Prompt: Some people believe that capital punishment should not be used. Others, however, argue that it should be allowed for the most serious crimes. Ċ Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Numerous characters deem that the death sentence is necessary for critical crimes; meanwhile, certain groups of people oppose and affirm the idea that it is not right to kill miscreants for their offence. In this essay, I will discuss, I examine firstly, how sparing offenders can give new opportunities to them, also negative aspects of finishing lawbreakers, followed by a reasoned conclusion. Ċ On the one hand, it is an inevitable fact that people can get changed, regardless of age, as human-study has already established by evidence, as long as people can surmise, the change in habitual behaviour is achievable. Besides, the incidence of punishing the wrong person is considered quite common according to Rayleigh, who has researched capital punishment in Mongolia said "one in every three death-row culprits was not guilty, meaning they got libelled. For instance, many movies got made relating to this topic, meaning this kind of occasion take a place normally. Therefore, I defy and stand against the execution. Ċ On the other hand, people inciting capital punishment are neglecting human rights and provoking violence. Now we live in the most peaceful time the world ever had, thanks to the UN, and the cutting edge of technology has brought us the society our ancestors had only dreamed of in the movies. For example, we are able to look into old ages and know how brutal life was. Hence, if we start to condemn criminals to death, we condone the brutality that might deteriorate us back to the savage period. Ċ In conclusion, from the arguments and examples given, I firmly believe that punishing a culprit by death sentence is utterly a wrong conception. Thus, I state again that we must save lawbreakers and give another chance, rather than killing.