There has been a controversial scholarly debate centering around the morality of death sentences amongst policy makers and citizens. Some argue that death sentences should be forbidden due to the violation of human rights and morality; conversely, others might be of the opposing idea and espouse that death sentences should be continued to be implemented for criminals who have taken lives. While it might provoke several strong reactions, the elimination of death sentences would be a travesty of justice. Therefore, I personally espouse the continual conduct of death sentences.
Firstly, morality is a contentious concept that does not succumb to objectivity, meaning different people have different beliefs and moral codes, and they are entitled to do so. However, the commitment to murdering might be an exception as convicted murderers have actually violated a moral code, and they have taken away a life. Moreover, death sentences might serve as a compensation for the insurmountable grief of the victim’s family and friends.
Secondly, depending on the happenstance and the cause of the murder, death sentences are not always necessary. In courtroom settings, the crime of murder is categorised into three types in order to justly evaluate the situation. For instance, if a person in need of protecting themselves, the judge will therefore evaluate the situation, either sentencing them to prison for an amount of time, or pronouncing them innocent. Moreover, in defence of a mentally ill person who has unintentionally murdered someone, death sentences would not be necessary. Instead, they would be hospitalised in specialised institutions for mental patients.
Nevertheless, as aforementioned, some people might construe death sentences as immoral or violating human rights. They might argue that if a death sentence is conducted on a convicted person who no matter commits murder intentionally or unintentionally , society is also killing a person, therefore believing that death sentences should be forbidden and supporting life in prison instead. However, there are some crimes that can never be compensated, and sentencing life in prison would not be just. In such a case, in the name of justice, death sentences are justified, even if it technically means that society would also take away a life.
In summary, death sentences should only be the ultimate punishment for criminals only after their crimes have been carefully evaluated. To preserve justice, death sentences should not be eliminated.