I have chosen to concentrate on the death charges for drug trafficking for the following reasons: Some governments will sentence those who are convicted for the possession of drugs to the loss of life charges, while other countries tend to be more lenient, nor do so. From this study, I wish to know if the enforcement of the fatality penalty may have an impact on drug trafficking through its deterrence effect.
I also want to determine more on the present situation of drug trafficking and therefore predict what may happen in the foreseeable future, in regards to to the application form and the law on medication offences.
Death Penalty for Drug Trafficking: Is it really necessary?
Drug abuse produces long-term results and problems in societies. Medicine trafficking is a significant offence and drug traffickers should be punished. However, should the death charges be enforced on drug traffickers? Do they deserve the death penalty? Some countries believe that implementing the loss of life penalty for drug trafficking has a deterrent result and would control the drug problem. However, is this really the case?
Which countries enforce the death penalty for medicine trafficking?
There are currently twenty-one countries which express in their laws that those whom are caught trafficking drugs and committing other medicine offenses will face the loss of life penalty. From Annex I, it implies that mainly countries in Asia, 18 out of 21, enforce the loss of life penalty for drug trafficking.
How does Singapore's and Mexico's regulations view medication trafficking?
Singapore and Mexico were chosen because I wish to see the contrast between the regulations of an extremely strict country and the one which has a drug war taking place and producing a sizable amount of drugs.
Singapore has tight, even draconian laws regarding the misuse of drugs and drug trafficking. That is shown in Singapore's laws, under the Misuse of Drugs Take action, which state that the trafficking of a certain amount of drugs will bring about the person acquiring a mandatory fatality penalty such as 250 grams of amphetamines and 1, 200 grams of opium containing 30 grams of morphine. In addition, any person possessing over a certain amount of drugs, such as 15 grams of heroin, 500 grams of cannabis and 30 grams of cocaine will be presumed medication trafficking unless proven otherwise and convicted of the death sentence.
On the other hands, Mexico, a significant drug-producing and transit country, has lawful restrictions which are much more lax than Singapore. Lately, a new rules was transferred in Mexico that decriminalized the easy possession of drugs. Under this rules it is mentioned that if person is available to possess an amount of drugs under the allowable quantity, they will just be told what exactly are the possible "drug rehabilitation options in their area". The allowable quantities are 5 grams of cannabis and 50 milligrams of heroin, which both contain multiple dosages, and 0. 5 grams of cocaine. Even if one is found to be in possession as high as 1, 000 times the allowable amounts, he would only be sentenced to 10 months - three years in prison.
What are the main arguments for and against the usage of the loss of life penalty?
This leads us to the issue of whether using the loss of life charges is justified for drug trafficking. There are quite lots of factors for individuals to support the death penalty. First, by eliminating the criminal, there is one less unlawful in modern culture to do harm, thus offering safety and protection. Secondly, this is a deterrent, as people might not exactly want to take the risk to commit a serious criminal offense if the punishment is death. Supporters say that fatality charges has been made as humane as you possibly can and can be carried out professionally. The fatality charges also helps justify the victim's fatality.
However, there's also many factors to oppose using the loss of life penalty for medicine trafficking. Some spiritual groupings say that life is sacred and killing should not be allowed in any circumstances and loss of life penalty is not "pro-life". Also, the imposition of the death charges is a "cruel and unusual punishment". Opponents also believe that studies of death penalty for deterrence are highly exaggerated and arguments in those studies are flawed. In addition, death penalty is often cruel and can never be humane. Within the framework of Singapore, competitors of death penalty feel that the consumption of the death penalty may lead to a higher potential for an innocent person being performed as Singapore uses a "guilty until proven innocent" legislations.
After taking into consideration the arguments from both attributes, I am against imposing the death penalty. This is due mainly to the fact that there is no verified deterrent effect caused by imposing the death penalty. While some studies advocate that enforcement of death charges can deter folks from committing offences, other studies suggested that there is insufficient data to demonstrate that death charges actually has a deterrent effect. There is really no proof a person would not commit a offense due to concern with execution. In addition, death penalty is irreversible, so any miscarriages of justice may lead to grave effects as the lifeless cannot be brought back to life.
Does the death penalty for medication trafficking have a deterrent influence on criminals?
There is little information regarding if the death charges for drug trafficking comes with an actual deterrent influence on criminals in Singapore. However, I have created a series graph showing a comparison of the number of medication related executions and the full total number of medicine abusers caught in Singapore.
Fig. 1 - Quantity of drug-related executions with regards to the total number of drug abusers arrested in Singapore in hundreds
From Fig. 1 above, it is shown that there surely is no correlation between your variety of drug-related executions and the full total number of medicine abusers imprisoned in Singapore. There have been some circumstances where there has been some correlation though, from the entire year 1994 to 1997 both the amounts of drug-related executions and drug abusers fell, albeit at different rates. Also, from 2000 to 2001, both quantities rose. However, this will not prove that there surely is a deterrent result for the fatality penalty as the number of medication abusers should increase when the amount of medicine related executions drop.
There are most likely other factors impacting the number of medicine abusers and drug-related executions like the "effectiveness of the legal justice system, demographic changes and economical conditions". With a more effective legal justice system, there may be more executions whether or not there can be an increase or decrease in the number of medicine abusers. Changing demographics could lead to more drug abusers if the change involved a rise in younger society between the age range of 13 to below 30. This however, might not exactly necessarily lead to more executions though one would think that more drug abusers may lead to a rise in drug trafficking. There is merely no simple correlation among these factors.
When economic conditions are bad, the number of medication abusers may increase as people abuse drugs to alleviate their unhappiness. However, there may be less executions, since costs necessary for executing one is quite high, over USD$1 million as a health care provider is required to be used to certify the criminals' death.
Is the death penalty really necessary?
What would happen if all countries currently practising the loss of life penalty abolish it in the next twenty years? With increasing pressure from Amnesty International and an increasing opposition to the fatality penalty, governments of countries would be under increasing pressure to abolish death penalty due to medicine trafficking. In my opinion, the abolishment of death penalty might not lead to a surge of drug trafficking as medicine trafficking is damaged more by the demand for drugs than the fear of the loss of life penalty. Also, there are other alternatives such as life imprisonment without parole.
Also, what would eventually the contemporary society if the loss of life charges was abolished? As stated above, the abolition of the loss of life penalty can occur due to pressure from Amnesty International and other organisations. I think that society generally speaking wouldn't normally be much damaged as there's not been any facts that death penalty acts as a deterrent. Hence, drug trafficking wouldn't normally be greatly increased. Pro-life users of the culture would welcome the abolishment as the supporters of loss of life penalty would put pressure on the government to step up law enforcement to prevent increased medicine trade and use.
From the prior two cases, I conclude that imposing the death penalty for medicine trafficking is not necessary because drug trafficking won't increase when the death penalty is abolished as there is absolutely no deterrent effect and it may help with tightening up police on medication trafficking and abuse.
Word Count number: 1475
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay