LNAT Practice Test Essay – Should the death penalty be abolished worldwide?

In the LawMint LNAT Practice Test Series for 2024 and 2025, there are 30 full length tests, with 360 passages – 1260 MCQs and 90 essay prompts or essay questions.

The essay below is a sample that can be written for the prompt:

Should the death penalty be abolished worldwide?

This LNAT essay question is included in LawMint LNAT Practice Test series.

While the model essays may include both sides of an argument, the question may require you to state your stance - either for or against; and support it with arguments.

Read our articles and watch the videos on our YouTube channel for guidance on how to structure and write the LNAT Essay.

Introduction

The death penalty, or capital punishment, has been a subject of contention and debate for centuries. The practice dates back to ancient civilizations such as Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Greece, where it was often used as a means of punishment for crimes such as murder, treason, and espionage. While some countries have abolished capital punishment, others continue to use it as a punitive measure. This essay will discuss the moral, legal, and social implications of the death penalty, exploring arguments for and against its abolition worldwide.

Moral Implications

The death penalty raises significant moral questions, particularly concerning the value of human life and the role of the state in taking a life. Opponents argue that taking a life is inherently immoral and that the state should not have the power to decide who lives and who dies. They contend that the death penalty violates the most basic human right: the right to life. Furthermore, they argue that capital punishment is hypocritical, as it aims to punish killing with killing.

Conversely, supporters of the death penalty claim that it serves as an appropriate punishment for particularly heinous crimes, such as murder, where the perpetrator has willfully disregarded the sanctity of human life. They assert that capital punishment is a fitting retribution and that it upholds the social contract, wherein individuals who violate the rights of others forfeit their own.

Legal Implications

The death penalty also has significant legal implications. One of the primary arguments against capital punishment is the possibility of executing an innocent person. Despite advances in forensic science, wrongful convictions still occur, and the irreversible nature of the death penalty means that an innocent person’s execution cannot be undone. This risk of wrongful execution is seen by many as a grave injustice that undermines the legitimacy of the criminal justice system.

Proponents of the death penalty argue that the legal system can be improved to minimize the risk of wrongful convictions. They contend that rigorous appeals processes and advancements in technology can help ensure that only the guilty are executed. Additionally, they argue that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to potential criminals, reducing the overall crime rate and saving lives in the long run.

Social Implications

The social implications of the death penalty are multifaceted. Critics argue that capital punishment disproportionately affects marginalized communities, such as racial and ethnic minorities and those living in poverty. They assert that systemic biases within the criminal justice system make it more likely for these individuals to receive the death penalty, further exacerbating social inequalities.

Furthermore, the death penalty is often criticized for its high financial cost. Studies have shown that the cost of executing an individual is significantly higher than the cost of incarcerating them for life. Opponents argue that the resources spent on capital punishment could be better used to address the root causes of crime, such as poverty, mental health, and addiction.

On the other hand, supporters of the death penalty argue that the practice serves a vital social function by providing closure to victims’ families and communities. They believe that capital punishment can help restore a sense of justice and order in society, particularly in cases involving particularly heinous crimes.

Conclusion

The question of whether the death penalty should be abolished worldwide is complex and multifaceted, with arguments on both sides grounded in moral, legal, and social considerations. Opponents of capital punishment argue that it is inherently immoral, risks executing innocent individuals, disproportionately affects marginalized communities, and is costly. Conversely, proponents contend that it serves as a fitting punishment for heinous crimes, acts as a deterrent, and provides closure to victims’ families and communities.

While the debate surrounding the death penalty is unlikely to be resolved in the near future, it is crucial for societies to engage in open and thoughtful dialogue on this issue. Ultimately, the decision to abolish or maintain capital punishment