The death penalty is an important and very disputed aspect of society. Laws are supposed to bring together the basic principles and purposes of society, including the recognition and protection of individual rights to life, liberty, and the security of people and property. The two separate groups of norms that are involved with the death penalty are desirable social principles and respectable moral principles. The death penalty has shown itself to be an ineffective punishment, due to the fact that, it is an immoral and anti-social practice in today's society. It does not and will not uphold any of the basic principles that are the basis of the law in this country. This country desires revenge, and that is why we have the death penalty. Do not let people fool you with words such as justice and deterrence, because the death penalty serves neither of these purposes. The fact is, the death penalty is not a deterrent of crime, as the death penalty has been proven not to deter crime. The death penalty can not be called moral, because taking another human life in such a fashion is not moral. Also, there is always the risk that an innocent mans life may be taken. Now I ask you, is taking an innocent mans life moral. The discriminate way the death penalty is given to minorities is not a socially acceptable occurrence, especially in today's society. Last of all, the death penalty is an uneconomical practice, and wastes valuable social resources in a steady stream of court costs that seem never-ending. When you look at all these circumstances combined, it is futile to argue for the death penalty. The facts shown stand against it. In the end, the death penalty looks to be nothing but legalized murder, and there is no other solution but to execute the death penalty once and for all. .
.
Any punishment should contribute to the reduction of crime; accordingly, the punishment for a crime should not be so idle a threat or so slight a deprivation that it has no deterrent or incapacitative effects.