The just application of the death penalty

Whether or not the Death penalty is justifiable is a rather difficult question to determine. While it is easy to say that some crimes are unforgivable, that some people deserve to die, and for some people to do the deed when required, Defining the boundary is rather hard. Rape, child molestation, and peoples incapable of comprehending emotion, sure. However, what if a person’s gone cold, but could be taught to feel again? You might add child abuse or murder, but what classifies as child abuse, and what if i murdered a person who raped my daughter? Personally, i would argue that murder as justifiable, but would the court of law agree?

What about the court of law itself, or the police that conduct the investigation and arrest? Whether or not the Death sentence is justifiable, Is giving that power to a corruptible organization of blanket charges that treat all murders as equal, despite the identity of the victim justifiable? If the morality of the Government, jury, judges, police, or lawyers is in the slightest question, How could you ensure people subject to the death penalty are actually guilty? Even if everyone involved was a moral angel, how could you ensure it remained so?

I believe the Death penalty is entirely justifiable for unreasonable crimes. That is, if a person had a starving family and murdered someone during an altercation while attempting to steal some, maybe he doesn’t deserve to die. Perhaps jail is enough. However, someone who kills innocent people for pleasure does not deserve the same justice. Better for all if he is removed from earth entirely. I can find no rational reason to ever molest a child, thus it is always an unreasonable crime. The problem with the Death Penalty is entirely upon it’s application. How could a civilized society trust that the penalty shall never be abused? I have seen far to many people lie, not because the truth would hurt them, but because they get more benefit from lying.

The only Time it would be just to allow a civilized court to hand down the death penalty is in a case with no ambiguity, an unreasonable crime. If there is a shadow of a doubt, Than the death penalty would be unjust if permissible, as the potential for abuse is incredible. It may also have the benefit of deterring people from all manor of crime, big or small, were a society to have the death penalty, while the people who would commit an unreasonable crime care no more about consequence than they do about emotion, and thus commit the act, irregardless of the penalty. As such, in that restricted capacity, the death penalty is just, but in any wider application the chance of corruption and abuse is far too high.