In the current technology-driven period, keepingprivatedatareservedis turning out to be challenging. The extremelycategorizedinformationis turning out to bemoreaccessible to the public databases, as a result of extensive interconnections being experienced by technology. The datais made available and many people can sift through it due to this interconnectivity. This processcastigates negative perception about technology. Technology is persistently turning out to be significant in easing people’s daily lives, nevertheless, there are perilsassociated with technology. Cybercrimes is one of the main dangers that are associated with technology use. Normal Internet users may be unacquaintedwith cybercrimes, and theybecome victims of cybercrimes.Several innocentpeople have fallen victimsof cybercrimes globally,particularly since technology is sprouting at a fast pace. Cybercrimes refer to any crimes that cause harm to other people using a computer and a network (Dalla & Geeta, 2013). Cybercrimes can take place throughinfiltration of privacy and confidentiality. This means that when privacy and confidential information is lost or interrupted by illegitimately individuals, it allows for high profile crimes, for instance, hacking, cyber terrorism, espionage, financial theft, copyright infringement, spamming, cyber warfare, and many more crimes, which occur across borders. Cybercrimes can happen to anyone once their information is breach by an unlawful user.The purpose of this paper is to analyze the evolving nature of cyber-crimes,find out the role of Interpol in fighting cybercrime, technologies being used to fight cybercrime, and ways of enhancing cyber-crime.
There are several factors that lead to the increased rates of cybercrime. In the first place, the aggressive advancement of current technology is making these rates of crime to be very difficult to be detected. Moreover, law enforcement agencies and people do not have required methodical proficiency to counter with felonious activity. In some cases, once a criminal activity has been discovered,the affected parties, for instance, businessmen getunenthusiastic to lodge a report and further investigationdue to the fear of antagonistic publicity, awkwardness, loss of public poise, investor loss, or other economic ramifications. As a result of these factors, the rates ofcyber-crime cases and the statistics across the world cannot be detectedand recorded accurately.
There are three main categories of cybercrimes. These are crimes against the person, property and the government. Cybercrime against a personentails harassment through email or cyber-stalking. Cyber Stalking refers to the deliberate process of following the moves of an individual’s doings over internet. This is achieved throughnumerous protocols accessible, for instance e- mail, chat rooms, user net groups while. At the same time, harassment entails sexual, racial, religious, or others aspects among others. Women and children are the predominant victims in this kind of crime.
Under the crimes against property,it incorporates aspects such as computer defacement by diffusion of harmful programs to other computer through internet. Furthermore, cybercriminal can also entail taking contents of individual bank account online. The most common method ofachieving this is through the money transfer email scam like when individuals receive emails invitingthem to help with transmitting funds from other nations. Hacking into organizations websites involves property trespass, and pilfering information is property theft. The third category involved cybercrimes against governments. The most common example of this category is cyber terrorism that affects so many lives.It involves hacking into a government website, predominantly the military sites, and also web jacking. Through web jacking, hackers gain admittance and control over the website of another entity and can go ahead and change the content of website in order to fulfillpolitical impartial or for monetary gains.
The Evolving Nature of Cybercrime
Currently, new trends entailedin cybercrime are evolving each passing moment with projected costs to the international economy running to billions of dollars. Earlier on, cybercrime was devotedand practiced largely by specific persons or small groups. At present, there are evident compound cybercriminal networks from different individuals across the worldwho are committing crimes in an extraordinarymeasure. Criminal groupsare turning progressively to the Internet to facilitate their activities through criminal actions and they maximize their profit within the least time possible. The crimes that are committed online are common, for instance, theft, fraud, and illegal gamblingamong others. However,these crimes are evolvingin terms of opportunities being innovated and presented online and,consequently,turning out to beprevalent and destructive.
Distinctwith other legitimate businesses, cybercriminals are not inhibited by national limitations and function under a cover of obscurity. This factor has enhanced online criminal activities since it makes it hard for law enforcement agencies to detect the perpetrators to discover their next move. Initially, cybercrime focused on single person operating criminals who took the advantage of weaknesses in the computer operating system or computer network. In as much asthere was some degree of damage financially and the security risks, the crimes by a single persondid not have the motive and determination of traditional criminal gangs. Therefore, cybercrime was infantile during this era with no huge damages. Currently, there are advanced cybercriminal activities organized and focused everywhere. Like in the olden times,thecurrent hardened criminal gangs are working on the Internet in a safe domain that operate and generate large profits. They have incorporated proficient elements into the world of cybercrime in using computer networks to penetratethe systems for huge financial gain. The new cybercrimes that have evolved include cyber-extortion, information theft, fraud,identity theft, exploitation of children, intellectual property theft, phishing, and vishingamong others.
