Maria Campuzano English 1010 Steven Hall The Death Penalty

Whenever in the country's media reported criminal acts that impact the community by cowardice and intentions that were made by individuals or groups in society enemies again proliferate the opinions in favor of the legalization of the death penalty. Countries and communities where there is capital punishment believe that, as the punishment proportionate to the harm done, is worth more just. The pain, anger, thirst justice and, why not, for revenge, and the purposes and consequences of these crimes are predict factors preventing negative ranges legalization, the penalty of dead is folly should ever enshrined in our Constitution . Despite the clamor with some advocating the legalization of the death penalty, there are different factors that do not favor their application. Whenever a society or a state run by one of its members, even when it has been proven that crime accused, precisely mimics the behavior he condemns. This approach ignores a serious contradiction. With this procedure, you are implicitly suggesting other potential murderers who kill people can be a lawful way to solve serious human problems. But killing is the worst solution to resolve conflicts even the most human. The approval of the death penalty in our times would return to outmoded barbaric times and not showing logic (logos). He says that deterrence is the only goal of the executions. But in truth the penalty of dead is not intimidating. And also dangerous criminals are people

insensitive to physical pain and moral. They know very well that death is one of the risks of his trade, not so terrified, as many people naively believe well. Nor intimidates those who commit crimes of passion, and that when these people commit crimes are unaware of their behavior and the consequences of it.The only people who cringe at the death penalty are occasional criminals and honest and peaceful people who fear for some unexpected circumstance of fate, come to see committed a crime that could lead to the death penalty. Edmund Brown, former governor of California, said after a performance in 1964. "The death penalty has become a serious failure, because despite his mistake and incivility, it has protected the innocent and has stopped the hands of

criminals." corollary to the above, the dead penalty does not instantiate. If so, in countries that still exists so inhuman punishment, they would place the heinous crimes committed there. That is precisely the case in many counties in the United States where there is still such a sanction. Nothing has shown that there violent crime rates have declined. In Spain, for example, specialists in criminology and Psych sociology.( Conclude that the killers, perhaps the first candidates to apply them death penalty are mostly people who have no hope of reaching old age and tend to believe who die before the age of 30 years. A murderers of that class are not intimidated by the death penalty, for them life has no value. In the majority of countries where the death penalty is applied, is prohibited for children less than 18 years. By legalizing the death penalty in our country, is likely to remain the same humanitarian principle. But it is also very likely that organized crime would hire minors as hit men to carry out their crimes as it is already doing and for them there would be the possibility of sentencing them to death.

On many occasions it has been proved with the passage time how unfair it was to have someone punished as guilty to the crime of which he was charged, was not investigated thoroughly. Our judicial system, with better legal infrastructure, is prone to have errors. A world famous event will serve to illustrate this injustice; we refer to the case called "the six of Birmingham". A London court of law sentenced to life imprisonment to six Irish IRA members suspected of having exploded a bomb in a pub Birmingham causing death 21 people in 1974 in this case sound unfair because the court do not have any facts and is mostly rhetoric of pathos . Only in early 1991 British justice acknowledged his mistake after througou research. During 16 years, 3 months and 21 days in prison were convicted suffered various forms of torture and after all this time I feel like the law was effective and rhetoric of logos. The case of six of Birmingham not the only mistake made by British justice. To date has not yet been given to the real culprits. What chance of correcting the mistake English judges have had if they had been suspects sentenced to death? If in countries with strong forensic and legal system these events occur, what worse things would not happen in ours, which lacks a modern and efficient infrastructure to ensure that criminology has not lead to impunity or wrongly convict an accused? This case is a good example of use of logos and pathos made by British justice instead of ethos. The brutal methods used at executions demonstrate a spirit of revenge. It seems that the purpose of the death penalty is not less murders being committed but society feel avenged. But with the application of the dead penalty there is no proportionally between the harm caused and the reaction of the state. One problem we have to face the judges is that, very often, the very nature of the facts difficult to establish the

proportionality of the sentence which lead sometimes to end in loss of ethos like in the case mention in paragraphs 8, so the case for example with drug crimes, against humanity, against the environment, the illegal collection of savings, speculation, political crimes. So the criminal statutes do not require that, for example, whose house burned deliberately caused a fire with criminal intent, or that violates the rapist. The famous law of retaliation that says "eye for eye, tooth for tooth" is not appropriate for our times. But this should not be interpreted as an invitation to cowardice disguised as tolerance towards criminals, but the partners have understood the need to overcome a range of values over who is condemned. The state responds perverse acts of criminals with retaliate criterion is a despicable attitude. The dead penalty is justified if it is extirpated with real causes of crime. While there are aberrant social injustices and inequality to justice, possession of land in the hands of an elite that neither works nor easy to cultivate the peasant, while governmental and political apathy exists to meet the needs of housing, education , health, labor and justice, it is fair to legalize such a drastic penalty. With the death penalty, it is true, potential threat to the offender, but that does not solve the root of the problems causing violence. 's no secret that in our country the weight of law rarely rests on privileged sectors. Numerous embezzlement, bribery, smuggling technical and a chain of criminal acts committed by members of the privileged class unpunished. Numerous white-collar criminals who enrich themselves with the complacency of various political and government thereof, remain free while the jails are full of social uprooted without economic power or another class to push the system to declare them innocent. Surely that approved the death penalty, this sector only would apply. Definitely, the death penalty is a cruel punishment whose implementation brutalizes who applied, placing it in the same plane as the criminals

they are applied. If life is the main human right, the delete is the first violation, and if the state that formalizes the crime, aggravated rape. When a law does not act by which it is created, it is best not approve.

Works Cited Dr. Raquel Busaniche. Law of retaliation-History. 30 jun 2011. Web. 10 Oct. 2013. Edmund Brown . Dead Penalty. 1964. Web. 10 Oct. 2013 Gareth Peirce. The Birmingham Six. 11 March 2011. Web. 10 Oct. 2013.