In the United states, 4 percent of people sentenced to death officially have been discovered later that they are innocent. Death penalty is a government-sanctioned practice whereby a person is killed by the state as a punishment for a serious crime such as murder. The underlying value that is the basis for the death penalty is life and the value of life should be enforceable because prisoners themselves are human beings as well. I am strongly against death penalty for three main reasons. Death penalty does not prevent crimes in the first place, innocent people might be killed, and the government should not take the citizens’ lives easily even if they are criminals.

First of all, there is no evidence that the deaths of the criminals benefit the families of the victims nor the government. Contrary to many people’s beliefs, death penalty does not make the victim’s family to have emotional, economic or social benefits. Instead, death penalty just means a death of another person without any additional advantages. Although, his sin might not be forgiven, a sincere apology is still better than an effortless death. Death penalty is rather bringing the opposite things that the victim needs. Not only that, death penalty is not benefiting the society or the government either. To illustrate, there is no credible evidence that the death penalty prevents crime more effectively than a prison term. As a matter of fact, evidence reveals the opposite when we look at the example of Canada. Ever since the abolishing the death penalty in 1976, the murder rate in Canada gradually declined and was at its lowest in 2016. Moreover, in the United States, the murder rates in specific states that do not have the death penalty compared to the ones that have the death penalty were consistently lower. The southern region of the United States, which accounts for more than 80% of the executions had the highest murder rate within the four regions. Thus, it is evident that the death penalty is not in anyways proving itself to be a clear solution to benefit the individuals and the society.

Furthermore, death penalty should be abolished because of the possible deaths of innocent people which will be extremely unfair. Judges are also humans and that means their judgements are not always perfect. We have to be aware of the fact that judges can also make mistakes. In fact, there are some cases in which the criminals were executed, then later were found out to be innocent. For example, Ruben Cantu, a Texan who was executed for murder, was executed when he was 17 but, after about 12 years after his death, investigations proved that Cantu did not commit the murder, and was only an eyewitness to his testimony. Even more shockingly, close inspections finalized the fact that Cantu was not even at the location at the night of the murder. This case proves that there could be innocent victims of the law named under ‘Capital Punishment’. In this sense, death penalty is ethically wrong since we, humans, are not the perfect beings to eradicate one’s life.

Moreover, we have to think again about the definition of laws and if humans have the power to execute the criminal with the power of the law. Laws are simply the rules that we create to make a more desired environment for ourselves. Does this mean that we humans have the right to make a judgement to kill another person and take away his human rights? Human rights are believed to belong justifiably to each and every individual. There should be an alternative way to punish the criminals yet protect their rights as men. As a hopeful solution, we should give the criminals a second chance to change themselves, because after all, criminals are the ones that are most pitiful and miserable, left with themselves. If we don't give them any chance to change themselves and just executed them, then they would not have any chance or time to repent the things that they have done. Thus, we have to give them the time and so that they can at least have chance to repent of their sins.

Last but not least, the death penalty is racist and has been applied in racially-discriminatory ways. African American men are disproportionately sentenced to death. Prosecutors, juries, and judges are much more likely to apply the death penalty when the victim is white, and the defendant is black. Race is a “potent influence” at every step in the criminal (in)justice system, including search, arrest, indictment, trial, conviction, sentence, and execution. To illustrate, it is shocking that 82% of people who are currently on death penalty are convicted in cases involving white victims. Also, according to the data of Spring 2000, 72% of those on death row in Maryland were black, and 63% of them were black in both Illinois and Pennsylvania. Thus, race of both the defendant and the victim influences whether death sentence is put or not.

To conclude, death penalty should be abolished since it doesn’t produce any benefits by killing the criminals, and also doesn’t help the victims to feel better. Also, innocent people might be killed because of the misjudgment. Lastly, we should give the criminals second chance to change themselves and repent what they have done and respect their human rights as well. For the answers to these questions, I strongly believe that the death penalty should be forever abolished from our society for the protection of human rights.