Now that we've fleshed out the documents, perhaps a redirect back to the topic at hand is in oder (or more accurately its intent).
If we have the right to safety, pursuit of happiness and life it self. doesn't that mean capital punishment must exist?
You do see the contradiction here, don't you? In that first sentence saying, "... we have the right to life" and then "... capital punishment must exist". Unless your basis is that by committing some offense, therein someone gives up
their right to life. If I murder someone else, do I no longer have the 'right to live'? If you believe this, you're not alone.
... it aids in these things. less murderers mean that more people are safe, pursuing happiness and living too.
Quantitatively, I think this is a superficially-correct statement: Take 10 murderers, kill one and now you have 9; all things being equal, you'd have 10% less murders. This is one of the 'justifications' for Capital Punishment; murder the murderer and more people live
(I think the other two I've heard have to do with 'deterrence
' and 'retribution
' - I put these in quotes because both notions are fraught with controversy).
My Opinion: The arguments against Capital Punishment are many and varied. I think that the one that most strikes me is the element of Human Imperfection in administering justice; are we sure that Joe is guilty
? Is it better to have 1 in 10 guilty murderers go free or accidentally execute one innocent? What if you (or your spouse, or mother, or father) was that one innocent? How about this: Does anyone believe the U.S. Justice System can even reach a 90% accurate-conviction rate? Ugh.. Trying to numerically quantify human worth, in my opinion, is way-flawed.
No, I don't think capital punishment can ever be justified in human
terms. My value system puts human life on a very high plain. Remove them... for sure, but killing the killer is hypocritical and unethical (again, in my humble opinion).
I hope this adds to the discussion well - thanks.