Dead Man Walking

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.

The idea of capital punishment deterring crime is difficult to determine; some could rationalize that the death penalty should in theory stop potential murders from committing crimes. However, this rationalization has never been concretely proven. The research into capital punishment’s effect on deterrence is immense; however, the majority of research on this issue has differential findings. Although some research suggests conclusively that capital punishment deters crime, others found that it fails to do this. Understanding deterrence, the death penalty, and the results of

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

Another issue related to the subject involves whether or not capital punishment actually deters criminals from committing crimes. Most people think that the death penalties primary function is to deter others in the future from committing similar crimes. There is evidence that at times capital punishment does deter. However, there are those or cite evidence or opinion that the capital punishment does not achieve its desired effect. The majority of this paper will focus on whether capital punishment actually deters crime.

In view of these safeguards, proponents of capital punishment believe that state executions are justified sentences for those convicted of willful first-degree murder. They do not think sentencing murderers to prison is a harsh enough sentence, especially if there is the possibility of parole for the perpetrator. A final argument posed by proponents of the death penalty is that execution is an effective deterrence. They are convinced that potential murderers will likely think twice before they commit murder. Despite the rhetoric of politicians for the increased use of the death penalty, a number of prominent individuals and organizations have emerged to express their opposition to capital punishment. Along with families of death row prisoners, the International Court of The Hague, the United Nations, Amnesty International, the Texas Conference of Churches, Pope John Paul II, Nobel Peace recipient, Bishop Tutu, numerous judges and former prosecutors, former Attorney General, Ramsey Clark, actors, and writers are waging a determined struggle against the death penalty. They invariably argue that capital punishment is wrong and inhumane. Religious folk generally evoke the nature of an “ideal spiritual community” (Cauthen, 1). Within this perspective, a moral and ethical community does not insist on a life for a life. While a community must act to protect law- abiding citizens, an ethical response would be to

More than two centuries ago, the death penalty was commonplace in the United States, but today it is becoming increasingly rare. In the article “Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?”, Diann Rust-Tierney argues that it should be abolished, and Joshua Marquis argues that it should not be abolished. Although the death penalty is prone to error and discrimination, the death penalty should not be abolished because several studies show that the death penalty has a clear deterrent effect, and we need capital punishment for those certain cases in which a killer is beyond redemption.

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

The film Dead Man Walking depicts the life of an inmate sentenced to the death penalty through lethal injection. The film portrays prison as grim, isolated and lonely place. The life of prisoners in the film live in agony and suffering. The main issue with prison shown by the film is the death penalty. In specific the main character, Matthew Poncelet has been incarcerated for six years, still awaiting his execution. Furthermore, Matthew Poncelet appeals to another court showing the death penalty being an unnecessary drawn out process taking up lots of time and other resources. The film takes the perspective of a christian nun when talking about the death penalty. As a result, the death penalty is viewed as inhumane, cruel and should be abolished.

The fight and controversy behind capital punishment is not a new idea. The death penalty has divided America down the middle, with half against and half pro the punishment. Due to the sensitivity of capital punishment, the Supreme Court has dictated which states capital punishment is legal. Despite it being legal in these states, it is up to the prosecutor’s discretion to vie for this punishment as opposed to other forms such as life in prison, rehabilitation, etc.

There are several controversies surrounding capital punishment. Some people are in favor of the death penalty and some people are against it. Capital punishment is the death penalty for a crime. It is not right to seek revenge on another person’s life, and we have the right to live. There should be justice for the crime but not take the life of the person that committed the crime. Many people are not aware of how wrong, painful, and costly an execution is, and above all, it is possible to kill innocent people.

Since the mid 1900’s, capital punishment has brought many individuals into many diverse view points throughout the years. Capital punishment is a way of punishing a convict by killing him or her because of the crime he or she committed. Capital punishment will always have its pros and cons. There are opponents who absolutely disagree with capital punishment. And then there are advocates who support the idea. In the advocates view point, capital punishment is a way to minimize the threat in the world today. In the opponent’s point of view, opponents disagree with capital punishment, because of the high expenses it brings to the states. Also, opponents argue that capital punishment

For decades, an age old cultural means of justice has been questioned and debated between its supporters and protesters. In the last four to five decades though, the ideals of capital punishment have been brought directly to the forefront of society and put on display for citizens to analyze at their own will. While both sides have contributed heavily to the conversation, the outcry has been negative for a majority of the time. While the ideals of capital punishment once benefitted the sentiments of society, being harsh and reciprocal in the sense of justice, it no longer creates the same feeling among Americans. Capital punishment is no longer an effective force of justice in American society as it does not comply with the humane values being installed by other developed countries and the agendas of American political parties, it is far less socially and legally effective than a life-long prison sentence, and the legal process is too long and drawn out to be effective in any way and create a sense of imminent danger for a potential criminal.

Capital punishment has been utilized as a sentence long before the establishment of justice systems and since that time has been a highly contested debate. With the advent and addition of justice systems, much of the topics of debate have remained the same with proponents arguing both sides and citing information to support their claim. Debates over whether capital punishment as a threat deters future crimes, the repercussions of making a legal mistake in handing a death sentence, and the morality of the issue are fiercely contested. I argue in favor of capital punishment by disproving the opposing side’s arguments and providing support for pro-capital punishment.

In this paper I will be arguing why capital punishment is still necessary. The topics I will be discussing are: is capital punishment constitutional. Should there be a standard what types of execution should be administered. Is capital punishment an actual deterrent? How the death penalty may actually save the lives of those on death row. The perpetrators of the most egregious crimes left alive belittle the life or lives that they have taken and offer no sense of justice in the legal system. Capital punishment has acquired a stigma due to how it is applied and how death row inmates are executed. Capital punishment has been in the United States since it’s founding. It has been a tool of the judiciary for giving a sense of justice to those families that have had to lose loved ones. It serves to remove criminals that have violated the most sacred law of the social contract, permanently. The reason for capital punishment is to invoke justice against those who commit the most heinous crime, murder.

Capital punishment has been a controversial and a central part of political debates for decades. As the result of being a complex dispute, there are multiple, common perspectives on how it should be resolved. However, most citizens of the United States identify with one of two sides, those for and those against its continued use. Most commonly, the death penalty is used in gruesome murder trials and some other offenses, such as treason, espionage, and airplane hijacking. Those for it, tend to believe that it is necessary to keep these criminals out of society and that it deters crime, while those against tend to believe that the practice is medieval and unethical in society today. With a controversial topic like the death penalty, it is important to determine why this controversy exists and if there is a possible solution. The focus at hand is whether or not the United States Government should continue its use of the death penalty and how this answer could be implemented.