Is The Death Penalty Ethical?

The death penalty has been a huge part of many political debates for the past few decades. There are two sides, those for and those against its continued use and both have logical arguments. My research question is if it is ethical and or beneficial for the U.S. government to continue using the death penalty? To gain the attention of my audience, I am going to share two stories that my sources have on those with experience in the debate. The Forbes article, “Considering The Death Penalty: Your Tax Dollars At Work,” is an anti-death penalty piece explaining how an innocent man was on death row and his opinion on whether or not it should be used. He said in the piece that living out a life sentence without parole is worse than being executed.

The legitimacy of the use of capital punishment has been tarnished by its widespread misuse , which has clouded our judgment regarding the justifiability of the death penalty as a punitive measure. However, the problems with capital punishment, such as the “potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness and racial skew" , are not a basis for its abolition, as the world of homicide suffer from these problems more acutely. To tackle this question, one must disregard the currently blemished universal status quo and purely assess the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty as a punitive measure. Through unprejudiced examination of the death penalty and its consequential impacts, it is evident that it is a punishment that effectively serves its retributive, denunciatory, deterrent, and incapacitative goals.

The history of the death penalty goes back to the earliest civilizations where it was used to punish all sorts of crimes from robbery, to murder, to different forms of heresy. In the United States it evolved to just punish murder, treason, and some cases of rape. It has been an issue that has sparked a never ending debate that goes back to colonial times. The general public traditionally supported the death penalty in a majority with only a few politicians speaking out against it (i.e., Benjamin Rush, Ben Franklin and later on Horace Greeley). Once the U.S. gained independence, each state went back and forth in abolishing and reinstating the death penalty and methods of

Capital punishment is never morally justified, and feminist, progressive and socialist ethics would always consider the social and family environment that produced the criminal in the first place, including poverty, racism, segregation or other types of oppression. It would also examine ways that society could be reformed on restricted in ways that would reduce oppression, such as ending the ghettoization of minorities or the extreme inequality between rich and poor in the United States. Indeed, inequality is more extreme in the U.S, than any other Western nation, the prison population is larger and the social safety net much weaker. These conditions have worsened during the present recession, particularly for blacks and Hispanics. Among Western nations, only the U.S. still practices capital punishment even though there was a moratorium in 1967-77 because of Supreme Court rulings. Feminist ethics would also emphasize caring, community, empathy and interpersonal relationships instead of morality based on following rules and regulations (Volbrect 17). Their response to the death penalty as well as war and other forms of public or state-sanctioned violence would therefore be pacifist, and demand social, economic and cultural change rather than punishment of perpetrators.

Good afternoon Madam chairperson and my fellow students. The topic for our debate is “That Australia Should Reintroduce or Legalise the Death Penalty.” We the negative team, do not believe we should reintroduce the death penalty.

The death penalty today is a hot button question that many experts cannot agree on. The topic deals with justice, logistics, and human morality which leads to either a person remaining alive or losing their life. It is not an easy choice to make because the death penalty has so much to do with human desires for justice as it does the justice system carrying out just punishments for crimes committed. In almost all of human history, capital punishment has been a punishment that was used to punish individuals who broke laws the society upheld. The United States of America is no different as it still continues to use the death penalty as a punishment in many states across the nation. The United States has contemplated the legality of the death penalty, with multiple court decisions dictating if and what is legal, as discussed in the video produced by CNN (http://www.cnn.com/videos/crime/2014/05/06/orig-jag-death-penalty.cnn/video/playlists/death-penalty/).

The death penalty will always be a topic some people refuse to talk about. When in fact, it is a very serious topic and people should know how and why the death penalty is not justified. I believe the death penalty is not justified in the least bit because there are people sitting up in prison just living life because the state does not want to pay for an execution, or they find it to be morally corrupt. Personally if you committed a crime that resulted in someone dying then you deserves to die as well. The idea of killing another human does not sit well with people and that is mainly the

Why should the death penalty be legal in every U.S. state? There are crimes that are so utterly odious that no amount of jail time will be ever punishment enough. Although personally not a fan of the death penalty, these most common arguments in its support might change one’s mind.

