Эксперт

Сергей

Задать вопрос

Мы готовы помочь Вам.

The issue of the death penalty always worried people. And now people continue discuss this problem. Particularly worrisome is the question of the advisability of applying the highest measure of punishment to terrorists and murders. Many feel that their atrocities should be given credit. The society was divided into two camps. All have different arguments for and against, but they are not strong enough.

The argument of opponents of the death penalty: a life sentence is enough, because in fact it is the same death sentence. But only a life-long prisoner has nothing to fear and he can commit a variety of crimes in prison. In addition, a criminal can be released within the framework of the law. The law contains amnesty, pardon, parole.

The main argument of opponents of the death penalty is the possibility of a miscarriage of justice, as a result of which an innocent person will die. But after all, life imprisonment also implies death in the end. Therefore, the introduction of the death penalty will have to lead to a more sophisticated method of crime investigation.

In connection with the increasing frequency of terrorist attacks, another argument has appeared — not to scare suicide bombers with death. Yes, this will not frighten suicide bombers, but the organizers of the attacks themselves are in no hurry to part with their lives. And for them, the death penalty should be possible. There are still many different arguments «for» and «against», but no one can clarify this complex issue.

My personal opinion is that the death penalty is needed to try the most atrocious crimes such as terrorism and pedophilia. But its applications need to be more thoroughly investigated to reduce the possibility of a fatal error.