The death penalty has been implemented in many countries for centuries.

It was
formally banished in 1998 in the UK but had been suspended from 1965 for five
years and in 1969, the suspension became permanent. The last execution before the
suspension was on 13th August 1964. The aim of this essay focuses on whether the
restoration of the death penalty could be justified in today’s society that’s
constantly evolving with new laws and different ways punishment is dealt with With
the growing population and the increased rates of crime leading to overcrowding of
prisons, it is clear that something in our current legal system needs to
change.During the course of this essay, I intend to focus on whether the death
penalty can be justified as an effective deterrent and whether it offers justice
for those who suffered as a result of the crime committed. When considering this
argument, both sides of the debate need to be considered in order to gain a clear
understanding of whether reintroducing such a sentence would have a positive
impact on serious crime levels or whether it would even impact crime rates at
all.Examining the states in America that still have the death penalty in place should
allow us to achieve an understanding of how this type of punishment works in the
modern-day justice system as they have the most similar culture to the UK,
compared to countries such as China and Iran.

Check for sweeping biased statements.

What is the death penalty and where is it still in place?
What are people’s moral, ethical and religious opinions on the death penalty? Use
evidence where you can. For/Against. Many will be against, but some will agree that
it is okay as ‘an eye for an eye’. Can it ever be just to punish a crime with a similar
‘crime’?

When looking into this increasingly topical debate, it is clear to see that many
people consider such an extreme punishment as ethically and morally wrong, as it
allows people to be murdered and for this to be accepted in society as normal. With
the death penalty being implemented in 55 countries around the world, it is clear to
see how society’s expectations of morals and ethics demonstrate that people
consider this extreme. Some examples of capital punishment that is implemented in
the world is by using lethal injections, electrocution, gas chambers, firing squad and
hanging. With the severity of these punishments, it makes it hard for this to be
morally acceptable in society. Still, this is unethical and morally wrong as it involves
in the killing another human being regardless of circumstance. “The death penalty
violates the most fundamental human right – the right to life. It is the ultimate cruel,
inhuman and degrading punishment.”(Amnesty international). This piece of evidence
provides validity and support for the death penalty being morally wrong as by having
this punishment in the UK removed its demonstrating this goes against the fundamental
views of society. With the right to live if this punishment being accepted back into UK
society, then is taking someone’s life acceptable and make it morally correct. This goes
against morals and if this was brought back into society it would allow people to think,
other crimes such as murder be acceptable as well. This shows us that the use of the
death penalty does not avenge the death of the victim by executing the perpetrator.
This issue demonstrated the issues this causes moral repercussions as when people
are killed there is no chance of rehabilitation or criminals trying to make up for
their crimes. By it not being reinstated it allows us in society to not have to face
this burden that being part if a jury that has to convict a severe punishment as
this.

What is humane is subjective to a person’s upbringing, education, beliefs, and

religion. Therefore, different people interpret what is humane differently. For
instance, some people consider putting a pet asleep is humane if the animal is in
great pain, but doing the same thing for a person is often not considered humane.
Other people would not kill an animal even for food. Amnesty International, a
government-based society founded on human rights in the UK, ‘which imply that the
murder rate in non-death penalty states has remained consistently lower than the
rate in states with the death penalty' (Amnesty International, 2009), thus
exemplifying why the death penalty is not a useful deterrent in modern-day society.
This reinforces the idea that committing death to people just because someone
else did a horrific crime does not make it justifiable and acceptable in society.
When considering morals, we can look at ethics as the death penalty goes against all
of these. Using this as evidence from Amnesty international (2013) claims “more
than two thirds of the countries in the world have now abolished the death penalty
in law or practice”. This evidence shows us that other counteries understand the
ethical implications that the death penalty possesses and has led to the removal of
it. This evidence provides credible support for the for the ethical implications this
would pose if reinstated. In terms of UK removal of the death penalty as goes
against the basic teaching we learnt from a young age that hurting someone and
causing them punishment is incorrect and if taking someone’s life is that right.This
demonstrates that society’s impact towards this is unethical, and this should not be
put into practice regardless of the severity of the crime. The fact that this has
been reduced worldwide demonstrates there is a more of an understanding that it
is incorrect. The reduction of this allows society to see how unethical it is and the
removal of the death penalty in the UK was because its degrading.Looking at South
Carolina if lethal injection was unavailable them you were forced between
electrocution or a firing squad which both would cause extreme harm and forcing
you to chose how you are to die it’s ethically and morally wrong. This can be applied
to the UK as a reason for not reinstating it as it goes against morals and regardless
of the crime would prison not enough of a punishment. When looking at an eye for
an eye we can see executing someone to avenge someone’s death does not mean is
justice its revenge. It makes you just as bad as them. The definition of eye for an
eye is the principle of justice that requires punishment equal in kind to the
offence. This goes against society expectations, and it does not make it acceptable
for this to happen. This is research support for the death penalty to not be
resisted as it goes against what we stand for and our ethics and morals.

Why might the death penalty be flawed? Injustices. Cannot release prisoners with
a pardon if they have been killed. Discrimination against particular group of people?
All this must be evidenced.
When looking into the debate if the death penalty should be reinstated back into
the uk society one factor to look at is if there is any racial bias and if that
influenced their right to have a fair trial or if there is a biased which makes sure
the predjuce is already set. In the UK, where 15% of the population are non-white,
37% of those stopped and searched, 23% of those arrested and 27% of the prison
population are non-white (Ministry of Justice, 2021). When looking at the validity of
this evidence it is useful as from the government, we can see the increase in stop
and searches in the minority. Looking at UK there is less of a racial bias compared
to America but with if re introducing the death penalty back into society would it
cause more. In America, African Americans are more likely to be sentenced to
death, arrested and charged with crimes than whites "The report shows that the
federal death penalty, like its application in the states, is used disproportionately
against people of colour. Of the 18 prisoners currently on federal death row, 16 are
either African American, Hispanic or Asian"(American Civil Liberties Union,
2003).These findings demonstrate how society holds these preconceived opinions
and causes a reflection in the treatment towards those of colour bypassing their
innocence. With this data could result to biased and unfair convictions, as they
could already have preconceived negative ideas and with the irreversibility of the
death penalty leads to false convictions.

"A more recent 2014 analysis collected data from all death sentences between
1973 and 2004 (Frisch 2023). They estimated that one in every twenty-five people
sentenced to death had been wrongfully convicted. When looking at this number it
is increasing alarming as how many wring convictions and by putting them on death
penalty it could have been late, and an innocent person would have been murdered
and the real perpetrator would still be alive and free all because of predjuice and
discrimination Where justice systems are flawed and unfair trials rife, the risk of
executing an innocent person is ever present.When looking at the death row
population by state in 2022(the death penalty in 2022: end of year report) 2414
people were on death row when we apply these findings to the 1 in 25 we can see
that it is just less than 100 people wrongly committed. Excluding factors of race
and any intellectual disabilities, we can see that this is not effective as how can you
sentence someone to death when they are innocent. This is excluding those that are
actually guilty with clear evidence and proof. Across American, they are wrong 97
times which shows us that this is a reason for the death penalty not to occur.
People who are sentenced to the death penalty never get a fair chance to prove
their innocence and are therefore sentenced to the death penalty without a say .
Looking at article 10 the right to a fair public hearing if there is a discrimination at
the start it forms a bias throughout, they whole process and could result in unfair
punishment. The death penalty isn't always just punishment because a convict may
turn out to be innocent. This shows it should not be reinstated in the uk as this
demonstrates how society factors can influence the right to a fair trial and result
in those innocently being put in jail.