There has always been a strong debate regarding the use of capital punishment for vicious crimes. Human Rights ‘activists and groups’ have always taken a strong stand against the use of capital punishment in developed countries. Whereas the legislation of several countries have not budged from it. The activists groups call it an inhumane act and dismiss it. However, the families of the victims hardly ever agree to this point of view. It is therefore a point which has, as stated earlier become a debate since a number of decades and hardly ever sees an end.
Much has been written, aired and spoken about it on social media platforms. But is it the solution to stop heinous crimes? The answer to this clearly lies in the tradition a certain country follows or has been used to. It is purely due to the freedom of speech and allowances given by the governing bodies to the activists. This does allow free expression however, where death penalty is concerned it has seen various forms over the years. From the much dreaded pillory to the gallows, lynching by law (as that was used as a deterrence for rule of authority), to the French revolution based guillotine and the ensuing severe forms of death as a public spectacle have been used since as long as we may recalled to keep the criminal element under control. These very same had also been used as a method of control over various periods in times of countries, as was need of the times.
As time progressed and lines started blurring less with borders taking shapes and countries started emerging on the map, the methods took a slated and organised approach towards dispensing the death penalty. The developed countries tried shifting from hanging to various other techniques under activist pressure which were more of an experiment that lead to a miserable failure because of the complexities of execution methods. In the end some developed countries took up death by lethal injection while some still practice the ‘hang by the neck until death’ tradition.
As for countries influenced by tradition, their religious roots and their colonisation past, it is difficult to budge from their believed forms of punishments. Although, activists stick to advocating milder forms of the same, the authorities however, find it a difficult task to move to any other form other than their traditional ones do deal with crimes that surpass a certain level of vicious element in their nature. It was said that avoiding the death penalty was part of getting civilisied as the countries progressed but on the same page we have also seen those very countries differing in judgment regarding the same.
To date no country apart from a handful of European ones have been able to drop the death penalty. These European countries have been the ones where crime rate was almost negligible therefore they could easily drop the death penalty. Even now with the most modern methods of capital punishment the death penalty is very difficult to be avoided. The very common debate is that the countries are following the colonisation rules and methods where rather if seen in its true perspective the basic death penalties are not anywhere else but came from nature itself.