The Death Penalty The death penalty has been, and still is, one of the most discussed topics in the United States. Its opponents argue it to be an unnecessary and violent punishment because it seems no less barbaric than the crime, as well as it is sometimes not believed to serve its purpose as a deterrent. However, there is a fundamental difference between the loss of an innocent life and the execution of a criminal in accordance with the law. Death penalty might not be the most ideal solution, but abolishing it would put in danger the lives of many innocent and law-abiding citizens. Not only has the death penalty proven to be constitutional, cost effective, ethically correct deterrent of future murders, but it also is a punishment that fits the crime.
Despite the disputes and controversies its potential capacity of regulating moral conflicts in a modern world is underestimated. Society is in the position to implement this strong moral act to show that there is no way to escape the consequences of wrongful deeds. The benefits of elimination of dangerous criminal elements, deterrence, reduced incarceration, shortening of sentence expenses and the safety of the community are the result of capital punishment implementation. . Even though, changes should be introduced to the system of penalty to adjust it to the needs of each particular community, it is still one of the most effective measures of combating and prevention of the crime.
As a member of society, there will be times where we would need to break the law in an important occasion. The laws were made for our society to be safe and they also serve as a protection of an individual’s rights. Laws prevent people from getting hurt or getting into situations they might regret later in their lives. But there will be scenarios where we would need to break the law for our protection, protection of our family, or in a state of an emergency. Breaking the law would be acceptable if lives are in danger or to prevent an even more serious law being made.
Criminal accountability refers to the responsibility taken for one 's actions when a crime is committed, these crimes may include sexual abuses, theft and murder. Accountability is intended to make sure every crime is taken under prosecution to maintain peace and equality in the country, however, the accountability of one that works within the UN body or with the government remains unclear due to many factors such as immunity, which exempts the criminal from being punished for the crimes they have committed. This is a major problem as it is biased and lacks justice to the violated victims, therefore, it must be taken under extreme deliberation in order to bring peace and exclude discrimination. Iraq has taken extreme care to amend and implement the “Penal Code”, which is a code that aims to categories criminal offences and adopt legal legislations to develop punishments for all the types of possible crimes. The most recent amendment to Iraq’s Penal Code 111 of 1969 was “The Provisional Authority Order No.
To argue that capital punishment is justified, one must initially state the possible objectives of the policy of capital punishment: revenge, retribution, general deterrence and specific deterrence. Some objectives of punishment--for instance, rehabilitation--do not apply. However, out of all those that do apply, one of them has the most benefit to the society: general deterrence. Specific deterrence means simply preventing the particular criminal from commiting more crimes. The death penalty achieves this objective, but more impressive is how it deters future crime by other criminals.
These improvements are aimed to monitor suspicious behaviors and hopefully prevent future terrorist attacks like 9/11. This topic is highly controversial. Opponents of the Patriot Act argue that this act restricts the right to privacy which is promised to citizens by the founding fathers and is stated in the Constitution. Supporters argue that the Patriot Act is a necessary response to 9/11 and provides our law enforcement with the means to eradicate potential terrorist behaviors before they occur. Truly, the Patriot Act is one of the most positive government or public response to the 9/11 attacks on the United States.
We all know that this is practically impossible given the current regime. However, I do believe that the rest of the world can do much more to help with human trafficking as a result of North Korean’s Dictatorship, such as offering formal shelters for those crossing the border. As to the right to freedom of movement, it requires policy changes within the state. The truth is that the North Korean government has been violating human rights for decades. Actions were taken to change this cruel reality.
The Rwandan genocide, for instance, illustrated the lack of capacity of the peacekeepers to stop massacres. Accordingly, the UN learned hard lessons regarding the need to make aggressive preparations that can make them ready to engage parties that kill civilians. The world was able to witness a more robust peacekeeping mission during the UN mission in Sierra Leone in 1999 after it learned from the weaknesses during the Rwandans genocide. The peacekeepers were ready to use force, and this helped to a great extent to contain a conflict that would have otherwise degenerated into the kind of massacre experienced in
It thus obliges state to carry out investigations in matter of enforced disappearances and to prosecute those who are found guilty of it. Analysis: Considering the international instruments relating to torture, forced disappearances and extra-judicial killings, it is perceptible that India is under an obligation under international law to punish the perpetrators of Human Rights violations. Though India has not ratified CAT and CPAPED, but it is still bound by their provisions. The prohibition of torture, inhuman and degrading treatment contained in CAT is a jus cogens principle in international law. This was first time held in the case of ‘Prosecutor v. Furundzija ’ by United Nations International Criminal Tribunal and torture was made a crime of Universal Jurisdiction, punishable in any state irrespective of the nationality of the victim or place of
Thinking about how disordered this world is, death penalty is a good solution to solve crimes related to murder and sexual offence, which are soiling this world. If it is such a good solution, why not used it earlier? Death penalty has been a controversy, because of the fact that it violates criminals’ rights. However, if we think about it backwards, they cannot judge that it violates human rights; it is them who first violated innocent people’s rights. Besides, there are other reasons to support my idea, and furthermore persuade you.