Society is organized so that the amount of good and evil almost balances. To maintain this, the legal system has to ensure that the appropriate rules and regulations come in place to determine the functionality. Crime is one side of society that cannot be ignored due to its impact on different individuals, especially the victims. If there were no laws to control everything and everyone, crime would have consumed society to the extent that the good side is non-existent. Different governments have varying systems to make it possible for the peaceful co-existence of different individuals, and that is where punishments come in to deal with the lawbreakers. Amongst all the methods the government has put in place to bring law and order, some attract much controversy due to the nature of the impacts and mark they leave behind. One of these approaches is the death sentence, which divides people on its effectiveness and justification on the offenders depending on the crimes they commit. The question is whether the death sentence is justifiable and how to ensure society is not going to its doom through its implementation. While some sources defend the need to take strict measures for felony crimes, the capital sentence is not necessarily a justifiable means of passing justice as no proof shows its effectiveness in deterring crime, other approaches achieve the same outcome, and it is also the role of the government to protect the life of its citizens, especially with the already broken system that might result to unfair sentences.

Research shows that there is no visible evidence that the death penalty is the most effective way to deter violent crimes. The biggest reason for its implementation is that it will make it difficult for individuals to commit crimes as they are scared of what might befall them when they get into the hands of the government. Since people fear death, they will stop engaging in criminal activities (Shatz, 2017). Statistics making comparisons, according to Shatz, have indicated that states that practice the death penalty still have more cases, almost double, compared to those that have abolished the practice. To state this clearly, there is no relationship between the rate of murders or other violent crimes and the imposition of the death penalty (Shatz, 2017). Offenders are more violent in such environments than in any other. The states practicing the death penalty clearly communicate that it is okay to resolve problems by taking life when they punish offenders, something that people end up applying in real life (Burney, 2022). More deaths, even in the presence of the death sentence, indicate that more individuals view death as a normal part of life since it is already made legal; hence, crime is still on the higher side. Research has concluded that there is a miscommunication between the occurrence of crime and capital punishment, as there is no valid connection between the two (Shatz, 2017).

The government can still get other practical approaches to justice that will work even better or similar to the death sentence. The origin of the capital sentence was associated with the need to prevent the offender from rejoining society and committing a similar felony that would make the justice system even more flawed. However, a life sentence would also achieve the same outcome as the offender will be incarcerated for the rest of their lives, and without freedom, they cannot cause any more harm (Carmichael, 2004). Instead of choosing the much more violent approach, it would make more sense to go with the method that also gives the same outcomes but in a less violent manner. Taking away life in exchange for another or teaching someone a lesson for a crime might not be the best approach to justice, something that makes the death sentence unnecessary and unjustified (Jacobs & Carmichael, 2004). Justice should focus mainly on giving severe punishment for the gravest crimes to build on the moral principles of society, but that does not have to be achieved only through a death sentence with many other less traumatizing options available.

An argument that will never stop making sense is that life is sacred and should be protected at any cost unless it is done for the greater good. The government is obligated to protect human life by taking all the appropriate steps to achieve such an outcome. Capital punishment goes against that duty as it involves taking away lives in ways that can be resolved through other options (Burney, 2022). There is no possible greater balance of good that can justify the death sentence. It does not necessarily solve the crime but adds more to the pain and trauma of an already violent and broken society. Having someone hung would mean that people would never commit felony crimes again, then it would be justified, and the death punishment would not be happening all the time as society would be completely flawless (Andre & Vela