PAMANTASAN NG LUNGSOD NG MARIKINA
Senior High School Department
N. Roxas St. cor. Diego Silang St., San Roque, Marikina City
WRITTEN ARGUMENT
in
UNDERSTANDING CULTURE, SOCIETY
AND CULTURE
Prepared by:
BAGACINA, KRISCIA (F4)
BASCONES, JOJIE (F6)
BECHAYDA, MICHELLE (F7)
BELGAR, MELODY (F8)
BORITO, JESSICA (F9)
GABULE, IVY (F17)
LORETO, ROSE ANN (F20)
MARTINEZ, JEMALYN (F21)
MERANO, RENALYN (F22)
MERCADO, NICOLE MAY (23)
REUSI, ROSALYN (F27)
SAMBITAN, MONIQUE (F29)
YAUDER, MACKYLAH BRI ANNE (F33)
Prepared for
MS. NOIME CALMA
Understanding Culture, Society and Politics
YES TO DEATH PENALTY
Introduction:
The death penalty as defined by Merriam-Webster dictionary as the punishment by death
from the court of law for committing very serious crimes. Death penalty or capital punishment is
a punishment that should be given to the most heinous and atrocious criminals. We agree that
death penalty should be imposed due to various reasons stated below.
1. Premise: Death penalty is not immoral.
Immanuel Kant stated in his book of Metaphysics of Ethics, “A society that is not willing
to demand of a life of somebody who has taken somebody else’s life is simply immoral.” If we
use Kant’s reasoning, we can say that capital punishment or the death penalty is not immoral.
If criminals who has done heinous crimes such as taking other people’s lives are only
punished with life in prison, did the system really provide the victim or victim’s family justice?
When the reward is high for criminals and the punishment is low in contrast to what they have
done, it almost makes it alright for these criminals to commit such crime.
Rebuttal: Capital punishment/death penalty violates the most fundamental human right- the
right to live.
Refute: We can say the same about the guilty party. Let us say that they are a murderer; do they
not violate the victim's rights?
According to Fein (2008), the death penalty does not treat the criminals like animal with
no right nor morals. He added that it is for the dignity of people whose lives are forcibly taken
away from them. As time progressed, criminals began to not fear the law, if they are not caught,
their crimes become bolder and more brutal. These criminals who commit horrible crimes are the
ones who ignore the right of their victims. They robbed them of their lives. As long as they can
satisfy their desires, it does not matter to them that their victims are not just punching bags.
These victims are someone else’s brother, parent or friend. Especially those who have power and
wealth, they think that they are above the law.
We often talk about how capital punishment will violate a criminal’s right but do we
think about the countless victims or possible victims’ rights?
2. Premise: Criminals who committed vicious and atrocious crimes should be punished with
Death Penalty in order to prevent more victims.
According to Liptak (2007), for every inmate who are considered serial killers, 3 to 18
lives are potentially saved. The Federal Bureau of Investigation states that for the majority of the
serial killers,violence and sexual gratification are intertwined in their psyche. For these people
who experience sexual gratification in taking a life, there are no guarantee that will stop. Even
with the best support in the world, some criminals are just beyond rehabilitation. These criminals
posed a threat to the peace and order that we are trying to achieve.
Rebuttal: By supporting the re-establishment of death penalty, you are taking away the
criminal’s chance at change.
Refute: If criminals who committed atrocious crimes, there are no guarantee that they will
change.
According to National Institute of Justice, 44% of prisoners who are released, return to
prison again during the first year and 77% are arrested once again within five years. During the
duration of time that criminals are released, countless victims are created. The death penalty
removes such dangerous people from society. Prisoners that serve life in prison without parole
does not get the rehabilitative program that will allow them back into society.
3. Premise: Seeking the Death Penalty for criminals whose crime are unforgivable does not equate to
seeking revenge.
Retribution is different from revenge. Seeking the death penalty is not revenge, it is not imposed
based on hate or vengeance. According to Pojman (2004), retribution is seeking the punishment of the
criminal to be proportional to the one they committed. Death penalty is a punishment that is befitting the
crimes that is committed.
Rebuttal: By supporting death penalty, you are agreeing that revenge is the answer and death penalty
does not deter the crimes. You are enabling the vicious cycle of violence.
Refute: How can we be sure that once they walk free, they would not repeat their crimes? Must
we risk the possibility of having more victims?
By imposing the death penalty punishment, studies reveal that it does prevent crimes and
lowers the risk of possible victims in the future. Dezhbakhsh and Sheperd (2003) stated that
according to their study, capital punishment or death penalty results on average, eighteen fewer
murders with a margin of error of plus or minus ten. They added that executions provide a large
benefit to society by deterring murders.
