Capital Punishment, Or Penalty Of Death

Senator for Utah Orrin Hatch once said, “Capital punishment is our society’s recognition of the sanctity of human life,” (Brainy Quote). While the arguments for both sides of the debate over the morality of the death penalty are vast, the bottom line is that the death penalty does not disregard human life, but rather it reveres it, as Hatch said. Morality is defined as, “The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct,” (The Free Dictionary). One who seeks to protect a person who has committed a heinous crime such as murder is arguably not in accords with what is right and wrong. Therefore, although killing is generally accepted as being wrong, the death penalty is sometimes the only solution to bring justice to a

¨The taking of even one life is a momentous event.¨ (Bernardin, The Consistent Ethic of Life). The consistent ethic of life is founded on the belief that all life is sacred and worth protecting, while the reasons for capital punishment may seem similar-- retaliation for a life lost-- the death penalty directly goes against everything the consistent ethic of life teaches. As proven through these presentations, capital punishment cases are often inaccurate and biased, while the act of the Death Penalty has proven to be painful with many examples of botched executions. Not only is killing immoral, but how can we go through with these executions when evidence has shown the death penalty can be inefficient and some

The death penalty is uncivilized and unfair in practice and life in prison is a worse punishment and a much more effective deterrent in preventing crime (ACLU, 2012). A life in prison involves the punishment to go on for decades, because prisoners are treated like animals and live in a

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

Children were often beaten against walls, or thrown alive into pits where the bodies of adults were later thrown; they were also tortured and raped. Victims of all ages often had their limbs amputated, or were impaled and left to die slowly. Others were doused in petrol and set alight, or disemboweled while still alive. Yet others were shot repeatedly or tortured and shut up alone to die in pain the wombs of pregnant women were cut open.

Furthermore, in the 1830s and 1840s capital punishment was targeted nationwide (Henderson, 9). The movement against the death penalty sought to “halt public executions” (Henderson, 9). Public executions at the time were widely attended and seen as a form of entertainment (Henderson, 9). The most popular form of execution at this time (and still today in some countries) was hanging (Beliveau, 202). Although this type of execution was common when carrying out the death sentence, it was not always the most humane. Beliveau claims that “contrary to what is often believed, in the majority of cases it is not the blocking of air entering the lungs that causes death” (202). In addition, the most common types of hanging were short-drop hanging and long-drop hanging (Beliveau, 203-4). Short-drop hanging was the more common of the two and had similar effects to dying by strangulation whereas long-drop hanging was created with the intent of executing someone in a more humane way (Beliveau, 203-4). Other methods of capital punishment include decapitation, lethal injection, electrocution, gas chamber, hanging, firing squad (Denver et al).

Whether innocent or guilty, no one has the right to end someone’s life. As a civilized society, the act of killing someone as

Nazis must have been the most impassionate and cruel people, to force people to dig their own grave. As soon as they had finished their job, execute them one by one as if they were cows in a slaughterhouse. Moishe also explained how the infants were executed, “Infants were tossed into the air and used as targets for the machine guns” (6). The cruelty of man when there are no restrictions to hold his true savage ways, his actual state of being. To kill people without compassion is cruel, but to murder innocent infants who are new to the world, that is beyond cruelty, that is having no human regard toward the people you are murdering.

When discussing the death penalty, rarely do we acknowledge the impact executions have on the men and women who facilitate the process. Although this process is solely voluntary, the side effects are not. According to several executioners, the first experience is far from what they had anticipated. To bring to light the stories of these men and women, Jim Willet facilitates an audio recording which covers the process of executing an inmate and the aftermath which is often felt by the executioner.

The assumption that the ultimate decision should rely with the juries as an objective approach should be reviewed. The U.S. Constitution should modify the power of the jury and also reconsider the process of a case going to trial. Cases should not take years in order to come to a conclusion on the ruling, in this matter juries need to stress the urgency of finalizing the case. Judges must not stand by and allow the prosecutor and defendant to debate for hours in front of a jury that decides the ultimate decision. Juries must act as the commentator of law in the court ruling for the

Humiliation, Pain and Death: The Execution of Criminals in New France,” is an article that puts

   The law of God is, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (Bible 79 ), and every system of ethics and rules of our society echoes that law. For decades, state and federal leaders have struggled with opposing views of the death penalty. Many minds have endured this difficult question-Who says it is right to take another human's life because of an act that he/she committed?

If everything was done correctly, the execution would be finished in a matter of seconds. Unfortunately, that was not usually the case, and the deaths were slow and painful. The end results of a hanging consisted of the eyes popping out of their sockets, protruding tongue, bloated face, defecation, and severe jerking of the body and appendages (Descriptions”).

Criminal law is imposed by almost every nation in the world to reduce crime rate and maintain law and order of the society. An individual who found guilty of a crime will have to face corresponding punishments. Among all penalties, capital punishment is considered to be the most severe and cruelest one which takes away criminal’s most valuable right in the world, that is, right to live. It is a heated debate for centuries whether capital punishment should be completely abolished world widely. The world seems to have mixed opinion regarding this issue. According to Amnesty International (2010), currently, 97 countries in the world have already abolished capital punishment while only 58 nations still actively adopt death penalty.

Murder, a common occurrence in American society, is thought of as a horrible, reprehensible atrocity. Why then, is it thought of differently when the state government arranges and executes a human being, the very definition of premeditated murder? Capital punishment has been reviewed and studied for many years, exposing several inequities and weaknesses, showing the need for the death penalty to be abolished.