The Role of Interpol in Fighting Cybercrime
Interpol is one of the ancient and prevalent forms of global police collaborationinternationally. It entails 190 member states that aggressivelyunite on numerous crime capacities. It is significant to note that from the legitimatestandpoint, Interpol is aworldwideassociationdespite the fact that it was not established through a worldwide accord (Broadhurst, 2006) The main objectives of the entity are detailed in the article 2 of its own Constitution and are “To guarantee and encourage the extensive possible mutual assistance between all criminal police establishments within the limits of the laws existing in the different nations and in the spirit of the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”” and “To establish and develop all institutions likely to contribute effectively to the prevention and suppression of ordinary law crimes”. Through the Interpol Global Cybercrime Expert Group, the organ assemblesprofessionals from diverse cyber-related arenas to offerguidance on establishing cyber strategy, research, training, forensics, and operations.There are noboundaries in cyberspace, thus, giving rise to challenges for the police and other law enforcing agencies in investigating cybercrime occurrences, which may encompassrespondents, victims, and crimes coveringseveralnations.Interpolsupports member republics in distributingas well as consolidating information on acknowledged cyber happenings, and it scrutinizes this data with an intention of coming up withapplicableintellectto be used by police and other law enforcing entities on the ground.Apart from intelligence sharing, Interpol alsoprovidesdirection on best applies in carrying out cybercrime inquiries. It is evident that most of cybercrimes are transnational in nature, therefore,the entity becomes a natural partner for all the law implementation agency searching to investigate these crimes on a compliant level. Through collaboration with the private industry, Interpol is able to offerhomegrown law implementationfirms with intensive cyber intelligence, resulting from coalescingefforts on a global scale. The main organization resourcefulness in cybercrime focus on functioning and investigative support, cyber intelligence and examination, digital forensics, invention and exploration, capacity building
and national cyber reviews.
Use of New Technologies to Fight Cybercrime
The currentpersonal, commercial, and government migration to the digital demesne has made criminals to carry out their activities easily and accurately. Large-scale cyber-attacks are turning out to be more regular and expensive for businesses and organizations across the world. The assailantsare having enough resources and sophistication as well as being betterplannedthan ever before.Several banks, especially in the United States, havefallen victims of cyber-attacks over the past period of time. For instance, cybercriminals managed to take 3.6 million social security numbers as well as almost 400,000 credit card numbers and tax figures from South Carolina Department of Revenue computers, burdening the state with a total of $20 million in onslaught costs (Be’ery,2012). Therefore, improvedtechnology security needs to be developed and invested. Financial services organizationsneed to enhancea yearly average cyber security spending to address the issue of cyber-attacks.
Therefore, as organizations and administration agencies progressivelyembrace cloud, mobile and social computing, information technology (IT) environments are turning out to be more hard to protect.Progressively, the entities need to consider that online security threats are inevitable.Technological approaches need to go beyond defense to entail detection, response, and recovery. These requirements necessitate the need forimproved skills andstrategies as well as distinct tools and technology,for instance, unremittingobserving and risk forensics powered by analytics. Cyber security is progressivelyturning out to be a point of focus among companymanagement.
With cloud, mobile, and social computing making new security exposures, customarycyber security products, such as firewalls and antivirus scanners are not in position tohandle every threat. Applications, such as network security analyzers,on the other hand,can be challenging for some entities to efficientlyapplythem without external assistance and expertcyber securitycapacity, which isa short supply. Specializedamenitiesorganizations are responding by integrating security offerings that espouse the computerization and analytical abilities of IT platforms with human intelligence to assist in detecting criminal activities.These improvements are vital in assistingfirms to monitor, gather, and investigatehuge data sets and detectarrays that designategaps or attempted breaches. In this manner, organizations are empowered to respond to dangers with more alertness. Establishmentscan no moredepend onunreceptiveresistances against cyber-attacks. Incorporating combinedastuteness and linkingmechanizationas well as analytics to human judgment is vital forfirms to lessen the danger of a cyber-attack and decrease the expenses of extenuatingoccurrencestake place.
