Capital Punishment: Arguments for Life and Death
Capital Punishment is the legal infliction of the death penalty on people convicted of a crime. Today, in modern law, the death penalty is corporal punishment in its most severe form. It is irrevocable: it ends the existence of those punished, instead of temporarily imprisoning them. Few states have both capital punishment and or life imprisonment. Capital punishment is the only corporal punishment applied to adults. The usual alternative to the death penalty is life imprisonment and only applied to the greatest criminals For the past decades, capital punishment has been one of the most contested political issues in America. Capital punishment is not merely or even primarily a
…show more content…
The notion of deterrence has been at the very center of the practical debate over the question of capital punishment. The fear of death or life imprisonment deters people from committing crimes. I believe that the death penalty has a deterrent value because it removes the criminals from society so they will never be able to commit anymore crimes. Also future criminals must understand the consequences of committing a crime, such as the three strikes law where after the third time of any crime, it is lifetime in prison. If they murder once they will do it again and taking the criminals off the streets will make us safer. Abolitionists have long argued that deterrence is little more than an assumption that most murder crimes be rationally deterred by any penalty, including death. They are crimes of passion, committed in moments of intense rage, frustration, hatred, or fear, when the killers aren't thinking clearly of the personal consequences of what they do. I respect the abolitionist’s beliefs, but I still believe in the death penalty’s deterrence value. People are deterred from committing crimes because of punishment and if there are no punishment there is nothing to fear. I believe the serial murderers that continuously kill should be put to death so that no more lives will be lost. If they get away with it, they will think that doing it again won’t matter. I believe in harsh punishments because I know that justice is not done if they get to roam
Keeping a prisoner in jail for life will be very expensive considering that it costs $80,000 a year; and the bad news is that the money comes from the taxpayer's pocket. Thousands of people will attack the death penalty. They will give emotional speeches about the one innocent man who might be executed. However, all of these people are forgetting one crucial element. They are forgetting the thousands of victims who die every year. This may sound awkward, but the death penalty saves lives. It saves lives because it stops those who murder from ever murdering again (Bryant). These opinions represent some of the strongest and most influential views that proponents hold. However, if our prison system could rehabilitate more effectively, perhaps those who murdered once, could change.
Those who believe that deterrence justifies the execution of certain offenders bear the burden of proving that the death penalty is a deterrent. The overwhelming conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that the death penalty is, at best, no more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in prison. The Ehrlich studies – which took
All of the research that I have done suggests that the death penalty is not a major source of deterrence for criminals to commit severe crimes such as homicide. In a 2009 survey of America’s top criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and written by Professor Michael Radelet, eighty-eight percent of the expert criminologists stated that they do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent for criminals to commit homicide. Respondents to this survey were asked to base their answers on research, rather
Deterrence has been the backbone of the United States justice system for a long time now, yet does deterrence truly work? When people plan, or commit violent crimes are they considering the immediate consequences of their actions? Offenders do not typically weigh the penalties they may receive after committing a serious crime. Keeping this in mind, increasing the severe ness of punishment, ultimately, will neither decrease or increase the amount of crimes committed in the United States. Death penalty does play a larger role in the deterrence of criminal acts. The death penalty has been a hot topic regarding whether it should be a legal punishment or not. Many arguments arise from this topic including: is it moral of the state to take a life? Or what act of crime is deserving of the death penalty? And how much of a role does religion play into the decision of the death penalty? Deterrence plays a major role in the discussion of death penalty. No one wishes death upon themselves nor would be satisfied with death by the justice system. The death penalty ultimately does deter major crimes in the sense that a
However, no individual has ever been able to present any credible evidence that supports the theory of deterrence. Decades of research across the country has failed to produce signs of a higher murder rate in states that have abolished the death penalty. The theory of deterrence assumes that a murderer is examining the costs and benefits of the anticipated criminal act and taking a moment to think rationally. In the United States, the death penalty is only handed down for about one out of every one hundred homicides. A murderer has a greater chance of being killed by the planned victim or in a confrontation with the police, and therefor has no reason to fear the death penalty if there is only a one in a hundred chance they will actually receive it (Jackson, Jackson, and Shapiro 33). Moreover, most homicides are unplanned, impulsive acts and to imply that a murderer is thinking calm and cooly outweighing their options in such an emotionally charged environment is simply idiotic.
