There are many reasons to both support and oppose the death penalty. Many people can feel very strongly about whether or not they approve of this method of punishment. I feel that the death penalty is wrong, and I believe that there is much support to back this up. I believe that the death penalty is wrong because it is not an effective deterrent, racially and economically bias, unreliable, expensive, and morally wrong of society.
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.
As far back as one can look into human civilization, justice for a murder victim has always been by taking the life of the killer. In today’s society capital punishment is needed to defend it from further harm, bring justice and/or vengeance to the victims of the loved ones, and encourage psychological deterrence. As of today, there are thirty-two states which offer the only just punishment for a crime without parallel and eighteen states having abolished the death penalty.
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
This is a big argument that bBy putting someone to death, you’re interfering with these human rights. Although the argument could be made that having someone imprisoned for the rest of their life is more torturous to the person than being put to death, by taking someone’s life, you’re interfering with their right to live. good
Some individuals believe that justice is only served when an offender’s punishment has effects of the some degree to that of their victim in relation to the crime committed against them. In this case, they argue that execution is a more punishments compared to other forms of punishments aimed to help the criminal reform; since the sentence makes the criminal suffer in a similar degree to their victims. However those opposing capital punishment argue that a sentence is meant to help on to reform and learn from their mistakes. However ones an offender is executed via the death sentence nothing is learnt since one cannot learn when dead. As a result in such a case the justice did not have any impact nor serve its purpose.
The Death Penalty Discussion In today’s world terrible crimes are being committed daily. Many people believe that these criminals deserve one fate; death. Death penalty is the maximum sentence used in punishing people who kill another human being and is a very controversial method of punishment. Capital punishment is a legal infliction of death penalty and since ancient times it has bee used to punish a large variety of offences.
Life is sacred. This is an ideal that the majority of people can agree upon to a certain extent. For this reason taking the life of another has always been considered the most deplorable of crimes, one worthy of the harshest available punishment. Thus arises one of the great moral dilemmas of our time. Should taking the life of one who has taken the life of others be considered an available punishment? Is a murderer's life any less sacred than the victim's is? Can capital punishment, the death penalty, execution, legal murder, or whatever a society wishes to call it, be morally justifiable? The underlying question in this issue is if any kind of killing, regardless of reason, can be accepted. In this
Last but not least, from a sociologic perspective, capital punishment does not work as intended, to deter crime rate, rather, it might brutalize individuals, at the same time does nothing good to the victim’s family other than brutal vengeance. The origin of death penalty is served as a vehicle to put a warning for those potential future criminals that such kind of behavior will lead to death. However, so far, no clear evidence can be seen that capital punishment, as a mechanism of deterrent, actually cut down the local crime rate. Ironically, a reversal trend was found by Death Penalty Information Center (2010) in the USA that the death penalty leads to an increase in local murder rate. To die might be too easy for the mindless murderers. Also, for the relatives or friends of criminals put into death through capital punishment, they are more likely to be
The death penalty seems to be a very debatable subject. There are arguments and support for both sides of the debate, but which side is right? That is a tough question to ask. After reading the article in the textbook, two other articles, and looking at statistics, I seem to feel that the death penalty may not be the right answer.
Dieter, Richard C. "Millions Misspent: What Politicians Don't Say About the High Costs of the
The death penalty, or capital punishment, is the execution of an offender that is sentenced to death by a court of law for a criminal offense. This type of punishment for inmates is involved in controversy over whether or not it is an acceptable form of punishment for criminals and also whether or not it is immoral. There are many arguments for both sides of the debate, each making valid points and pointing out the flaws of the opposing position. Many religions are either for or against capital punishment, due to them either being against killing or for it. The controversy surrounding the death penalty laws in the United States is made up of various arguments. Other arguments surrounding the use of the death penalty include whether
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
Have you ever watched a movie like “Alice in Wonderland” where every few scenes somebody is put to death? This really happens to this day. The real question is if you think it should stay or be abolished. The death penalty is needed and shouldn’t be revoked in any of the states that support it. Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is one of the oldest forms of punishments. Some of the ways societies used to kill people was: boiling to death, hanging, and decapitation. Today some countries still use these methods, however here in the United States capital punishment is mainly death by lethal injection, electric chair, or firing squad. The death penalty should be in place for three reasons. The first being the religious aspect, the deterrent of crime, and the overcrowding as well as the cost.
“Assume that all murderers would instantly die upon murdering. Murderers would then kill only if they wished to die themselves. Murder/suicide is an extremely small component of all murders. Therefore, if a swift and sure death penalty was universally applied to our worst criminals, it is logically conclusive that the death penalty would be a significant deterrent and that many innocent lives would be saved. In fact, swift and sure executions do result in deterrence”(Sharp). The death penalty should be allowed and enforced in every state because it is cheaper than life in prison, and it would scare potential criminals away from committing felonies that could lead to the death penalty. Also the death penalty would only be enforced in a case where a life was endangered. And people are rarely wrongly accused when the death penalty is in play.