Sei sulla pagina 1di 5

ARABELLA MAGALLANES OCTOBER 18, 2019

12-STEM SELENIUM EAPP PROJECT

POSITION PAPER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
(Death Penalty: Not Favor)
BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is a government-sanctioned


practice whereby a person is killed by the state as a punishment for a crime.
The sentence that someone be punished in such a manner is referred to as
a death sentence, whereas the act of carrying out the sentence is known as an
execution.
Death penalty is the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally
convicted of a capital crime. This penalty must be executed to people who are
using prohibited drugs, against human rights and many more.
The death penalty, or capital punishment, refers to the government-sanctioned
execution of individuals convicted of murder or other capital crimes. While legal
in the United States, the death penalty is not utilized in all 50 states.
However, in spite of its widespread use, the death penalty was opposed by some.
In the 12th century, Moses Maimonides, a Jewish scholar, wrote that, “It is better
and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single
innocent man to death.” He felt that the flagrant use of the death penalty in
Europe resulted in countless innocent deaths (which was, in fact, very true), and
argued that this was ruining the validity of the justice system. Maimonides’
arguments became more common from the 16th century onward, with the
emergence of modern nation states. In these systems, justice and the law
developed more fully, as the concepts of natural and legal rights also developed.
It is during this period that the prison system and police forces also started to
become similar to what we have today.
COUNTER ARGUMENT

The death penalty is applied unfairly and should not be used.


In practice, the death penalty does not single out the worst offenders. Rather, it
selects an arbitrary group based on such irrational factors as the quality of the
defense counsel, the county in which the crime was committed, or the race of the
defendant or victim. Almost all defendants facing the death penalty cannot afford
their own attorney. Hence, they are dependent on the quality of the lawyers
assigned by the state, many of whom lack experience in capital cases or are so
underpaid that they fail to investigate the case properly. A poorly represented
defendant is much more likely to be convicted and given a death sentence. With
respect to race, studies have repeatedly shown that a death sentence is far more
likely where a white person is murdered than where a black person is murdered.
The death penalty is racially divisive because it appears to count white lives as
more valuable than black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976,
158 black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while
only 11 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a black victim.
Such racial disparities have existed over the history of the death penalty and
appear to be largely intractable. It is arbitrary when someone in one county or
state receives the death penalty, but someone who commits a comparable crime
in another county or state is given a life sentence. Prosecutors have enormous
discretion about when to seek the death penalty and when to settle for a plea
bargain. Often those who can only afford a minimal defense are selected for the
death penalty. Until race and other arbitrary factors, like economics and
geography, can be eliminated as a determinant of who lives and who dies, the
death penalty must not be used.
INTRODUCTION OF THE ISSUES

This is one of the most common issues debated by the senators of the Philippines
or even around the world. Death penalty aims to execute person who are
committed to as a suspect of killing and rape which is against human rights but
this penalties as well is against human rights.
All of the families of raped victims and the victims of injustice killings are for sure
in favor of this kind of penalty. But how about the family of the accused suspect
of such crime, maybe the accused suspect is being accused of a crimes which he
did not do. I want to know, no, every people in this world want know why this
kind of punishment must be approved. What will this penalty contribute to lessen
inhuman crimes, while this punishment is also inhuman?
Bayan Muna Representative Crispin Beltran says, in the current state, the system
of justice in the country is fit to carry out the death penalty. There are too many
flaws in the justice system, and the balance is often tipped in favor of the rich and
the influential.
The poor, being unable to pay for the services of good lawyers, are often left at
the mercy of unscrupulous judges or to the weaknesses of the system itself.
According to Mr. Beltran, the poor cannot afford to have good lawyers that may
defend himself from accusations of heinous crimes he did, but think of first the
reasons why does this unfortunate people commit such heinous crimes.
Most people who experience poverty, no work, and alcohol and drug abuse are all
connected in explaining why people commit crimes; rape, user and pusher of ille
gal drugs, and other crimes that is against human rights.
My point here is, these people can make no crimes which are inhuman if these
peoplehave things to do, like having work. If the government only gives these peo
ple something to be busy with, they will not commit such heinous crimes.
There are many methods of death penalty but it is still inhuman. Otherwise, if the
death penalty will be not approve, where is the justice in our country?
I understand that the death penalty is against human rights, but how about those
people that can be a victim of rape, andthese possible suspect of heinous crimes
can have a better life.
I, as one of the people of the country of the Philippines, is not against death penal
ty. Ifthese is the only and possible way to lessen the criminals, to make them fear
of making crimes.But I only wish that the current government will support every
people that resides in thiscountry, so that we can prevent unexpected number of
people that may be executed to such penalty.
Support in a way of, giving some lectures every month or maybe once a year of
what arethe available work a person can enter to be busy with, free scholarship
for some unfortunatechildren that cannot afford to enter any school.Death penalt
y is against every human’s right yet we must think of the positive results
these can bring to us.

THESIS STATEMENT

If the aim of legal punishment is prevention of crime, are there no other


methods to prevent crime? Crimes are situational, impulsive, extreme acts
and not so much personal acts committed with permanent destructive
instinct: retribution and not extinction should be preferred.
Every human deserves the chance at life, no matter what they have done
we can’t take that right away.