Over the years, the rate of crime in the world has rapidly risen, raising concerns on the establishment of various punishments for that fit different crimes. For decades, capital punishment has been justified for serious crimes as murder with the argument that the death penalty deters potential killers from murdering people (Lanier & Acker, 2004). Critics have argued that the capital punishment offers a psychological release from conformism by reinforcing the idea that executing murderers will lead to a cumulative increase in safety in a society.
Throughout history, the community has shown the highest interest in the death penalty as the toughest punishment to mitigate murder. However many countries in the world have abolished the death penalty …show more content…
Political and moral stands have influenced the jurors’ views on moral guilt and blameworthiness of the offender based on his capability of failing to take into account the damage caused by the offense. The line for delivering a death penalty should be drawn based on the juror’s ability to process the evidence and separate their political affiliation and beliefs (Lanier & Acker, 2004). Majority of the republicans with punitive and vengeful attitudes towards criminals believed that the death penalty is a deterrent. Democrats who supported the death penalty believed that it is a cheaper punishment compared to life …show more content…
Some critics argue that the jury selection criterion is not fair as most judges are former prosecutors (Sommers & Ellsworth, 2003). It is clear that the death punishment is the preferable method of preventing crimes of murder. The death penalty is one punishment that cannot rely on the rule of law alone, but also an ethical judgement that represents the conscience of the community on deciding if the accused has lost his moral entitlement to live. It is vital for the legal system to examine the composition of the jury pool to meet the legal standards (Lanier & Acker,