Ways of Enhancing Online Safety
Different legislations against infringements of privacy have been adopted in several nations of the world. Moreover, data protection laws have also been set up to address the concept of cyber-crime. A critical observation of the laws indicate that diverse worldwide conductshave been attainedsubstantialconsistency in the commonorganizational and civil law regulations of the national privacy laws.Therefore, there is a need for a global criminalization to address the cybercrime menace. Nevertheless, some nations, especially developing countries, may lack the required investigative ability or technological capability to handle the issue of cyber security. This calls for measures toharmonize and alignglobal cybercrime laws by entities and bodies, for instance, the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime (COECC) as well as the United Nations Convention against Transnational organized Crime. Global co-operation by nations across the world isnecessary to comply withthe Conventions to ensure the laws are applied uniformly since the problem is universal. The main objective of the laws should be to settle for a homogenous criminal approach policythat is objected to guard the society against cybercrime, specifically through integration ofeffective legislation and enhancing global co-operation.
Cybercrime will always be a continuing confront regardless of the development being witnessed in several nations across the world. Numerous nations have established their own rules and regulations toaddress issues ofcybercrimes. Nevertheless, some nations do not have any laws and regulations but they exclusivelydepend onordinaryglobal law to put these crimes on trial. Besides the outdated laws and regulations to deal with cybercrime perpetrators,there are also delicate consequences in place to chastisecyber-crime perpetrators, an aspect that has lessimplication on the preclusion of cybercrimes, which have an effect on the financial system and individuals’ socialwellbeing on a large scale by the perpetrators. Therefore, there is a franticrequirement for all nations across the global scale to put up joint efforts and decide on what amounts to cybercrime, andestablish ways to address the problems of cybercrimes globally.
Hackers and cyber criminals will remain to be in existence so long as computers have will exist. In recent times alongsideadvances of technology and the rise of the internet, cybercrimes have progressed in astonishing ways. Currently, individualsmuch of their day connected to the internet than they do without it. Cyber criminals have taken this opportunitythrough manipulating e-commerce and misusing intellectual properties across the whole world
Several cases of cyber-criminal activities are being witnessed every day. In numerous scenarios, the legal system has failed to address the issue fully despite the efforts being put.In olden days, the internet was associated to the wild west, having no rules and regulations tocontrol it. However, cyber law is becoming progressivelybecoming in place and harder to break the law online. However, the system is not faultless since many people are stillfinding it easier to get away with a crime on the online than it is in real life.
Regarding the laws that on cybercrime, some facets of the law are functional while other arenot working. Technology is here to remain, therefore individuals will continue to spend much of their time and resources online. Every time an individual is online, he or she is a susceptible target of a cyber-criminal. Criminals od perpetrators are complex to deal with since they are anonymous and located in different parts across the world. This is why it is critical to carry on working with our foreign partners to fortify cyber laws not just in one nation but across the whole world.
It is recommended that unless effectivelawful actions are applied toindividual’snational and international ways of harrying criminals, self-protection is key and represents the first mechanism of controlling cybercrimes. Every person and organizationsneed to ensure they are familiar with cybercrimesbecause they can be victims of the peril. This fundamental awareness is significant inthwarting possible cybercrimes against individuals.
Furthermore, the law protecting intellectual property owners against online piracy should be enhanced. Numerous cases of file sharing sites are still in actuality since they function in nations where online piracy is permissible. A focus should be placed on these nations and force put on them to prohibit these websites to function, particularly when thepopulations have access to them. These can also be enhanced through cracking setting stringent penalties on the people who usethese sites to download pilferedinformation or content.
As indicated before, cybercrimewill remain as long as technology is active, if anything it is even becoming resilient. Through an analysis ofoccurrences, lesson can be learnt from them and apply that information in the thwartingimpending crime. Cyber law will also have to be transformed in order to keep in shape with theevolving nature of the criminalsin order to be able to control cybercrime. There should also be a balance in law regardingprotecting citizens from crime and invading on their rights.
