Cruel & Unusual Punishment & The death Penalty
I think that the Death penalty would be justifiable if it fit the crime, depending on the type/types of crimes committed, how severe it was, and the history of the offender. I don’t necessarily think it’s cruel and unusual punishment if there is no suffering or pain involved. According to the text (“Conditions must not involve the wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain; nor may they be grossly disproportionate to the severity of the crime warranting (Cripe C, 2012) imprisonment”) (p.g.287 Cripe, Pearlman, Kosiak) So if the Person does not undergo pain or suffering, and it is equal to or fits the crimes that were committed then it’s not considered “cruel and unusual punishment”.
I think it can go both ways there have been instances where it can be cruel and unusual punishment. Such as a botched lethal injection as was the case of three different gentlemen who were facing the Death Penalty. The cases involved Clayton Lockett, Charles Warner, William Happ. Clayton had been on death row for 17 years for committing a murder of a 19-year-old female who witnessed a crime Locket had committed. There had been some suspicion of criminal acts going on in the prison system with administration. Such as allegations of the prison officials smuggling illegal pharmaceuticals that were used for lethal injections. They had been purchasing unapproved medications too use for lethal injection sentences.
It was believed that the medication used
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.
The following description of Evans's electrocution was sworn to and verified by Russell F. Canan on June 22, 1983:
We kill people to show them killing is wrong. The death penalty does not punish people for killing but for murdering someone. Murder is "the unlawful, malicious, or permitted killing of one human being by another" (Carmical 1). The slogan should be ?We execute people to show people that murder is wrong.? The death penalty is racist, it punishes the poor, it causes the innocent to die, it is not a deterrent against violent crime, and it is cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is wrong and it should be abolished.
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
The death penalty also known as capital punishment is an execution in which the person who committed the offence is put to death by the state. It was first practiced in Jamestown colony, 1608. The person was hanged for spying for the Spanish government and was the 1st person sentenced to death in America. Since then, it has been a form to punish the criminals for committing such heinous crimes and putting end to violence and crime rates. Despite how people agree that the death penalty is justifiable, however; it still violates the international human rights laws. These laws were created to protect the lives of all human beings including the criminals, who some might agree they do not deserve to live. Even though some might say that the
Capital Punishment is Not Only Unusual, But Cruel The most widely known aspect of the eighth amendment is the fact that it prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual punishment is perceived as punishment that causes “an unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain” (Bailey). Is capital punishment cruel and unusual? It is one of the most controversial topics in America today. In effect since the 1600s, the US Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was “cruel and unusual” in 1972 but reversed this decision when a "cleaner" way to bring about death was found in 1976 (Encarta).
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
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)
The death penalty till this day remains to be a very controversial topic. Some people may argue that it should be considered a form of cruel and unusual punishment; others may rebuttal in saying that the death penalty is capital punishment. When visiting the idea of placing someone to death one must bear in mind the possibility of condemning an innocent person through such torture, the brutalizing effect on society it may leave, and the serious psychological trauma that a defendants family and friends may face. Is this really what the justice system is willing to place on the line in order to gain a form of so called justice. I mean reasonably speaking what will anyone gain from such an action. It definitely will not bring the harm to be undone. As stated in the encyclopedia under the theory of judicial torture “ the use of torture was confined to capital crimes, for which the death penalty or mutilation could apply” (PIHLAJAM, 2004). Looking at how the death penalty is conducted people should not be treated like animals, given a due time to be put down. No human being deserves such treatment whether or not his or her offense was so horrific and traumatic. Is that not the lesson being taught to society when the criminal is captured? Yet, the law as a jury of peers, men just like the accused, may cast the same sin upon him. Why should this action be considered in any way to be fair or believed to be capital punishment?
When the Judge announced the verdict “Guilty” there was a slight murmur in the court room as was expected. Then the Judge began to announce the sentence “Life in prison without the possibility of parole”, the words cutting through the air like an arrow through a paper target. The courtroom was an arena of mixed feelings, half cheering in a celebratory manner, the other half crying and shouting in disbelief. Someone’s 13 year old son was going to prison for the rest of his life without any chance of parole. Children should never be sentenced to life without parole, making the sentence in
While solitary confinement is one of the most effective ways of keeping todays prisoners from conflict and communication, it is also the most detrimental to their health. According to NPR the reason for most solitary confinement units in America “is to control the prison gangs (NPR, 2011).” But that is not always the case. Sometimes putting a gang member in solitary reduces the shock and awe effect that it is supposed to have, when they start losing their minds. The prisoners kept in solitary confinement show more psychotic symptoms than that of a normal prisoner, including a higher suicide rate. Once a prisoner’s mental capacity to understand why he is in prison and why he is being punished is gone, there is no reason to keep said
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
The death penalty is a cruel and inhuman death, “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”. Death penalty violates the right to life. (2004)
Others say that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment. However in most states, the person convicted has a choice between the electric chair or lethal injection. When a person is
I know that it is in the eighth amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, and I can’t think of a greater punishment for a crime than death, but I believe that exceptions should be made.