Most countries around the world have **abolished** the death penalty; meaning they *used* to have it, but have banned it, with bans generally coming into force from the 1970s-1990s. These days even countries which do allow a death penalty rarely use it.
When people discuss the pros and cons of the death penalty today, they generally argue in absolutist terms, e.g.: the risk of executing innocents, that the state shouldn’t kill its own citizens, lifetime incarceration is worse than the release of death etc. But clearly historical societies felt the death penalty *was* appropriate. So what changed in the mid-to-late 20th century to make countries favour abolishment?
In: 4
Modern forensic science made it easier to prove that people were innocent. That means that it was easier to prove executed people were innocent. As long as people believed that only guilty people were being killed (and thus it wouldn’t affect them) there was widespread support. Once the idea that you could be executed for something you didn’t do took hold, (and thus everyone was at risk) support fell rapidly. I’m minded of the lady who was released yesterday after 20 years for ‘murdering’ her kids – when it was discovered they just had a genetic disease. If the death penalty had been in force she would have been dead long ago.
Latest Answers