Across America there are 27 different states that have the death penalty. there are reasons that the death penalty should be used for example when someone kills other people or a group of people they should be put in the court with the death penalty to be an option.

Cameron Todd Willingham was executed by lethal injection on February 17th, 2004 in Huntsville, Texas. He was convicted of murdering his three children by arson in 1991. Thirteen years later, he was sentenced to death and executed. In 2011, he was found virtuous. Forensics experts proved his innocence assuring that the fire was accidental. Willingham was killed for a crime he didn’t commit. Situations like this are one of many reasons why the death penalty is absurd. The death penalty is an unethical and impractical process that has to be diminished in the United States because life in prison without parole is reassuring enough, Capital punishment is expensive and time consuming, and less people are in favor of the death penalty. Families of

Philosophy branch which streamlines, protects and guides the concepts of being correct or incorrect is referred as Ethics. People learn this concept from their parents who got it from their parents and it is a chain. However philosophers claim that it is people’s belief which decide ethics along with human intuition. An individual at singular level conscientiously decides what is right and wrong and define a limit of pushing ethical behaviour and morality in being. Moral acceptability of any action can be judged from the points if action is understood by an individual well, the consequences of that action on public, fair treatment of action with all people respectfully and the way action is being performed, the motivation of people for it.

The human mind is amazing, the things it can do and accomplish the emotions we feel, the way we think, and impulses that can drive us to do deadly things. The human mind in simple terms is phenomenal. After reading, re-reading, and evaluating your article we have come to the conclusion that the death penalty in morally wrong and psychologically these people, who are murdering and raping, are not right in the head. “In the 1990s a research team — led by Adrian Raine of the University of Southern California and Monte Buchsbaum…did brain scans on 25 convicted murderers” (Potter). In this study, they found that many of the killers had some sort of abnormalities in the front section of the brain called the frontal lobe. As they scanned the brains

Should capital punishment/ death penalty be abolished in the United States? Many feel that the death penalty is immoral and question whether the state and federal government deserve the right to kill those whom it has imprisoned. On the other hand, those opposed feel that by not acting upon the death penalty communities would plunge in anarchy and that by having the death penalty it honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a free moral actor able to control his/her own destiny for good or for ill. However, others believe it serves as a deterrent for citizens not to commit crimes, in fear of death. While others argue that there is no scientific evidence that supports this claim, that states that abolished the death penalty showed no significant change in crime or murder rate. States that have the death penalty did not have lower crime or murder rates. Therefore, the death penalty does not act as a deterrent. Although, abolitionist think killing the person who has killed someone close to you is simply to continue the cycle of violence, which ultimately destroys the avenger as well as the offender. Retribution is not really a rational response to a critical situation and it contaminates the otherwise good will which any human being needs to progress in love and understanding. In contrast, the opposition believes that society

Affirmation: Capital Punishment, by definition, is the legal and authorized killing of an individual as a punishment for a crime. Dating back as far as the Eighteenth Century B.C., capital punishment has been used internationally for the most dangerous and menacing criminals. However, is the traditional way always the moral way?

Capital punishment, better known as the death penalty, is the act of killing or executing a person who was found guilty of a serious crime, by the government. Capital punishment became widespread during the Middle Ages and was applied throughout Western Europe for more than two thousand years. Although, the call to abolish it started in the 18th century, some of the first countries being Venezuela in 1863, San Marino in 1865, and Costa Rica in 1877. Great Britain abolished the death penalty in 1965 and was permanently outlawed in 1969. By 2004, eighty-one countries had abolished capital punishment, but some countries in the Caribbean, Africa and Asia still use it for ordinary crimes. At present day, China and the United States apply the