We should have death penalty
James A. Ardaiz, who started as a prosecutor before he became a judge, is in support of California’s capital punishment. He argues that the punishment is a deterrent and the right moral choice. According to him, his entire professional life had been disheveled with death penalty. When he was a prosecutor, he had asked for death penalty.
When he became a judge, he imposed the penalty. He says that he would vote against abolishing of the capital punishment option in California laws.
He disputes claims that death penalty does not deter anyone from murdering anyone. However, there is no clear way of telling whether there would more murders committed if there was no capital punishment. Nonetheless, research indicates that death sentence has substantial deterrent effects. He actually bases his argument an actual case he came across in his career.
He uses the case of Clarence Ray Allen who was the last person to be executed in California before a suspension on executions issued in the year 2006. Clarence had been convicted in 1977 for arranging the murder of a potential witness to his burglary charges. During this time James was a prosecutor. In fact, he prosecuted the case.
———–Middle of paper———-
In conclusion, death sentence is the most severe punishment that one can ever get. Upon its execution, there would be no reversal point. In this light, therefore, the participants in the trail process need to exercise their roles with precision in order to avoid wrongful conviction of innocent people.
Are you ready to order a custom essay from us ? Place your order with us today.