Another way in improving the problem of cybercrime is through education. As we have seen the challenges of cybercrime, governments and other concerned agencies should in strategies ways of fighting them through education and not depending on law alone.It has been evident that several organizationsas well as government agencieshave identifiedloopholes with which cyber criminals or even cyber-terrorist could can make use in conducting future crimes.In most cases,organizationsinvolve them as specialistsin helping them to construct solid security for their systems and data. Through learning their techniques and methods, organizations should come up with skills learned from these activities to be able to bar their activities. Furthermore, these entities should invest in providing more skills and knowledge to the technological experts in order to counter methods that are employed by the cyber criminals.
Moreover, it is becoming almostimpracticable to condense cybercrime from the cyber-space. As it is evident from different acts passed, it is proven that no legislation has attained the level of total abolition of cybercrime across the globe.Therefore, the onlypotentialmechanism is through individuals understanding their rights online and coming up with morestringentrules to punish cybercrime perpetrators.
Nonetheless, the corporate world needs to come up withapproaches to ensure that their employees are guided and they follow thesafety conducts to make sure thatuprightness and privacy of stored datais maintained at all times to contest cybercrimes. Safety practices,for instance, staying off work sites during an organization working timesare crucial to reduce the chances of viruses being downloaded to infringe the system and forward chain emails. Others include not leaving an open workstation unattended or security key sharing over implicit mediums. If all these strategies are observed, chances of cyber-criminal work are minimized.
Be’ery,Tal. (2012). The South Carolina Data Breach: A Lesson in Deaf and Blind Cybersecurity. Retreived from http://www.securityweek.com/south-carolina-data-breach-lesson-deaf-and-blind-cybersecurity
Broadhurst, R. (2006). Developments in the global law enforcement of cyber-crime. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 29(3), 408-433.
Dalla, E. H., & Geeta, M. S. (2013). Cyber Crime A Threat to Persons, Property, Government and Societies. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, 3(5), 997-1002.
Understanding the four categories of death is essential for any criminal investigator. It helps to identify the type of death at a crime scene. There are four categories of death. To some extent, the categories are similar, but again they have differences.
Natural death occurs when the body stops functioning on its own. This death can result from medical factors like terminal illness among other natural causes. Accidental death is death that comes in an unexpected way that is not natural, murder or suicide. Sometimes, it can be referred to as manslaughter- involuntary murder resulting from acts of violence or death my misadventure-death caused by engaging in mortal danger risks. Suicide happens when a person deliberately takes their life. In most cases, it results from extreme emotional distress that results from severe depression. Lastly, homicide involves taking a person’s life in a planned and executed murder (Gilbert, 2010).
Teen homicide in Chicago
A 17-year-old boy had fatally shot another tender in South Chicago on June 12, 2012. The boy was charged with murder. Keon Tolliver was charged on June 13 as an adult for shooting Romelo Golden (17 years old). The case prosecutor, Bob Groebner said that Golden was approached by the defendant while standing in front of the 8900 block of South Brandon Avenue. According to the prosecutor, the deceased, of the 8800 block of South Burley Avenue was shot by Keon in the other thigh, neck, arm and the forehead. According to the police, the deceased was taken to John H. Stroger Hospital at 10.39, and he was pronounced dead upon arrival (Hanzlick, 2007).
I suggest the death investigators collect any weapons that are found at the scene and they also take finger prints on the weapons. They will later determine whether the weapons were used to aid the death of the deceased or it resulted from a different means. Collecting information of the psychological well-being of the deceased is also important in suicide cases
Death cases require the investigators to find answers to the victim’s family. Unlike other cases, it requires adherence to strict guidelines. Clues that identify particular types of death must be searched by investigators. A collection of evidence must be done carefully to help in the conviction of suspects and murders in cases of homicide.
Preliminary death investigations are done to gather evidence that will help end a case by identifying the type of death and identifying the criminals involved in the case. The investigations follow a well-spelt procedure.
Identify and introduce self and role- the investigator establishes formal contact with other representatives from official agencies. He builds rapport and determines the safety of the scene. The introduction helps to develop a collaborative investigative effort. The investigator should carry identification should authority question them. It is also crucial to establish the safety of the scene before entering.
