Reform or Capital Punishment ?

Tweet

The world is in a crime wave right now, murder in all shapes and forms are rampant and it ranges from international terrorism,gang warfare,abduction & murder to rape & murder of children.The problem has gotten so out of hand that Capital Punishment is now on the lips of many governments even the conservative pro-life ones.The question though is "Is capital punishment a panacea for the world's crime problems or is there a milder more pro-life solution?" Proponents of Capital Punishment often use the famous principle "An eye for an eye".The belief here is that this will serve as a detterent to murder because many persons will think twice about taking another persons life if they know they will loose theirs.This seems like a pretty straightford principle however, there are a few detractors firstly how do you deal with murders on impulse,can you guarantee that the right person is condemmed and what does the evidence show for crime reduction in places that have implemented the death penalty. With regards to murder on impulse for instance would you sanction capital punishment for a brief lost in control that resulted in the murder or would you sanction a lighter sentence. Are you certain beyond a shadow of a doubt the man you are hanging is the right one .This is a seriuos undertaking,because it cannot be reversed.You cannot say for instance oops "I think I made a mistake can I try again to get it right ",it has to be right the first time. In a few of the sates in America that have implemented the death penalties there are no clear evidence to suggest that crime has gone down.Some support for the reformist however comes from China where there is no appeal process and crime is almost non existent.This may lead one to think that the problem with the american experience is proably due to existence of an appeal process. Always in constant contradiction with capital punishment are the reformists. They o believe that a better solution would be to reform the criminal and try to incorporate them in society(if they are guilty of crimes less weighty than murder )or incarerate them for life .For these persons, capital punishment is inhumane and just satisfies our blood thirst.These person argue that killing someone for a crime doesnt bring back the muredered person,it merely seeks to satisfy the family members .They believe that these persons should work and pay back their debt to society and family members by generating an income which can go towards the grieving family.Say for example ,murderer killed the breadwinner for a family then the murderer should work for the rest of their lives generating wealth while in prison and help to raise the mudered man's children What I would like to know is how the pro-lifers and reformists would feel if someone for them was murdered?.