Anti Death Penalty

WE IN THE NEGATIVE SIDE YOUR EXCELLENCIES TRULY BELIEVE THAT DEATH PENALTY IS NOT THE KEY SOLUTION TO THE DETTERENT OF CRIMES., IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE “Justice that kills is not justice. The imposition of capital punishment has no positive impact on crime prevention or security and does not in any way repair the harm done to the victims and their families. WE BELIEVE THAT LIFE IMPRISONMENT IS ENOUGH WE ONLY NEED TO STRENGTHEN THE POLICE POWER HERE IN OUR STATE,BY EMPOWERING THE LAW ENFORCEMENT WE CAN ENSURE THAT THE CRIME RATE HERE IN THE PHILIPPHINES WILL DECREASE. WHY DO WE NEED TO REINSTATE THE DEATH PENALTY? FIRST OF ALL MORALITY: Ultimately, the moral question surrounding capital punishment has less to do with whether those convicted of violent crime deserve to die than with whether state and governments deserve to kill those whom it has imprisoned. The legacy of racial apartheid, racial bias, and ethnic discrimination is unavoidably evident in the administration of capital punishment. Death sentences are imposed in criminal justice system that treats you better if you are rich and guilty than if you are poor and innocent. This is an immoral condition that makes rejecting the death penalty on moral grounds not only defensible but necessary for those who refuse to accept unequal or unjust administration of punishment.Moreover “An eye for an eye” does not mean vengeance, for the Almighty God himself said, vengeance is mine and by this he meant he would met justice in accordance with his mysterious way through the Ten Commandments from which morals laws were taken. ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 3 SECTION ONE NO one has the right to deprive another person of his life, or to degrade him or her to the status of an animal, or abuse and debase a person to the extent of destroying forever his or her dignity. In the Philippines where there is no clean and fair justice system, there is no doubt that if ever the Republic Act No. 7659 or the Death Penalty Act is reimposed there are many Filipino who will lose their right to life and many will be sentenced with death penalty and die as it is said those who have less in life, have less in law, that the death penalty will be biased to the poor ones who could be easily accused by the rich one or those who were set up to be pointed out as the criminal. As long as bail is pegged on wealth and the enforcement of law is swayed by money, position and possessions, the death penalty will be a sword of Damocles over the head of the impoverished and the weak. "Death is... an unusually severe punishment, unusual in its pain, in its finality, and in its enormity... The fatal constitutional infirmity in the punishment of death is that it treats 'members of the human race as nonhumans, as objects to be toyed with and discarded. [It is] thus inconsistent with the fundamental premise that even the vilest criminal remains a human being possessed of common human dignity. There is also no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than long terms of imprisonment. States that have death penalty laws do not have lower crime rates or murder rates than states without such laws. And states that have abolished capital punishment show no significant changes in either crime or murder rates. The death penalty has no deterrent effect. Claims that each execution deters a certain number of murders have been thoroughly discredited by social science research. The death penalty it self is a crime the death penalty is murder. The worst thing about it. Errors:
The system can make tragic mistakes. In 2004, the state of Texas executed Cameron Todd Willingham for starting the fire that killed his children. The Texas Forensic Science Commission determined that the arson testimony that led to his conviction was based on flawed science. As of today, 139 wrongly convicted people on death row have been exonerated. DNA is rarely available in homicides, often irrelevant (as in Willingham’s case) and can’t guarantee we won’t execute innocent people. Capital juries are dominated by people who favor the death penalty and are more likely to vote to convict.

Keeping killers off the streets for good:
Life without parole, on the books in 49 states (all except Alaska), also prevents reoffending. It means what it says, and spending the rest of your life locked up, knowing you’ll never be free, is no picnic. Two big advantages:
-an innocent person serving life can be released from prison
-life without parole costs less than the death penalty

Costs, a surprise to many people:
Study after study has found that the death penalty is much more expensive than life in prison. The high costs of the death penalty are for the complicated legal process, with the largest costs at the pre-trial and trial stages. The point is to avoid executing innocent people. The tremendous expenses in a death penalty case apply whether or not the defendant is convicted, let alone sentenced to death.

Crime reduction (deterrence):
The death penalty doesn't keep us safer. Homicide rates for states that use the death penalty are consistently higher than for those that don’t. The most recent FBI data confirms this. For people who lack a conscience, fear of being caught is the best deterrent.

Who gets it:
Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty isn't reserved for the worst crimes, but for defendants with the worst lawyers. It doesn't apply to people with money. Practically everyone sentenced to death had to rely on an overworked public defender. How many people with money have been executed?

Victims:
People assume that families of murder victims want the death penalty imposed. It isn't necessarily so. Some are against it on moral grounds. But even families who have supported the death penalty in principle have testified to the damage that the death penalty process does to families like theirs and that life without parole is an appropriate alternative.

It comes down to whether we should keep a system for the sake of retribution or revenge even though it isn’t effective in reducing violent crime, costs much more than alternatives and, worst of all, can lead to the nightmare of executing someone for a crime he didn’t commit. Lastly, the death penalty encourages violence. In eighty percent of the United States, murder rates actually increase after executions take place. Executions lead to a brutalization effect, a climate of violence and killing to avenge grievances. “The death penalty’s not a deterrent. In fact, the figures would suggest it’s just the opposite.We must come to realize that by killing a murderer, no lives are being saved, no lives will be returned, and no one is learning a lesson from the execution. It is only revenge, which does no good for anyone. The death penalty is expensive, it is not a deterrent, it is actually a crime because it is murder, and it encourages violence. Therefore, the death penalty should be illegal.