Ensure safety and security of the scene
Any physical or environmental threats to the investigator must be removed to ensure safe conduction of investigations. The investigating staff must use protective devices to prevent any injury. The investigator might also endeavor to protect the evidence against any form of contamination or even loss. Scenes that prove to have potential hazards that can tamper with the evidence necessitate the removal of the body before investigations can go on.
Before initiating death investigations, appropriate personnel must determine if the person is dead. Confirmation of death helps in determining jurisdictional duties.
This step allows for the exchange of factual and initial factual information. The investigator should locate a staging area and document the location of the scene. He should gather preliminary details to aid the determination of the nature and scope of the investigation. Lastly, he should confirm accounts given by eye witnesses. The investigator conducts a walk through the scene and takes note of any evidence.
An example of a preliminary investigation that was carried out successfully is that of the death of Robin William. The deceased is believed to have committed suicide as a result of asphyxia since he was hanging. According to the investigation, the 63-year-old man had a pocket knife and a closed blade that was found close to his body, additionally, the deceased had superficial cuts on his left wrist (Prahlow, 2012).
As rigor passes, the skin of the abdomen turns green. The rest of the body becomes discolored. Methane gas forms that cause swelling of the body. Bacteria inhabit the body. After death, the bacteria proliferate. Only warm and cold weather retards their growth.
When a person dies, the body temperatures cool to the room temperature from a normal internal temperature of 98.6F. This decrease is known as algor mortis. This process helps in determining formulas that could predict the consistency of the body (Prahlow, 2012).
This is a condition where body muscles initially become flaccid after death. After 1 to 3 hours, the joints freeze and become rigid. Rigor mortis increases in warmer temperatures and retards in cooler ones.
Hanzlick, R. (2007). Death investigation: Systems and procedures. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Prahlow, J. A., & Byard, R. W. (2012). Atlas of forensic pathology. New York: Springer.
Gilbert, J. N. (2010). Criminal investigation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Philip Kayser claimed the United States government was losing the sense of delivering justice at a fast and worrying pace. This is because rapists, murderers, and other criminals are being sentenced to and facing the death penalty. He asserted that prisons and death penalty are not biblical forms of delivering justice. This is because the criminals incarcerated in jails mentor each other in attempts to improve their criminal behaviors and skills. As a result, prisons can be regarded neither as effective nor efficient in delivery of justice. This has led to debates seeking to justify the use of death penalty in punishing criminals (Phillip, 2011).
The embassy of the United States sought to find out if the death penalty is a form of harsh and capital punishment. The discussion provided was based on the United States federal government powers while imposing State laws, which further influence politics and the role of Supreme Court with regards to interpretation of the Constitution. The embassy affirmed that different States support the death penalty. This States include New Hampshire, California, Pennsylvania, and Kansas. Although they support the death penalty form of punishment, some have not or rarely use it (Richard, 2002). This discussion paper therefore seeks to argue that the death penalty is a favorable form of punishment. This is because it is a form of capital punishment encouraging reduction in crime rates across the country.
Types of Crime Warranting the Death Penalty
There are three forms of crimes that can be punished by applying the death penalty. The first form of crime involves discretion of the judicial system through the use of the phrase’ surely he/she shall die’. These crimes rely on the death penalty as the punishment incapacitates the convicted criminals ensuring they are not released based on good behavior only to commit more cruel and heinous crimes. Kauffman an assemblyman asserted that at least eight hundred and fifty murderers are convicted annually. Those who are jailed and released back to the society commit similar heinous crimes. Thus, the death penalty ensures the convicted murderers and rapists are severely punished and removed from the society protecting an equal or greater number of lives as the criminals can kill more than one victim (UNHR, 2012).
The second form of crime involves the courts and victims applying clemency of forgiveness through discretion of the judicial system. Although this form of crime does not advocate for death penalty, it is regarded as a contribution towards increase in capital crimes. This is because forgiving a murderer or rapist does not motivate or encourage him/her to change. Instead, it encourages them to commit more capital crimes as they hope and believe the victims or victims’ families will forgive them for committing painful, undignified, offensive, unethical, and violent actions. The last form of crime involves premeditated actions carried out by the criminal before inflicting pain and violence. Thus, a premeditated murder involves the victim and the courts failing to show any leniency, hence applying capital punishments. This form of crime therefore advocates for the death penalty as it guarantees the offenders will receive an equal punishment for the crime committed (UNHR, 2012).
