My English teacher became the mother of a six year old girl who had been brutally raped, beaten and murdered. The assailant had been caught, and was awaiting sentence. The mother wanted him dead, wanted to kill him with her own bare hands.

It is natural enough a reaction for any mother, I'm sure, and I know that had I been in her place, I would not have been able to restrain myself from killing my daughter's murderer (among other things) in the slowest most tortuous way imaginable. But - and here is the crucial point - can a human being's fate rest on the mere whim of emotion alone?

In the cold light of day, the death penalty is far too easy a way out. One quick pain, perhaps a short series of pain, maybe no pain at all, and a criminal simply ceases to exist. Finish. Finito. The End. And then what?

Does that quick, merciful end really compensate for the incredible amount of pain and grief both victim and victim's family go through? I think not. I would rather he - or she - die a slow, excruciating death a million times over.

Which brings to mind th following phrase, "There are many things worse than death." Like what, I'm asked. The most obvious alternative to the death penalty seems life imprisonment.

But prison isn't really such a bad place, I'm told. No? No: the prisoners get to breathe, to live with one another, to eat, to see the sun everyday, to live. Whereas their vistim lie beneath the cold, hard ground or worse. In that case, is it not the system itself which is at fault? Would energy not be better spent making prisons veritable hell on earth rather that the clean, healthy dormitory it appears to be?

That brings me to three points. Firstly, I remember reading in an article about somewhere - Japan, I think, but do correct me if I'm wrong - where the food in the prisons is deliberately cooked so as to be unpalatable. Whereas this was a measure to keep the crime rate low (it's amazing how well the most simple measures can work!), the same principle can well be applied to making prisons the worst place to be in the world world. Bad food, bad treatment, back-breaking labor... the list is endless.

Secondly, we have ethical considerations. No, I do not make any appeals to anyone's religious beliefs, only to simple morality. Why so we ask that a person be executed in the first place for a crime like murder? Because that person - no person - has no right to take another's life - yes? (We're not talking about self-defense here) Then how do we justify the death penalty?? From where do we get the right to do to a person that for which we ourselves condemned him in the first place?

How many children are taught that "an eye for an eye" is not acceptable, for then we become as bad as he who has taken the "eye"? Is this not, then, hypocrisy?

Thirdly, what if the prisoner doesn't "deserve" to die at all? If he or she - and yes, this does happen - is by chance wrongly accused? The death penalty is irreversible. How does one live with that?

Yet I am forced to consider the arguments in favor of capital punishment. It is very true that it acts as a deterrent to crime. I mean, it's common sense that a criminal tends to think more than twice before committing a crime if he has the death penalty hanging over his head. But then, one has to wonder whether or not these men and women who are driven to crime punishable by death are not already beyond this fear of death. The very feeling that their lives mean little enough for them to risk death cancels out the deterrent effects of the death penalty. This applies especially to assassins: the most valuable weapon they possess is the fact that they no longer care about their own survival.

It follows, then, that if capital; punishment is to be abolished, then a suitable alternative has to be arranged in its place. It has to be ethically acceptable as well as pertaining to the same deterrent qualities as the death penalty. Well then, how about corporal punishment?

Corporal punishment can take various forms: flogging and whipping are the most common examples. In Singapore, for instance, the former is used to punish even minor crimes. Modified, corporal punishment can prove a deterrent just as effective as capital: one of the only things that can cause more fear than death is the anticipation of prolonged, excruciating pain. There is also the added shame of social degradation, in whatever strength it may be present. Plus, corporal punishment is a far more ethical punishment to crime prevention than the death penalty could ever be.

In Britain, the death penalty no longer exists. A large majority, however, is in favor of bringing it back. Now I ask you - what do you think?