Arguments Against The Death Penalty

In this paper I will be discussing everything you need to know about the death penalty such as its pros and cons. While the innocent can be killed, the death penalty has its pros because it prevents them from killing again if they are released or have escaped from prison, it helps overpopulated prisons, and it can help victims’ families get justice and closure. Not only can the innocent be killed, but in the past the death penalty was very inhumane. To some its feels right but to others they feel like 2 wrongs don’t make a right. Most people think that the defendant deserves the death penalty, but what does the defendants’ family think?

Why is the death penalty used as a means of punishment for crime? Is this just a way to solve the nations growing problem of overcrowded prisons, or is justice really being served? Why do some view the taking of a life morally correct? These questions are discussed and debated upon in every state and national legislature throughout the country. Advantages and disadvantages for the death penalty exist, and many members of the United States, and individual State governments, have differing opinions. Yet it seems that the stronger arguments, and evidence such as cost effectiveness, should lead the common citizen to the opposition of Capital Punishment.

Capital punishment, otherwise known as the death penalty, is a controversial subject which has been argued for decades due to the ethical decisions involved. People believe the death penalty is the right thing to do and that it is the perfect example of ‘justice’ while others believe that it is immoral and overly expensive. The death penalty is not a logical sentence for criminals, it doesn’t give them the right type of justice and it is immoral.

The debate on whether or not the death penalty should be abolished has been ongoing for quite a long period of time. While there are those who believe that the death penalty does not serve its intended purpose, proponents of the same are convinced that the relevance of the same cannot be overstated and hence it should not be abolished. In this text, I examine the arguments for and against the death penalty.

In this article, it talks how the government carries out executions, not merely to its choice of particular execution methods. and execution method such as lethal injection that can be humane in theory and can be carried out by means of flawed or haphazard procedures that create a foreseeable danger of inflicting severe pain in actual practice. Also, it said in the article that over time in the absence of adequate safeguards, such a method of execution will inevitably involve the infliction of gratuitous pain in some executions. The Inflicting gratuitous pain on a subset of condemned prisoners is no more tolerable than inflicting gratuitous pain on all condemned prisoners.

In these two short essays, one by Anthony G. Amsterdam and another by Ernest Van Den Haag both authors make two very important views. Although one supports capital punishment and one is against capital punishment, both authors have good reasons to support their case. Amsterdam believes that capital punishment is a brutal process that a murderer has to go through. Amsterdam believes that the murderer should be punished for their actions, but should not go through capital punishment. Although Ven Den Haag agrees that capital punishment is one of the harshest penalties, it should nevertheless be used. Ven Den Haag believes that a murderer should take responsibility for their actions,

In the article "The Case Against the Death Penalty," which shows up in Crime and Criminals: Opposing Viewpoints, Eric Freedman contends that capital punishment does not discourage fierce crime as well as conflicts with decreasing the crime rate. This essay will analyse Freedman 's article from the perspectives of a working man, a needy individual, and a government official.

The death penalty is one of the most controversial forms of punishment in the United States criminal justice system. For many, the death penalty seems like a way to gain retribution, and to help make this country a better place, however there are many reasons why the death penalty is also not a good thing. My main points that I’m going to talk about for my paper is why I don’t believe in the death penalty. Throughout the paper the reader will be able to understand exactly what the death penalty is, the pros and cons of the death penalty, and eventually be able to depict for themselves whether the death penalty is “good” or not.

In the debate over capital punishment, the opponents argue that capital punishment should not be practiced because it has a civilizing effect and practicing capital punishment has do deterrent effect. On the other side of the debate, the supporters argue that capital punishment should not be abolished because it is just retribution and has a deterrent effect. In this paper, I will argue that capital punishment should not be practiced.

Against the Death Penalty: An Annotated Bibliography While the Death Penalty has been historically used as a deterrent of crime, it is barbarity, is economically costly, and racially bias in the United States of America. With this research paper, I will explain how the death penalty should be abolish from our judicial system. Death Penalty Information Center. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org./ This is a website that gives lots of information about the death penalty from the history, current inmates and trials that could lead to death row.

Costs and Consequences of the Death Penalty, written by Mark Costanzo, neatly lists reasons for opposition, and abolishment of, the death penalty. Costanzo provides a review of the history of the death penalty, a review of how the death penalty process is working today, questions on whether or not if the death penalty is inhumane and cheaper than life imprisonment. He also questions if the death penalty is fairly applied and the impact, if any, that it has on deterrence. He closely examines the public's support of the death penalty and questions the morality of the death penalty. Finally, Costanzo provides his own resolution and alternative to the death penalty. Each of these items allows the reader an easy, and once again, neat view

In 1940, Lawrence Bittaker, an infamous serial killer from the 1970’s, was born to two unloving parents in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He was adopted but eventually left abandoned by his adoptive parents who could not put up with him anymore (Chojnaki, M. & Danz, E. p. 1). By the age of 17, Bittaker dropped out of high school, never to obtain his GED. From the ages of 21 to 26, Bittaker was diagnosed “borderline psychotic” and “basically paranoid” multiple times by different doctors (Chojnaki, M. & Danz, E. p. 1). Bittaker was in and out of jail before murdering five teenage girls in 1979 with a partner, Roy Norris (Chojnaki, M. & Danz, E. p. 2). In 1981, Bittaker was sentenced to death. As of today, he is 70 years old and is still on death row at San Quentin Prison in California (Chojnaki, M. & Danz, E. p. 3).

The death penalty is one of the most controversial issues in the United States today. The debate of a life for life is one that has many dimensions and points of views. However, the acceptance of the death penalty is affected by many factors morality, deterrence, retribution, mistakes, cost, race, an income. More specifically the discussion will be based on these three reasons to support the death penalty; the matters of retribution, deterrence and morality.

People who are against the death row are worried that people who are on it might be innocent. The people who support death row, are saying they can’t site one person in modern times who were executed and later proven innocent. DNA test prove that there are a lot more innocent people that have been convicted of a crime, than we thought. There are many cases where people were wrongly accused, and were close to being executed.

Life is sacred. This is an ideal that the majority of people can agree upon to a certain extent. For this reason taking the life of another has always been considered the most deplorable of crimes, one worthy of the harshest available punishment. Thus arises one of the great moral dilemmas of our time. Should taking the life of one who has taken the life of others be considered an available punishment? Is a murderer's life any less sacred than the victim's is? Can capital punishment, the death penalty, execution, legal murder, or whatever a society wishes to call it, be morally justifiable? The underlying question in this issue is if any kind of killing, regardless of reason, can be accepted. In this