Death Penalty Synthesis Essay with Documents

Opponents of the death penalty believe capital punishment is unnecessary and inappropriate in our modern

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.

For most of human civilisation, death sentences have been in common use. Most of the time, death sentences have been issued to people who break the law. However, the use of death is controversial in its effects and morality.

Capital punishment is the government’s imperfect attempt to protect its citizens from deadly individuals because some of these criminals are unable to function within current societal and legal norms; however, discrimination and wrongful convictions undercut the principle of the death penalty.

“A young African-American man shot and killed an Alabama police officer in 1981. He was examined in jail and found to be psychotic then and at the time of the killing. In 1982 the Alabama Lunacy Commission found him competent to stand trial, and he was sentenced to death. He was consistently described as psychotic in prison records; but another state forensic evaluation in 1988 again found him competent. After reviewing his records and examining him, I concluded that he had been psychotic when he killed the officer and was psychotic still. A federal appeals court judge ruled that the original trial had been unconstitutional because the defendant was not competent at the time. The prosecutor declined to retry him, and he was sent to a state mental hospital.”(Beck)

There are 34 states that currently have the death penalty, as well as the U.S. Military, and the federal government. The most frequently used method is that of lethal injection, but several states allow the use of lethal gas, electrocution, and under certain circumstances, the use of a firing squad or even hanging. With all of this being known, does the death penalty do anything to prevent these crimes from being committed in the first place? Most criminal justice experts say that it’s just not possible to prove whether or not having the death penalty in place will prevent or deter violent crime from being committed in the first place. (Parks, 8)

Despite this on going argument, outlawing capital punishment in America could create many unhappy citizens, and cause a division in the U.S. government. By enforcing the death penalty prevention in crime could occur. If death is the punishment for murder then criminals are not gaining from their crimes, but receiving the punishment they have inflicted on others. The crime rate is lower in the states that do not invoke capital punishment, but as Walter Burns stated “the number of murders tend to rise with the crime rate in general - and not only in America,” (105). Capital punishment is maintained to hopefully show criminals that when they kill they will eventually meet the same fate. By enforcing the death penalty the government could be trying to scare criminals from their crimes, and in some cases it has worked. When the death penalty was restored in Kansas, for example, the homicide rate dropped considerably (Bedau 122). According to research done by Bedau the crime rate continued to sore between 1960-1969 when capital punishment was rarely being used in most states (Bedau 127).

“The use of the death penalty in the United States has been rapidly declining since the end of the 1990s” (Dieter, 2015). This is contrast to the believes of the Founding Fathers where “the death penalty was widely accepted at the time the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights were ratified” (Gardner & Anderson, 2014). While the crimes have not changed, aspects of capital punishment which were once viewed as constitutional, today are deemed cruel and unusual. The prevailing liberal view sees the death penalty as morally unjustified and a vengeful form retribution. “It is the most brutal form of state power, requires massive state administrations and it costs significantly more than life imprisonment which is both more humane and equally effective” (Davidson, 2015). They point to the lack of deterrence it provides and highlight the racial and gender biases of the criminal justice system and the potential for the execution of the innocent by the State. In contrast, those in favor of capital punishment see it as a valid, moral and constitutional punishment as punishments should be imposed in proportion to the crime. The death penalty is reserved for the most violent of crimes in society and without it, justice is not achieved for victims and their families. The death penalty must be viewed again as a valid, moral and legal

The first known execution was in the colony of Virginia in 1622, by the 1800s the law in the United States not only accepted capital punishment but also required it (“Facts about the Death Penalty” 3). Execution was the automatic penalty for anyone convicted of murder or several other serious crimes. The debate has shifted from whether capital punishment is appropriate in a modern civilized society to questions about the fairness of the trials and the reliability of the results. These questions have contributed to the rise of citizens who oppose the death penalty (“Facts about the Death Penalty” 3). A divided United States Supreme Court also appears to be struggling with several important aspects of the death penalty. Especially vulnerable members of society like children, the mentally ill, and the mentally retarded who are viewed as undeserving

ACLA agree to the right to kill human beings especially when it comes with premeditation. Other concerns that ACLA have with capital punishment is that the death penalty is unfair because depending on how much money they have will depend on the skill of their attorney, the race of the victim and place where the crime happened (ACLA, 2012, pg1-3). It is said that people of color are far more likely to be executed that whites and/or Caucasians especially when the victim is white. One thing to think about when it comes to giving justice to the victims is the possibility of the criminal being

The intent of this paper is to share the views of those who oppose capital punishment. I, for one, am part of the majority that is in support of the death penalty. I am in agreeance of the old saying of “An eye for an eye”. The death penalty is one of the most controversial issues in our criminal justice system. There is an increase in opposition against the death penalty, not only in the United States. Many Americans feel that capital punishment is wrong. It is hard for people to fathom the idea of putting someone else to death. It is not the physical mechanics involved in executions that are hard to handle. It is the emotions involved in carrying out the process. Many feel that the death penalty violates the eight Amendment of a

In Addition, there is a chance mentally ill citizens could be convicted to death (“Facts”). According to Amnesty International and the National Association on Mental Illness, One out of every ten persons who has been executed in the United States since 1977 is mentally ill. “Many mentally ill defendants are unable to participate in their trials in any meaningful way and appear unengaged, cold, and unfeeling before the jury” (“Facts”). Many mentally ill defendants have been drugged against their will in order for them to be competent enough to be executed (“Facts”). Some states still haven’t put a ban on executing mentally ill people such as Organ, although the United States Supreme Court has declared that

Throughout time our world has experienced many forms of crime. Crime will continue in our society no matter what steps we take to prevent it. Many people wonder what they could do to decrease the crime around the world, especially the violent crimes. This is where the death penalty issue comes into play. The death penalty has been around for thousands of years and, compared to the past, has changed dramatically. For example, people used to be publically tortured and then executed in front of anyone who wanted to see unlike today, the most common practice used is the lethal injection. Yet, many people wonder whether capital punishment is a humane or inhumane form of justice. So, should all states implement the death penalty to reduce violent crimes? Having states enforce the death penalty can reduce violent criminals going back out into society to commit more violent crimes.

The death penalty directly violates basic human rights for which the constitution stands for. The eighth amendment states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty does not violate the 8th amendment however, many would consider it to be cruel and unusual. The Supreme Court has not established a conclusive definition of cruel and unusual punishment, which is

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