_text_

In 1972, the death penalty was abolished due to arbitrariness and discrimination. It was temporary reinstitued in 1976 in a condition for a prommise of a "fair" punishment. Thus from then on, the final decision of death penalty was by nonpartisan groups those who are not in particular party. However, the groups concluded that it's impossible to be succeed in the task. In making decisions for the death penalty, the arbitraries consider three biases- race, class, and politics. Besides the graveness of the crime itself, the arbitraries, naturally, consider other factors which have no relation at all of deciding the punishment.

The death penalty should be abolished for two reasons. To begin with, the system of death penalty is lodsided and unfair. The decision making in the death penalty should be considered carefully and attentively since a person's (even if it's a criminal) life depends on the arbitraries' conclusions. Just by looking at the case of Troy Davis, it is apparant that today's justice system on the death penalty are full of biases and contributing factors such as race, social status, and politics. If the death penalty increases the change of acusing innocent people, it's worse than nothing. Moreover, no one has rights to decide "life or death" to anyone. If I go back to the fundamental concept of human rights and death penalty, does a particular group of people have a right over another to decide the value or the worth of living ? When the society was first created, Hobbes insisted that humans gave right up to harm others in order to gain security. If they harm others or go against rules, they should be punished. But, does this indicate that a group of people has a right to judge other people's lives? No one should have rights to decide the worth of living of another because every human is equally important; no one should have a PRIVILEGE to measure worth of lives. The effect of death penalty can't be ignored; fear basically is essential in order to keep control of the society. Nonetheless, today's injustice system on death penalty and the basic fact that every human is equal lead to the conclusion that the death penalty should be abolished.

Just a tiny complain here:

Omg... writing my position was an extremely difficult task even though the issue itself was pretty straightforward. I had so many things that came to my mind, so I had trouble with organizing all my thoughts as one stream. Thus, my response on my position might be a bit confusing.

[to sunny] Good approach!
BTW, the thesis, no one has rights to decide "life or death" to anyone, looks controversial.
In terms of Hobbes's theory, to protect people by Nation with LAW, what do you think that the difference between punishment and isolation?

If I start the sentence with,
the death penalty should be abolished due to the injustice system and human equality. Does it work?
What do you mean by isolation?
Does it indicate "isolating" the criminals from the society by putting them in jail?
If so, I personally think isolation is a term that is already included as a form of punishment. Isolation is a fairly wise way to grant security to the general public. However, punishment can includes extremity that can cross the line under the title of "punishment".

Accounting the facts from this thorough opinion, I think death penalty must and should be abolished in every reason possible. This punishment shouldn't be kept and shouldn't be protected by any possible excuses. I think so because of two main reasons: Immorality and unfairness. Without counting the facts about the crime, killing a person because of what one has done is just as brutal as the criminal. If the government gives a death penalty to a criminal, why isn't government equal to criminal? Also, in many literature or maxim, we learned that the revenge or paying back exactly what other's have done isn't the best solution. So, morally, putting our hands on our hearts, death penalty should and must be abolished. Another point is that the process that this punishment is done is unfair in certain ways. First of all, the discrimination takes a huge role in this process. In my opinion, the moment discrimination is put into judging someone's future, it is no longer a judgement, but a bully. Secondly, many of the people who receive death penalty are too poor to hire a legitimate lawyer or a proper lawyer. So, these inexperienced lawyers fail to defend and, in the end, many people died. So, considering the fact that the death penalty is unfair and immoral, it should be abolished.