Crime Rates versus Death Penalty
For a period exceeding three hundred years, organized communities relied on the death penalty to punish criminals and offenders. This ensured criminal acts, such as theft or robbery, street gangs, drug peddling, murder, and rape among other petty and serious forms of crime reduced. This however has changed as most global nations have prohibited use of death penalty in punishing criminals. Developed world and democratic nations believe the death penalty is too harsh and unbiblical. More so, it is regarded as a violation of human rights. For example, Phillip asserts the death penalty robs the criminals their rights to use the civil laws in prosecuting, restituting, or forgiving them as their lives are forcibly taken away prematurely. Thus, this is neither ethical nor biblical. Conversely, Richard Dieter asserts the death penalty has attributed to a social evolution through human sacrifice rituals in attempts to deliver delivery. Richard further asserts that, United States does not embrace the human rights concept while employing the death penalty punishment (Richard, 2002).
The first incidence seeking to abolish the death penalty dates back in 1867 in Venezuela and 1870 in Netherlands. Countries across the globe however continue to abolish application of the death penalty as they believe it violates basic human rights. They believe civilized citizens and global societies should not be denied the right and dignity of life. However, defining the death penalty based on issues related to human rights restricts its purpose. The purpose of the death penalty is t reduce crime rates. This is because crime rates are committed by citizens without civil, human, moral, and ethical principles. The criminals commit diverse forms of crime, which deny their victims’ the right to a dignified life. As a result, those arrested and charged with criminal behaviors warranting the death penalty should receive the capital punishment (David, 2012).
In United States, the government has lagged in its attempts to abolish the death penalty punishment. The government believes heinous crimes such as murder diminish victims’ legal powers. The perpetrators should therefore receive capital punishment through a death penalty. The United States Congress asserts that, the Constitution has allocated legislative powers over criminal laws across the fifty States. This provides the states with power and opportunity to repeal forms of capital punishment. More so, the Eight Amendment to United States Constitution affects Bill of Rights prohibiting federal governments from imposing capital punishments including the death penalty. In 2003, Hashem and Joanna asserted death penalty does not influence the rates at which capital crimes are committed (Hashem & Joanna, 2003).
The Eighth Amendment versus Death Penalty
It was ratified in 1791 denying federal government from imposing various forms of punishment against criminals. These forms of punishment included imposition of excessive bail and fines as well as unusual, inhuman, and cruel punishment constituting to torture. This provision was inspired during the case of Titus Oates who succeeded King James II. Titus Oates was accused of multiple acts of perjury resulting to several executions of wrongly accused persons. This facilitated Titus Oates to be jail coupled with whipping. It however underwent changes under the United States Supreme Court through jurisprudence to facilitate development of the Eight Amendment. Thus, Titus Oates was not sentenced to death penalty as the judges believed it would have discouraged honest witnesses from ever testifying in similar cases due to fear. These sentiments are shared by Hashem and Joanna who assert that, death penalty and capital punishments reduce crime rates. More so, the Michigan State University believes death penalty criminals successfully executed prevent persons planning to engage in unlawful actions warranting a similar capital punishment (Hashem & Joanna, 2003).
In 2011, a survey was conducted across United States to find out how people favored the death penalty punishment. More than two thousand adults provided their opinions. More than sixty-two percent favored the death penalty. They asserted persons convicted for committing murder should be punished by applying the death penalty. This affirmed polls conducted in 1990s providing a statistics of seventy eight percent of people favoring the death penalty. Although some asserted the death penalty is immoral and wrong as it involves killing an individual, persons favoring it affirmed the justice system should execute them or punish them in a similar manner they committed the capital crime. Thus, they claimed punishing a criminal or offender by applying a punishment fitting the crime committed could encourage people to reform and avoid offensive activities. More so, they claimed that hosting criminals who have committed capital crimes could be costly for the State (Eric, Alan, & Janet, 2004).
