People have different views about whether a death sentence should be banned or whether it should be applied for people who commit heinous crimes. From my point of view, I agree with the latter because this is the optimal way to deter serious criminals.
On the one hand, opponents for capital punishment think that this kind of execution could cause possible innocent deaths. It is true that globally, people witness a lot of innocent people who were executed with death-penalty. Take Carlos Deluna in Texas as an example, he was accused of the fatal stabbing off Texas convenience store clerk in 1983 and was executed in 1989 although his brother was really a murderer. Secondly, several criminals repent of their acts and they want to live day-to-day in order to make up for their cruelty. Therefore, in this case, governments should provide them with a second chance to rehabilitate into society and do useful things for their community.
On the other hand, death penalty could be a deterrent against outrageous and barbarous crimes. For instance, terrorism-related offences should enforce a capital crime to eliminate bad elements in the society because they deliberately murder dozens of innocent civilians. Another justification worth mentioning is that capital punishment could be cost-effective in terms of feeding, sheltering, clothing and providing basic needs for brutal offenders as a humane way. If they had been executed, this money would have been saved and used for other concerning matters like people’s welfare or the sustainable development of the society.
In conclusion, although capital punishment could be detrimental for several cases for aforementioned reasons, I believe that it is a feasible resolution to control heinous perpetrators and reduce the cost for one country.