
Originally Posted by
jctgf
hi,
I have here two versions of a composition and I'd like to know your opinion about them.
version 1:
I would be for the death penalty if the justice system were able to say with 100% of certainty that the subject was guilty.
However, when we look at who collects the forensic evidence, analyses it, judges it and who pronounces the verdict we see that these tasks are all performed by human beings. Therefore, inevitably there will be mistakes and errors made during the process, which could cause the conviction and death of an innocent person.
It has been proven that, in countries like the USA and Japan, where the death penalty is used, innocent people have been sentenced to death several times. This demonstrates the failure of this sort of punishment, mainly due to the fact that it is irreversible.
Due to the aformentioned reasons, I believe that the best solution for serious crimes such as murder, rape and child abuse, would be a life sentence with no chance of parole. This way, society would avoid this kind of criminal (do you mean person or action...criminal is person crime is action), meanwhile allowing enough time to gather evidence and proving their innocence, in case of an unfair trial.
Knowing a little about the reality inside the prisons and penitentiaries around the world, I don't think that a person who has committed a brutal crime would regret their mistakes or become a better person after serving their sentence. I also don’t think they would ever be able to live in normal society. That's why I believe removing the chance of parole for people who commit hideous crimes is essencial.
version 2:
I would be for the death penalty if the justice system were able to say with 100% certainty that the subject was guilty.
However, looking at who collects the forensic evidences, analyses it, judges it and who announces the verdict we see that all these actions are done by human beings. Therefore, there will be inevitably be mistakes and errors during the process, which could cause the conviction and death of an innocent person.
It has been proved, in countries like the USA and Japan, where the death penalty is used, that innocent people have been sentenced to death several times, which demonstrates the failure of this sort of punishment, mainly due to the fact that it is irreversible.
In light of the reasons previously mentioned, I believe that the best solution for serious crimes like murder, rape and child abuse would be a life penalty with no chance of parole. This way, society would avoid these kinds of criminals meanwhile allowing enough time to prove their innocence, in the case of an unfair trial.
Knowing a little about the reality inside prisons and penitentiaries around the world, I don't think that a person who has committed a brutal crime would confess and regret their mistakes, and become a better person, after returning to live in normal society. That's why I believe, for the kind of crimes previously stated, that the offender should not be given a chance of parole.
Thanks a lot.