In 1991, a young mother was left helpless and in pain after a killer ensured she watched the execution of her baby. The killer then mutilated her body before killing her as well. Providing the killer with a lesser form of punishment for the heinous crime does not motivate other murderers to avoid committing a similar crime. This is because incarcerating such killers in prison provides them with a second chance in life. Foremost, they are able to access three meals a day, rest on clean sheets and comfortable beds, and watch cable TV. More so, their family members are allowed to visit the killer while making endless appeals for the release. In order for justice to prevail, such killers ought to die through the death penalty. They should not be provided with lesser punishment in comparison to the pain they inflicted on their victims. More so, the mother and her child can no longer access life pleasures they are able to enjoy while in prison. Thus, the death penalty should be applied in order to deny such killers an opportunity to enjoy life just as they denied their innocent victims lying in graves. Thus, the Eighth Amendment should not be applied to abolish the death punishment. Instead, it should be applied to seek justice for victims and their families who have undergone pain and suffering due to unethical and immoral persons inflicting and violating their stable lives (DPIC, 2012).
Arguments in Support of Death Penalty
Through the High School Curriculum and Michigan University, criminologists claimed petty offenders are repetitive, as the form of punishment does not motivate them to stop engaging in crime. For example, it was observed in 1973 by Isaac Ehrlich that, more lives were spared by utilizing the death penalty. Based on the United States Constitution, punishments are provided legally to offer justice, teach criminals ethical lessons, and motivate them to avoid committing crime. Thus, death penalty was established to inflict law deliberately through scheduled court proceedings as a threat to deter criminals and the illegal, uncivil, and unethical activities they engage in. This is because the death penalty is a form of punishment incapacitating and preventing criminals from engaging in future similar activities (DPIC). (2000).
Criminals are threatened with punishments as an attempt to deter them from committing various forms of crime. Persons tasked in implementing legal laws therefore impose them to threaten criminals and also reattribute or seek justice for any crimes that were not deterred. Retribution refers to independent moral justification especially when punishing a criminal. The moral justification should be applied in punishing criminals who have committed repulsive, inappropriate, unwise, and punishable crimes. Thus, threats and punishments are essential in deterring crime. More so, deterrence is a satisfactory practical justification for punishing criminals and offenders. Thus, death penalty should neither be abolished nor diminished. This is because it guarantees the country is safe with morally upright and conscious citizens neither willing nor attempting to commit crime (Andrew, Carroll, Michael, & Gregory, 2012).
There are however pitiable crimes committed by persons mainly inflicted by the legal justice system. The legal punishment awarded to such guilty persons cannot be unjust. This is because the persons commit a crime hence, volunteering to presume the risk of receiving a legal punishment. All citizens should therefore acknowledge that, criminals cannot avoid legal punishments. They were formulated and implemented to address, punish, and reform criminals before integrating them back to the community. However, if the form of crime is regarded as severe, then a capital punishment should also be applied to address and punish the criminal. The punishment suffered should also be voluntary to the pain inflicted on innocent victims of the criminal activities. This is because criminals can avoid committing the crime. However, they choose to voluntarily risk suffering legal punishment by committing crime knowingly. Thus, it would be more than unjust for a rapist or murderer who knowingly and voluntarily committed the crime to receive a legal punishment that does not equate to the crime they have committed. Thus, the death penalty is a just form of punishment as it ensures guilty criminals receive legal punishment in order to deliver justice to the victims (David, 2012).
Some persons however do not premeditate before committing a crime including murder as well as other crimes of personal violence. This is because most criminals always plan and ordinarily concentrate on finding an escape route from detection, arrest, and conviction. However, criminals who fail to premeditate cannot be discouraged or deterred by the threat of even the severest punishment. More so, they fail to plan how they will prevent or escape arrest and conviction, as they are ready to receive any form of severe punishment. Police officers and prosecutors assert that, most capital crimes including rape and homicides are committed in the heat of the moment. This is because the criminals commit them at the moment of great emotional strain. Others are usually under the influence of marijuana, drugs, alcohol, and other illegal substances hindering the criminal from engaging in logical thinking. During such incidences, the criminals inflict severe pain on the innocent victims without relying on their humanity to either stop or prevent such incidence from happening in the future. Criminals oblivious of the consequences therefore inflict the severe form of violence and pain committed. Ensuring other criminals are aware they can receive a death penalty as the punishment should therefore encourage them to deter from crime. This is because even a long-term imprisonment period, which is often considered as severe, cannot be enough to deter rational criminals waiting and willing to commit more violent and painful crimes after they are released (James & John, 2007).
