Once a popular punishment for crime has now become one of the most controversial forms of punishment. The death penalty has been abolished in most civilized nations around the world and states in America are now reanalyzing this method of punishment. There are many critics of the death penalty that find this practice of punishment barbaric and uncivilized. There are however, many that still hold that the biblical verse of Exodus 21:23-24 “But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,” as principle (Bible Gateway, 2014). Supporters of the death penalty believe that for the ultimate crime, you must pay the ultimate price. But at what cost does the rest of the …show more content…
Carlos had maintained his innocence from the day he was arrested until the day he was executed. Liebman’s investigation proved that there was not only shoddy police work, eye witness inconsistencies, but that officials had ignored statements from witnesses that stated that a man named Carlos Hernandez had actually bragged about the murder and that he had gotten away with it. Hernandez had a proven history of stabbing and cutting women and even his family members that were interviewed identified the murder weapon as a knife that Hernandez was known to have carried. (Mclaughlin 2014). Carlos De Luna was a poor uneducated man who was not afforded experienced counsel.
Racism and socioeconomic class play a very large factor in considering who is executed in America. An alarming statistic shows that 70% of all executions are those in which the victim was a white person (Wade 2013). “Since 1977, the overwhelming majority of death row defendants have been executed for murdering white victims, although African-Americans make up about half of all homicide victims” (Wade 2013). The old adage that ‘you get what you pay for’ unfortunately stands true when considering the representation that is provided for indigent defendants accused of murder.
Oklahoma Indigent Defense System, Executive Director, Joe P. Robertson stated that he believes that eventually all states will abolish the death penalty but
Senator for Utah Orrin Hatch once said, “Capital punishment is our society’s recognition of the sanctity of human life,” (Brainy Quote). While the arguments for both sides of the debate over the morality of the death penalty are vast, the bottom line is that the death penalty does not disregard human life, but rather it reveres it, as Hatch said. Morality is defined as, “The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct,” (The Free Dictionary). One who seeks to protect a person who has committed a heinous crime such as murder is arguably not in accords with what is right and wrong. Therefore, although killing is generally accepted as being wrong, the death penalty is sometimes the only solution to bring justice to a
The death penalty is a controversial topic in the United States today and has been for a number of years. The death penalty was overturned and then reinstated in the United States during the 1970's due to questions concerning its fairness. The death penalty began to be reinstated slowly, but the rate of executions has increased during the 1990's. There are a number of arguments for and against the death penalty. Many death penalty supporters feel that the death penalty reduces crime because it deters people from committing murder if they know that they will receive the death penalty if they are caught. Others in favor of the death penalty feel that even if it doesn't deter others from committing crimes, it will eliminate
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.
The Death Penalty in America has been a talked about issue for some time now. Americans have their own opinions on the death penalty. Some people feel it is too harsh of a punishment, some believe if you take a life you should lose your life. I myself do not believe in the death penalty. To me it goes totally against what Americas was built on God. Even though over the last fifteen years or so we have slowly drifted away from “In God We Trust”. Looking at the death penalty in a whole it was never something that the United States came up with. It was adopted from Britain. (Bohm, 1999)The first ever recorded death penalty in United States history was that of Captain George Kendall in 1608. He was executed for being a spy. The death of Captain Kendall started a chain of other colonies jumping on board for the death penalty. In some colonies they were sentencing people to death for petty crimes, such as steeling, or trading with Indians. Over the years after the death penalty would be reformed and revamped numerous of times. Until it was only used when murder or treason occurred. Matter of fact Pennsylvania was the first state
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
The U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) found “a pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in the charging, sentencing, and imposition of the death penalty.” Moreover, the study reached the conclusion that a defendant in a capital case was much more likely to be given the death sentence if the murder victim was white. Sadly, “the single most reliable predictor of whether someone will be sentenced to death is the race of the victim.”
Being sent to Death Row is the highest prosecution a criminal could be sentenced to and the process when determining of someone deserves a death sentence is a very bias decision. Since 1977 when capital punishment was restored there has been about 20,600 homicides and only about .7 death sentences for every 100 homicides has been given in the Cook county. The decision to impose a death sentence is not only based on the crime done but also the race of the victim. Attorneys at a state level has a less formal guide when giving death sentences. It is commonly seen how race plays a major role in the justice system. As apart of attorney protocol of determining if the death sentence is given it is seen black males will be given a higher sentence versus a white male even if the crimes where similar. In this article “Disparities on Death Row” published in Grumman points out the unjustness in the justice system. Through ethos, pathos, and logos Cornelia Grumman effectively persuades her audience to spread the issues of capital punishment assignment.
The law of God is, "Thou Shalt Not Kill" (Bible 79 ), and every system of ethics and rules of our society echoes that law. For decades, state and federal leaders have struggled with opposing views of the death penalty. Many minds have endured this difficult question-Who says it is right to take another human's life because of an act that he/she committed?
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.
Racism has always been an issue in our society. Throughout history, minorities have been misrepresented in the justice system, especially in cases where the outcome is death. In early American History, blacks were hanged for breaking any informal laws. Back then, killings occurred without any type of dues process. In the 1960s the National Association for the Advancement of African Americans (NAACP) believed that African Americans received the death penalty more frequently than members of other groups. “According to data from Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC), 55% of death row inmates are black or Hispanic”
Almost all nations in the world either have the death sentence or have had it at one time. It was used in most cases to punish those who broke the laws or standards that were expected of them. Since the death penalty wastes tax money, is inhumane, and is largely unnecessary it should be abolished in every state across the United States. The use of the death penalty puts the United States in the same category as countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia which are two of the world’s worst human rights violators (Friedman 34). Lauri Friedman quotes, “Executions simply inject more violence into an already hostile American society.”
“Murder is wrong” (“Capital Punishment”). We’ve been taught this indisputable truth since childhood. The death penalty is defined as one human taking the life of another. Coincidentally, that is a classification of murder. There are as many as thirty-six states with the death penalty, and it’s essential that they change it. The United States needs the death penalty abolished because it is filled with flaws, cruel and immoral, and is an ineffective means of deterrent for crime.
One week, one month, one year or maybe even more, This is how long the wait could be for a death row inmate to receive the most positive profound or extreme punishment that can be given to him or her.The death penalty is often debated on the moral grounds, however it is significant that the process of putting an inmate to death happens within a system paid for by taxpayers.
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.