receiving a death penalty who did not commit crime as there situations where the innocent individual was framed or had similar characteristics to the suspect. For example Carlos DeLuna who was an innocent man was convicted of murder in 1983, he was executed in 1989. It was later proven that Carlos DeLuna was in fact innocent and the one who committed the crime was a man with a similar name Carlos Hernandez, who had a record of crimes (Death Penalty Information Center 1). This example just give us another reason to abolish the death penalty because it shows us the cold truth about the innocent lives that at are at risk. This goes back to the first point because if the man was sentenced imprisonment instead of death penalty he would be later dismissed from jail without the cost of his life, but the innocent people who did not get lucky had to go through a cruel punishment for the actions of someone else. Our society teaches its youth that violence does not solve anything which is ironic because they are the ones who allow capital

punishment.
The last point arguing against death penalty is that it conflicts with human rights which represents the morals and beliefs of our society as a whole. Capital punishment violates the part of human rights that states humans have the right to life and also the right to avoid torture. (Amnesty International, 1). Most countries violate this right and punish the suspect in a cruel way. This demonstrates to us that the government is abusing their power on society by legalizing the murder of the suspect and denying the right to life. Which implies that the government is controlling society by violating the biggest human right when the government should reflect the morals and beliefs of the people. If the government wants to punish the suspect they can in a humane way which does not conflict with the right of every human being. Despite the fact we are an advanced society, as humans we still make mistakes, and committing a crime does not make someone less of a human being, which is why we should not kill the suspect but give him or her a second opportunity and maybe one day they will be able to join our society again. Therefore the death penalty conflicts with the rights of humans.
The death penalty is brutal and harsh discipline that should not be utilized when there are less ruthless alternatives, the danger of executing an innocent individual and the fact that it conflicts with human rights. Rather than concentrating on disciplines we have to concentrate on why individuals carry out crimes. There is always a reason a suspect perpetrates a crime, whether it is a mental issue or the fact the individual is poor. As a society we need to cooperate to advance by helping one another and eradicate these issues with the goal that we can live in congruity.