Death Penalty: Killing Is Wrong

Holly Near once said, “Why do we kill people, who kill people, to show that killing people is wrong?” The contradiction of the purpose for having the death penalty is superb. If the government believes that killing people is wrong, why do the government kill people who perform the act they are against? The death penalty is a punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime. Capital crime can be classified as first degree murder, murder with special circumstances, rape with bodily harm or federal treason. The death penalty in America was influenced by the British. When British settlers came to America they bought the practice of capital punishment to each colony. Laws regarding the death

The death penalty has been considered one of the most severe punishments by governments. However, recently, many people have rebelled against the death penalty. The death penalty is an act that is similar to being ruled under fascism instead of democracy. Under the rule of democracy, citizens are responsible for the acts of other fellow citizens, which can be inferred that crime is caused by the lack of responsibility in society. The victim's loved ones suffer due to the victim's death. It is understandable that they would want the murderer dead, but society often does not work that way. People need to think on behalf of the society.

For centuries capital punishment has been used to “punish” criminals for a severe enough crime that they committed. It dates back to hundreds of years ago and has been enacted in many different countries, some that still have it today. Death penalty/capital punishment is the punishment of death an offender receives after having a court hearing and being convicted of a crime (ProCon.org, 2008). Once someone receives a death penalty sentence, they go on death row awaiting their execution. For a very long time, the controversy regarding whether or not the death penalty is ethical or just has been a topic of debate. I believe that the

To add without a doubt that killing another person is a terrible crime that one can commit. our government is states that capital punishment is the wright choices because, after all, the criminal did murder an innocent victim, and therefore should be killed. known as and "eye-for-an-eye, and tooth-for-a- tooth theory." Of course, if we used this system all the time, there would be no need for laws. If someone hits me, I would hit him/her back. How simple, we can all be primitive again. Also, some people support capital punishment the fear of being killed is going to stop criminals from murdering.

Sister Helen Prejean, the writer of the biographical account “Dead Men Walking”, advocates strongly for the abolition of the death penalty. The non-fiction work is based on her experience being the spiritual advisor of Sonnier and other inmates on death row. Prejean believes that if people know the truth about executions, they will oppose them. In her essay “Memoirs of a Dead Man Walking”, she openly opposes the death penalty. There are four reasons for her to oppose death penalty is immoral as. Firstly, it is a torture. Secondly,, it does not work out as a deterrent. Thirdly, and it costs more than life imprisonment. Finally, only the poor sentenced to death. She believes that the death penalty is immoral as it is a torture, it does not work out as a deterrent and it costs more than life imprisonment. However, I disagree with her argument, because death penalty is not seeing as a torture in history, Super Court and those criminals deserve the retribution; death penalty help deters crimes and poor cannot be the reason to escape the law.

The United States has set up numerous laws that are said to be for the people 's ' security, however in what manner can those same people make certain that these laws are doing what they are meant for? The death penalty is contended to be a just punishment equivalent to the wrongdoing committed, but is it truly, if it means lowering others to turn into that what they are against. “Always I have concluded the death penalty is wrong because it lowers us all; it is a surrender to the worst that is in us; it uses a power—the official power to kill by execution—that has never elevated a society, never brought back a life, never inspired anything but hate”(Cuomo). Therefore, capital punishment ought to be reformed across all of the United States, not only because it is immoral and prejudiced, but also, because mistrials are a common happenstance, it allows for a violent cycle to continue, and it is truly not an eye for an eye but the easy way out.

The ultimate question surrounding the death penalty continues to be “is it morally right?”. The death penalty is an unjust punishment and too many variables affect the decision for it to ever be truly a truly objective decision. According to the first major study conducted in the US, 4.1% of all defendants sentenced to death are innocent. Death itself is one of the worst events that could happen to an individual. Being unable to enjoy the little things in life due to a mistake in the system made by the biased people running the government is unfair to anyone involved. Others may argue that the death penalty being morally unjust is a completely biased statement based on faith instead of fact. This remains invalid because the people deciding the penalties fit for the opposer are humans, and will therefore always be biased no matter how hard he/she tries.

The death penalty can be summed up entirely in one word, bias. For a country that prides itself on “justice for all” and “all men are created equal”, the death penalty falls short of such boast. The subsequent arguments are not formulated to defend the individual and their horrific crime, rather they are presented in order to support why the death penalty is unfair and should be eliminated. If such brutish punishment if seen as just for the crime committed, should it not apply equally to all, regardless of race? The debate of whether the death penalty is inappropriate has been been thoroughly investigated for many years by scholars and journalists alike. I shall defend my position against this sanction based on erroneous convictions, racial biases, and the the high costs associated with the prosecution and detention of death row inmates.

