Capital Punishment Is Not Only Unusual, But Cruel Essay

Constitutional. The death penalty itself has been proven unconstitutional through in depth studies. There has been a number of cases in which the convict is improperly executed. For instance, the case Glossip v. Gross was created because of a botched execution, unfortunately it was not ruled as a violation of the Constitution. “In June the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Glossip v. Gross that Oklahoma's use of the sedative midazolam in lethal injections did not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishments” (Heyns and Mendez). There has been many other cases with a similar situation to this. The death penalty is not considered cruel and unusual, but due to circumstances in the past there is reason to believe that is not true. Many of the most recent incidents of cruel and unusual punishment was caused by lethal injections. The injections are meant to be the most humane way of killing the inmate, however it obvious in many situations that the killing is not humane. For example, cases have been reported of botched lethal injections, “The cross-country battle over lethal injection methods has taken on added importance since last year, when inmates in Ohio, Oklahoma and Arizona gasped, moaned or writhed in pain during the administration of a three-drug cocktail including the sedative midazolam” (Wolf and Johnson). Due to what those inmates went through during their

“Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.” The Eighth Amendment states that punishments must be fair and fines shouldn’t be excessive or to expensive. No cruel or unusual punishment means you are not allowed to torture the accused person. This amendment has created different laws for the death penalty, for example death by a firing squad is not allowed that would be considered cruel . The death penalty is not stated has cruel or unusual punishment in this amendment, the states get to choose whether or not they want to use it.

The eighth amendment of the constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. What makes something qualify as cruel and unusual? Killing a person certainly sounds cruel, and injecting various chemical drugs to put to sleep and kill a person most definitely sounds unusual. The united states is the only Major western country that still practices the death penalty. Therefore why would the death penalty even be considered as constitutional by anyone?

The eighth Amendment states that the government is prohibited from cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is a complete violation of this amendment. Every one, guilty or innocent has the right to live freely, and the government taking away this simplicity of rights, is unconstitutional.

The eighth amendment states that cruel and unusual punishment can not be inflicted upon anyone. Although the eighth amendment does state that cruel and unusual punishment can not be enforced the eighth amendment does not state what “cruel and unusual punishment” actually should include. It is hard to decide what punishments should be identified as cruel and unusual. I believe that there should not be any terrible punishment that is pushed too far to handle although that is my stand I also believe that some things have an excuse to enforce a cruel and unusual punishment. Is death penalty cruel and unusual or should it be enforced on certain people is a question that is commonly asked. Some people can do the unthinkable crimes such as killing someone or even multiple people something that you believe could never happen or maybe should never happen. Or maybe something you think there should even be the possibility for it to happen. Or maybe they raped or molested someone, or maybe hurt a kid or teenager. I personally do not want people that can do this with no regret or thought to be able to be in my life or even my world. I believe that there are certain cutoffs on who should get the death penalty and who should not get the death penalty. People who killed another human being or hurt a child in any severe way deserves the death penalty. If that child or person does not have the right to live or even live a normal life anymore then the person who did it should not have the right to live a normal life or even a life at all. Someone who rob someone or even robs a bank or stole something from a store should be locked up or put in prison. I believe that walking a certain great amount or being forced to do hours of laborious work is cruel and unusual but having a prison job and cold showers are not. Anyone who is in a prison is most likely in there for a reason. The reason being they broke a law of some sort. Or that person did something that they knew would end them up in jail and still decided to do it anyways. If you can not stop yourself from doing something that is harmful to yourself or others then you get to spend some time working like everyone else does on a daily basis. Another common question asked is

In the United States Constitution, the Eighth Amendment prohibits the use and practices of cruel and unusual punishment. What exactly is considered to be cruel and unusual punishment? This question is a hot topic among America 's many different current controversies. Many people are saying that the use of capital punishment to be sentenced to death as a penalty in the eyes of the law. An execution or capital punishment is a direct violation of the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. (84)

There are five ways to execute a person. The five are: lethal gas, lethal injection, electrocution, hanging, and firing squad. The most commonly used are lethal injection and electrocution. Lethal injection is when the people inject a shot into both of your arms. It takes about three minutes until the acid kills you. Firing squad is when a group of people has guns and the shoot at the murderers

