In 1999, Frank Darabont directed his second big-budget film, "The Green Mile." This movie was the perfect film to follow Darabont's Academy Award Best Picture nominee, "The Shawshank Redemption." In it, we experience the daily lives of prisoners condemned to death penalties which are to be carried out by electric chair. Cruel murderers, rapists and thieves which all probably deserve the capital punishment are seen being fried up by the electric chair, delivering justice. Most people may agree that the death penalty is necessary for handling such savages, but when an innocent man is killed by capital punishment, disagreements will break out, discussing if the death penalty really is a moral act.
There are many arguments for and against death penalties. Most of the arguments against the death penalty discuss how it is an immoral act, making us no less than the convict was in the first place. Everyone needs a chance, and if someone would commit to a murder then they probably need psychological help. Maybe the person experienced something traumatic as a child by someone they trusted the most, making the person disturbed for the rest of his life. On the other hand, arguments for the death penalty discuss how most people never improve even though they spend tens of years in jail. "A murderer will always be a murderer," is a common phrase used by this side of the discussion. Why should society even spend money on keeping a person in jail, when they deserve to die for the horrible things they've done? Wouldn't it be cheaper and easier to just kill them? The biggest fuel for this side tends to be hatred for someone who has hurt someone else so badly that they want revenge by death penalty. This may sound like an uncivilized an immoral act to most, but it has been the most natural way to solve arguments by humans for thousands of years. Even in the Bible it is stated that "an eye for an eye," revenge by the same act being reenacted back to ...