I am going to argue that capital punishment is a morally and logically justifiable punishment for criminals. I will demonstrate this by showing how the logic behind not having the death penalty is invalid. I will also present examples that will defend my argument. I will then present counterarguments and their implications. The death penalty in the United States is a contested subject, and even recently it has been voted to be unconstitutional by some states. Currently there are many states that still have the death penalty, though many have not executed anyone in recent years. Outside of the United States the issue is also split, with many countries recently eliminating the death penalty. Crimes that usually receive the death …show more content…
You are given this right to live if you follow society’s rules and standards, and when you forsake them and go against its strongest values, you are in essence giving up your right. This conclusion invalidates the opposition’s logical argument that the criminals still have a right to life.
Opponents of the death penalty have also proposed that by showing that we as a society find it reasonable to kill sometimes with capital punishment, that it shows criminals that it is acceptable to kill under certain circumstances. While the logic behind this argument may seem sound it is flawed. This is mainly because of the fact that though capital punishment is used, it is placed under very strict guidelines. It is clearly visible to notice the difference in what the law defines as acceptable and not acceptable reasons to kill somebody. It is a logical fallacy to agree with this argument, just because capital punishment kills people and capital punishment is accepted does not mean that a person killing people will be accepted.
Imagine a situation where the police have apprehended a mass murder who has already killed a large amount of people. This person could be either convicted with the death penalty or sent to prison. If this criminal is sent to prison he will be able to continue to live out his days while costing the state, as well as
The death penalty is a controversial topic in the United States today and has been for a number of years. The death penalty was overturned and then reinstated in the United States during the 1970's due to questions concerning its fairness. The death penalty began to be reinstated slowly, but the rate of executions has increased during the 1990's. There are a number of arguments for and against the death penalty. Many death penalty supporters feel that the death penalty reduces crime because it deters people from committing murder if they know that they will receive the death penalty if they are caught. Others in favor of the death penalty feel that even if it doesn't deter others from committing crimes, it will eliminate
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.
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
If we examine some arguments presented from both sides, opponents of the capital punishment claim that executing someone is nothing more than an immoral, state-authorized killing which undervalues the human life and destroys our respect for our government which itself says that killing is wrong. But the supporters of the death penalty think that certain murderers
Compared to the death penalty, life in prison is perceived as an ethical decision, while the choice to inflict the death penalty is irreversible, the latter allows for better judgement in the long run. An article from, the Nation, contrasts the costs between both methods, "carrying out an execution costs at least twice as much-and perhaps five times as much- as sentencing a murderer to life without parole" (David Dow, Life Without Parole: A Different Death Penalty, the Nation). Clearly, if the economy is to be impacted to such an extent, then law enforcement must re-evaluate whether or not the death penalty is actually meaningful in the long run. If the government were to eliminate the funding used for resources towards the death row, and instead facilitate the money elsewhere, it would serve more meaningful purposes. Moreover, life in prison guarantees a, "Swift, severe punishment. It provides justice to survivors of murder victims and allows more resources to be invested in preventing violence." (Is Life in Prison without Parole a Better Option then Death Penalty, ProCon). The answer to seeking justice for one crime, should not be answered for by committing another. If this were a concept applied by people in everyday life, then murder rates would escalate and hold potential for anarchy. On a realistic thought, a majority of the problems related to the death penalty can be avoided through a more humane penance. It also leads to whether or not government institutions should have the warrant to issue capital
destroy the basis on which a moral community rests, and they give up their rights to citizenship and also to life itself. The argument against is based on love and the nature of an ideal community in which forgiveness and the hope for redemption and rehabilitation are the key elements. Protection of the innocent requires that criminals be isolated, possibly for life..
When it comes to the topic of the death penalty in the United States, for many years it has been a controversial issue whether the United States should keep the death penalty or abolish it. Some people argue that the death penalty should be banned, onee should abolish the death penalty.
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, was implemented and designed to bring justice to people for their wrongdoings. It has been around since the colonial times of America, and since that time it has had many supporters and protestors. Many states have abolished the death penalty, while some still carry it out but they are doing so using a different method than others have over the years. Throughout my time researching this topic, I will be looking for information about the death penalty that is relevant, and that will provide evidence for both sides of the question at hand. The questions I plan to answer through my research include: What states still carry out the death penalty and how do they do so? How much does the death
There is a lot of controversy about whether the death penalty should be legal or not. It is widely used, with only 18 out of the 50 states having abolished it, but should it be permitted, regardless of the popularity of it? The answer is no. It should be abolished because it demeans life, is cruel, prison is a better punishment, and it is not effective.
From an early age, children are taught that murder is morally wrong. In today’s complex society that is impeded by unsettling periods of civil unrest, it is an expectation for everyone to acknowledge and accept that murder is one of the worst crimes individuals can commit. Perhaps it can be said that the death penalty is one of our legal system’s biggest contradictions of itself, as, if someone commits murder (or another heinous crime of that caliber), such ‘murderers’ will, in states that have capital punishment laws, be sent to Death Row and ultimately murdered in order to prevent potential future crimes by such perpetrators. I believe that the death penalty is wrong not only as it is immoral to take a life, but also, such ineffective laws waste money and do not deter crime.
In 1879, the United States Supreme Court ruled, by a vote of 9-0, that execution by firing squad was not cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. This began a long debate on whether or not a government reserves the right to punish those who have taken a life by taking their lives. There are many reasons as to why someone would be against capital punishment: it is not our right as humans to play God, it is against the constitution, the threat of capital punishment is not a valid deterrent, it is morally corrupt to take a life. All of these points are valid, and they represent the mindset of millions of Americans; however, capital punishment is a valuable asset to be reserved for only “the most heinous murders and the most brutal and conscienceless murderers” (Alice).
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment is a legal procedure in which a state executes a person for crimes he/she has committed. This punishment has been implemented by many states, and is normally used for atrocious crimes, especially murder. It is also used on crimes against the state such as treason, crimes against humanity, espionage, and violent crimes while other states use it as part of military justice. There are mixed reactions on capital punishment depending on one’s faith, and the state they come from. In my view, I am not in favor of death penalty, as I strongly believe that, death penalty is unacceptable and an inhumane practice for it denies one the right to live. Death penalty does not deter crime, it is an act
Capital punishment is the execution of a perpetrator for committing a heinous crime (homicide), and it is a hotly debated topic in our society. The basic issue is whether capital punishment should be allowed as it is today, or abolished in part or in whole. My argument is that:
The death penalty is a tough debate and an overwhelming argument in this country. We as Americans put Timothy McVeigh to death by lethal injection just three months ago. Arguments can be made for and against the death penalty, but this is not the problem. Capital Punishment is supposed to be a deterrent to crime, but is the death penalty really a deterrent? Capital Punishment is not a deterrent for crime, and the effects of Capital Punishment are actually hurting the American citizens. Capital Punishment affects the American citizens by having those citizens pay millions of dollars for death row inmates, and these criminals affect those same citizens because the