Mocan and Gittings (2003) stated that they found a link between the imposition of death
penalty to the rate of homicide. Each additional execution was found to decrease the case of
homicide by five cases while the removal of a person from death row generates one additional
case of homicide.
4. Premise: The Death Penalty is a sentence that will only be given to the most heinous criminals.
According to the Republic Act No. 7669, the crimes punishable by death are the ones that not
only resulted in the loss of human lives but also affects the state’s effort in building a safe and peaceful
country. This sentence will only be given to those who committed heinous crimes. The imposition of this
law is to not further raise the violence but to promote general welfare. This punishment will only be given
to those who have not showed a single and continue to show no remorse in the crimes that they have
committed.
Rebuttal: You may be sentencing an innocent man to death due to the unfair justice system. Death
penalty is unfair.
Refute:
The Death Penalty is reserved for the criminals whose crime are so heinous and brutal. It is only
for the worst of worst. According to Feser and Bessette (2016), the Death Penalty system acts like a filter
that would only select the criminals that would be found guilty of the most brutal crimes.
People who are charged with count after count of charges of parricide, murder, infanticide,
rape, kidnapping and serious illegal detention and other crimes punishable by Death Penalty that
was proposed by House of Representatives justice committee back in 2016. That is why these
criminals that committed such gruesome and disgusting crime will always pose a threat to
society should be eliminated. Imposing the death penalty does not mean that every imprisoned
criminal must be sentenced to death. It will take thorough investigation and careful evaluation.
5. Premise: Life imprisonment is not enough.
Criminals who will be charged of life imprisonment instead of death penalty will have the chance
to get out of prison. After a certain period of time depending of their sentence, they could be granted
parole. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, parole refers prisoners serving the remaining time of
their sentence in the community. We would be putting more people in danger of being harmed if such
dangerous criminals are allowed back to society.
There are instances where the criminal’s side found a legal loophole that will overturn the
case. In cases where they are granted a retrial and they win, even some of the most horrendous
criminals walk free.
Rebuttal: Instead of the Death Penalty, won’t lifetime of imprisonment suffice? These criminals whose
crime are so horrible does not deserve a quick punishment, they deserve to serve and carry out their
punishment until they die.
Refute:
The criminals who should be serving life imprisonment may be granted parole in the guise of the
Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) Law. Just in 2019, people feared that the convicted murderer
and rapist, Antonio Sanchez, may be free. This unveiled the rampant corruption in the New Bilibid
Prison, dubbed as “GTCA for sale.” Under the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) Law, law
enforcement officials are allegedly accepting bribes in return of reducing the amount of a prisoner’s
sentence. The rich will find a way to cheat the system and tipped the justice in their favor. In addition, it
has been found that prisoners who were released is often arrested once again due to violating the peace
and order in the community.
Furthermore, Kenneth E. Hartman, who is a prisoner currently serving life in prison without the
possibility of parole stated that fifteen to twenty minutes of suffering would be better than life
imprisonment. Those who are in the same boat as him are in a maximum security prison where
rehabilitative and restorative programs are not available to them.
REFERENCES:
Premise 1:
Kant, I. (1987). Metaphysics of Ethics.
Refute 1:
Fein, B. (2008). Individual Rights and Responsibility.
https://deathpenalty.procon.org/source-biographies/bruce-fein/
Premise 2:
Liptak, A. (2007, November 18). Does Death Penalty Save Lives?
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html
Federal Bureau of Investigation. https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-
murder
Refute 2:
World Population Review. Recidivism Rates by State 2021.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/recidivism-rates-by-state
Premise 3:
Pojman, L. (2004). Should the Death Penalty Be Used for Retribution?
https://deathpenalty.procon.org/questions/should-the-death-penalty-be-used-for-
retribution/
Mocan, H, Gittings, R. (2003). Getting Off Death Row: Commuted Sentences and the
Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment.
Refute 3:
Dezhbakhsh, H., Sheperd, J. (2003). The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment:
Evidence from a ‘Judicial Experiment. https://www.sfu.ca/~allen/deter.pdf
Premise 4:
Official Gazette. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1993/12/13/republic-act-no-7659/
Refute 4:
Viray, P. L. (2016, December 7). Crimes punishable by proposed death penalty. Philstar
Global. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2016/12/07/1651195/list-crimes-punishable-
proposed-death-penalty
Feser, Bessette, J. M. D. E. (2017, July 18). Why the Death Penalty is Still Necessary.
Catholic Word Report. https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2017/07/18/why-the-death-
penalty-is-still-necessary/
Premise 5:
Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=qa&iid=324
Refute 5:
Rappler (2019). ttps://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/numbers-freed-heinous-crime-
convicts-gct
Rappler (2019). https://www.rappler.com/nation/explainer-gcta-law-that-may-free-
antonio-sanchez