Almost everyone has been stuck in a situation where they were having trouble determining what they should do. In those situations, the actions that are available to them to choose from are either classified by our society as right or wrong. It is obvious to most people what the right option in a situation is as well as why they should choose it, but why do part of those people still choose the wrong option if they are fully aware what they chose is awry.

A man by the name of John Grisham once said, “Who exactly, gives us the right to kill? If killing is wrong, then why are we allowed to kill?” Do people kill because they feel guilty? Once the criminal kills or commits a crime, is it okay for them to be sentenced to the death penalty? The death penalty can be looked at in a variation of ways. However, is it moral or immoral?

I think that there are times when killing is justified. If that were not so then we would never go to war or have a police department. I believe that the only justifiable reason for killing would be to protect either yourself our others. When we go to war we go to war to protect ourselves or others we do not go to war just to kill. When we had the revolutionary war we were standing up for ourselves against the English. When ww2 started we did not fight for either side until we were attacked and then it was justifiable because we were protecting ourselves.

Although the family victims of these criminal activities feel a need for retribution for the victim, many do not seek a sense of revenge with the death penalty. They want justice which usually means life time punishment in prison. It is my opinion, that the desire for revenge is one of the lowest human emotions, and “to kill the person who has killed someone close to you is just going to continue the cycle of violence and destruction” (Schroth). There is no means to an end with this type of punishment. Does anyone really believe that the death penalty is a deterrent for criminals? I would say no. Does this penalty make them really think twice about what they did? I would surmise an emphatic no. If the criminal cannot think like a “normal person” whatever they may be, then this very expensive punishment to tax payers is not a viable option. Hence our forefathers sought to create equality among the masses. As a country based on Christian beliefs and standards, we do not believe in “an eye for an eye.” Everyone was a right to life. As a whole community, I believe killing people is wrong. By strapping someone to a chair and injecting a needle into them, we are sinking to the level of the killer. We are a compassionate and caring community. As said by Anna Quindlen “what many people want from the death penalty, they will never get.” Even thinking that an execution

Many people question whether the death penalty is right or wrong. Issues regarding the possibility of putting an innocent man to death based on faulty investigative work and a flawed legal system are often explored. References to the concept of lex talionis are made, wondering why rapists are not raped and sadists are not beaten in a legal system that kills killers. A killer takes another 's life, liberty, or chance at happiness? Is it wrong to take the same from them? How can taking a life for a life be considered justice? So, is the death penalty genuinely considered justice, or is it blood thirst?

The death penalty, or generally known as capital punishment, alludes to discipline by demise which is condemned by a state or lawful system. The primary at any point recorded execution to happen in the American Colonies was in 1608. Albeit correctional code contrasted from settlement to state, capital punishment was rehearsed in provinces like New York and New England. By the time the settlements picked up autonomy following the Revolutionary War, each of the "provinces had comparative demise statutes covering illegal conflagration, theft, injustice, kill, homosexuality, thievery, burglary, assault, horse-taking, slave resistance, and falsifying" (Stein 4). At the point when the First Congress assembled in 1790, they confirmed criminal statutes that permitted the death penalty for felonious violations, for example, assault and murder. The men of the First Congress likewise drafted the Bill of Rights what's more, U.S. Constitution. The Eight Amendment gives that "inordinate safeguard might not be required, nor exorbitant fines forced, nor pitiless and unordinary disciplines caused" ("U.S. Const."). When the Eight Amendment composed, there were at that point the death penalty laws set up. Along these lines, to supporters of capital punishment, the eighth amendment's disallowance of "merciless what's more, uncommon discipline" does not have any significant bearing to state supported executions. Because of the outrageous idea of the

The problem with the death penalty is that it is a big waste of money. Yes, in some cases it can make people feel better, like they are getting revenge on the people that did the crime to their loved one or someone they know but that is really cruel. In the article, The Price of Justice it shows how the price were a few years ago and it can only of up from there “in 1988, The Miami Herald reported that the cost of the death penalty in Florida was $3.2 million per execution compared to $600,000 for life imprisonment.103 Similarly, The Dallas Morning News reported in 1992 that the trials and appeals of a capital case alone cost Texas $2.3 million per case on average”. Making the criminal sit in a jail cell that is not that big with other bad people is more of a punishment then just killing them. And it is a lot cheaper to do it that way as well. The cost of the death penalty is not reasonable because the state can’t even perform the death penalty the right way. And we can use the money for better things for our states and for our society so we can improve our comity’s so