Is Capital Punishment justifiable?

A few years back there was an incident where an Australian man was found to haven been in possession of more than 15 grams of heroin as he entered Singapore. In accordance of Singapore law a person caught in possession of illegal substances is assumed to be trafficking, thus putting the burden of proof on the accused. He was then found guilty and sentenced to death. This issue sparked of much debate to how right was Singapore's decision to put that young Australian to death. I feel that the use of capital punishment as a deterrent to crime has become obsolete, and that we as humans do not have the right to decide whether another person should live or die. Furthermore, people should not be convicted to die because of a moment's folly. everyone should have a right to a second chance.

As we progress as a society, implementation of capital punishment gradually becomes obsolete and even barbaric. Though those pro-capital punishment will argue that instilling the fear of death into the people have proven effective in lowering crime rates. I must stressed the use of past tense here. Indeed, it has worked well these years however we must not forget that progress does not only affect the good parts of our lives. Progress also means advances for in the ways crimes are committed as well as the new ideologies as well as the introduction of organized crime. Criminals are no longer afraid of death. Just take a look at the increasing numbers of suicide bombers, they certainly are not afraid of death. In addition the profit for each shipment of smuggled drugs or the payoff for each time they break the law is more than worth the risk. And even if criminals were afraid of death, they all know now that so long as they do not get caught or cannot be proven guilty they are perfectly fine. Proving my point that the use of capital punishment as a deterrent is no longer effective.

There is a misconception that prison inmates are a bane to society draining away precious taxpayers money for their upkeep. Hence, the misguided thought that giving a criminal the life sentence in prison is a utter waste of resources. Here i must inform those misled that prison serves as a parallel society to our own. The only difference obviously is the space constraint in th prisons, Everything else functions just as a normal town would. Prison inmates are actually put through training programmes where they can pick up skills so that they can be reintegrated back into society. During the day, Inmates are also given odd jobs to do. In Spain for example, prison inmates are made to look after and grow fruit trees, and for each fruit they harvest they are paid from the the money collected from selling them. In this manner, prison inmates are actually working for their own upkeep and are not being a burden to the working population.

Notice how the major arguments to justifying capital punishment are mostly due to practical reasons. This is largely because it is almost inherent to all of us that taking the life of another regardless the reason can never be justifiable on moral grounds(exception to the cases of euthanasia). Even sentencing a murderer to death, is logically and morally wrong. The murderer has already taken a life, by the judiciary board sentencing the murderer to death does not resolve anything. The life has already been lost nothing can be done to bring the victim back. Having said that, there would be utterly no meaning in killing the murderer. Furthermore, who are we to decide the fate of another? It is not in our position to play god. By sentencing, the accused to death , wouldn't that make us murderers too. The judiciary does have a right to punish the murderer for taking the life of another. But to sentence the murderer to death , to kill the murderer is a whole different story. By executing a criminal, would the judiciary not be stooping to their level?