That question is a debate that has been occuring for years. The supreme court has previously ruled that the dealth penalty is not cruel and unusual punishment there for it is not violating the eighth amendment in any way. Despite how the supreme court has ruled the death penalty, there is still many arguments till this day on whether or not it should fall under cruel and unusual punishment. In 1972, the case Furman V. Georgia was brought in front of the supreme court to rule whether or not they believed the dealth penality was cruel and unusual. This case almost ruled out the death penalty, but that didn't last very long. In 1976, the case Gregg V. Georgia came in front of the Supreme Court and the earlier decision was changed because a majority vote believed that the dealth penalty was not cruel and unusual. Eventually four principals were established to decided whether or not punishment was cruel and unusual. The four questions were, is it degrading to human dignity? Is it arbitary? Is it rejected throughout society? Is it unnecessary? Which many states ended up believing that the death penalty were along the lines of those four principals. Clayton Lockett might be a tragic example of the death penalty going bad. He was getting injected, but the injection didn't kill him up until an hour after it was injected. He had to sit there and suffer and many would of

The eighth amendment claims that there would be no cruel and unusual punishment. Furthermore, Williams writes, “In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court suspended the death penalty on the grounds it violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment (2011, 2)”. Supporters of this do not believe that it is fair to kill someone for a crime. The most common forms of executions in the United States are lethal injection, electrocution, and lethal gas. People believe that these ways of execution are in humane, and according to Williams article -- The Cost of Punishment -- “has no place in society”. Also, people who argue the death penalty say that it is a costly alternative to life sentencing in prison. ( quoted material from argues side cost of punishment.) It also says that on average it only takes twenty thousand dollars to keep an inmate in jail for a year, While the death punishment requires much more money to carry out. Whether it be because of the violation of the eighth amendment, or the cost to carry out, the death penalty is not in agreement with all of the American

Capital punishment is defined as the legally authorized killing of someone as punishment for a crime. There are many arguments that are for and against the death penalty. Majority of these arguments contain broad categories ranging from morality to attorney quality. Although most would support that capital punishment is the closest penalty for murder it is still used unequally across the prison populations. Capital punishment is a practice that the judicial system should abolish for the future generations.

Cruel and Unusual Punishment, according to merriam-webster.com, is a punishment that is very harsh and too severe for the crime. The Eighth Amendment prohibits the federal government from imposing or inflicting cruel and unusual punishment, stating that "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted." This meaning, the punishment should not be too severe. There are nineteen states without the death penalty, while thirty-one that still have it including California, Florida, and Texas. There have been cases, in these states, in which the criminal sentenced death suffered once administered the most common protocol to date used on death row which was lethal injection. One man, Charles

that offenders will not commit these crimes again. The United States should use the death penalty because it is economical and continues to be a deterrent for potential offenders.

Adversaries of capital punishment have argued time and again differing reasons why the death penalty is a cruel punishment, nevertheless the Supreme Court of the United States has not complied. Individuals argued on this topic on the account that it increases taxpayer revenue, it goes against every religion, innocent people have been executed, and there isn’t any evidence that the death penalty deters crime. The death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment

In the United States Constitution, the 8th Amendment prohibits the use and practices of cruel and unusual punishment. What exactly is considered to be cruel and unusual punishment? This question is a hot topic among America's many different current controversies. Many people are saying that the use of capital punishment (to be sentenced to death as a penalty in the eyes of the law [a capital crime]. An execution [capital punishment]) is a direct violation of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (Capital Punishment). They say there should be another way to deal with these criminals other than having them executed. The purpose of this paper is to give a brief history of the death penalty

When considering whether Capital Punishment constitutional, it’s important to evaluate if it considered as cruel and unusual punishment. The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury….” (U.S. Const. amend. V). It can be safely assumed that the founding fathers accepted capital punishment and is not considered cruel and unusual punishment. (Davenport, 2012, p. 360). However, I will be detailing common law defenses for the Death Penalty that challenge being cruel and unusual punishment.