According to the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), when a life is taken, the balance of justice is disturbed. The legal justice system should therefore ensure the balance is restored to avoid the society from succumbing to the rule of violence in attempts to seek revenge. Thus, taking the life of a murderer who has also committed multiple homicides restores the balance of justice. More so, it allows societies to show convincingly that murders, homicides, and rape are intolerable forms of crime that should be punishable in kind. Although retribution has its basis in religious and cultural principles, ethics, and values that have been historically maintained, it is appropriate to take away a life from a person who has also taken away another individual’s life. Through the death penalty, the victims’ families are provided with closure despite the inability to bring back the victim and restore the status of his/her life in the society. More so, the death penalty guarantees the criminal will not inflict more pain and take away other several innocent lives (DPIC, 2000).
Thus, Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) believes persons who commit the most cruel and heinous crimes should receive a death penalty. This is because as offenders they deserve the worst and severe form of punishment under the legal system of law. More so, applying any lesser form of punishment while dealing with such persons is undermining the values guiding and ensuring the society is capable of protecting lives (Andrew, Carroll, Michael, & Gregory, 2012).
The death penalty has deterred various crimes. Some anecdotal evidence indicates some homicides across United States were deterred by the death penalty. For example, the Los Angeles Police Department reported that, a half number of members belonging in a group of suspected criminals decided to avoid use of weapons during robbery to avoid killing their victims. This was reported in 1971 when the suspects were arrested for committing a crime allied to robbery. They claimed that, they engaged in criminal acts of robbery without relying on weapons to intimidate and threaten their victims. This is because they were assured they could not be attempted or forced to use the weapon hence, risking killing an innocent victim. This therefore affirms the death penalty has motivated and encouraged criminals to avoid committing petty and capital crimes (UNHR, 2012).
The death penalty is a fitting punishment for capital offences. It guarantees persons convicted for capital crimes such as murder and rape receive an equal punishment inflicting similar pain and anguish the victims underwent. Although some people claim it is unbiblical, the legal justice system is developed to pass judgment here on earth based on the sins committed inflicting pain and anguish on innocent citizens. The courts should therefore be awarded legal power to apply any form of punishment fitting the crime or offense committed. For example, robbers should be incarcerated in prison to deny them simple pleasures of life. Consequently, murderers should not be accepted either in prison or in the society. This is because the law courts should not provide them with an opportunity to live, breathe, and eat while their victims lie in graves. More so, it is painful for the victims’ family members and friends to acknowledge the individual who violently took away the life of an innocent soul has a chance of ever being released from prison due to good conduct. Instead, they should also be denied to live in order to punish them in an equal measure they inflicted pain and anguish on their victims.
Andrew, K., Carroll, D., Michael, D., & Gregory, S. (2012). More Concern among Opponents about Wrongful Conviction: Continued Majority Support for Death Penalty. Pew Research Center Report.
David, G. (2012). Why Does the U.S Have Capital Punishment? Bureau of International Information Programs. Embassy of the United States of America.
Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC). (2000). The Death Penalty: Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty. High School Curriculum, Michigan State University and Death Penalty Information Center.
Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC). (2012). Death Sentences Near Record Low; Executions Equal 2011 Total, With Fewer States Carrying Them Out: Connecticut Is 5th State in 5 Years to Abolish Death Penalty. A Report by the Death Penalty Information Center.
Eric, G. L., Alan, C., & Janet, L. (2004). Reasons for Supporting and Opposing Capital Punishment in the USA: A Preliminary Study. Internet Journal of Criminology.
Hashem, D., & Joanna, M. S. (2003). The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: Evidence from a “Judicial Experiment”. Department of Economics, Emory University.
James, M. G., & John, F. G. (2007). Criminology: A “Commonsense” Theory of Deterrence and the “Ideology” of Science: the New York State Death Penalty Debate. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology.
Phillip, G. K. (2011). Is the Death Penalty Just? Omaha, Biblical Blueprints.
Richard, C. D. (2002). The Death Penalty and Human Rights: U.S. Death Penalty and International Law. Death Penalty Information Center.
United Nations Human Rights (UNHR). (2012). Moving Away from the Death Penalty: Lessons from National Experiences. United Nations Human Rights Report.