The Death Penalty Discussion In today’s world terrible crimes are being committed daily. Many people believe that these criminals deserve one fate; death. Death penalty is the maximum sentence used in punishing people who kill another human being and is a very controversial method of punishment. Capital punishment is a legal infliction of death penalty and since ancient times it has bee used to punish a large variety of offences.
The concept of deterrence means that people should be punished to set an example for others. One assumption is that if a particular punishment is placed on offenders, it will keep them from committing others crimes. The next assumption is keeping others from committing crimes. According to Amnesty USA, different studies have shown different stances on whether or not the death penalty has an effect on crime. Other studies have shown that Over 80 percent of those polled believe that the present research does not support a deterrence effect for the death penalty (dealthpenaltyinfo.org).
While criminals must be punished for their criminal actions, “legalized murder”, as author Coretta Scott King put it, is immoral. The death penalty is legalizing the very thing that many on death row are charged for, murder. There is a multitude of lawful alternatives, to the death penalty, of reestablishing a better reputation for the criminals. The Constitution has no true right to allow such a felonious form of rehabilitation.
The test for deterrence is not whether executions produce lower murder rates, but that executions produce fewer murders than if the death penalty did not exist. For example, the fact that the state of Delaware executes more people per capita (1/87,500) than any other state and has a murder rate 16 times lower than Washington, D.C. (5/100,000 vs 78.5/100,000) is not proof, per se, that the death penalty deters murder in Delaware or that the lack of the death penalty escalates murders and violent crime in Washington, D.C., which has the highest violent crime and murder rates in the U.S. Be careful how you explain and understand deterrence.
Should one person have the right to end another human's life? It is a question most people have the answer for when it comes to capital punishment. Capital punishment is known to some people one of the cruelest punishment to humanity. Some people believe giving a person the death penalty doe's not solve anything. While other's believe it is payback to the criminal for the crime they have committed. There have been 13,000 people executed since the colonial times, among 1900 and 1985 there were 139 innocent people sentence to death only 23 were executed. In 1967 lack of support and legal challenges cut the execution rate to zero bringing the practice to a complete end by 1972. Although the supreme court authorized its resumption in 1976
Groups that support the death penalty often say that it deters criminals from committing future crimes like murders or other heinous crimes. On the contrary, many criminals do not think of the consequences of their actions when they are committing a crime, nor do they care what happens
Studies of the deterrent effect of the death penalty have been conducted for several years, with varying results. Most studies have failed to produce evidence that the death penalty deterred murders more effectively then the threat of imprisonment. The reason for this is that few people are executed and so the death penalty is not a satisfactory deterrent. If capital punishment were carried out
The deterrence argument states that, "although executing the murderer neither prevents the death of the victim nor restores their life, instating the death penalty effectively prevents the deaths of other victims" (Nathanson, 1987). On the surface, this seems like a convincing argument, because of course, if the murderer is dead, then he/she will not kill again. The question is, though, does the death penalty prevent the potential killer from ever killing in the first place? Is it more effective than other forms of punishment? Supporters of the death penalty argue that the death penalty ensures that the murderer will not strike again. But doesn't life in prison without parole do the same?
I do not agree with this statement. I couldn’t think of punishment worse than death. If I were a criminal I
To do this, the punishment for crime must be harsh enough to deter potential criminals. Under this mindset, the death penalty makes perfect sense. Here is a punishment that truly makes a criminal pay for his crime, stops the criminal from committing it again, and deters other criminals from committing the same crime.