Lyndze Curry
Professor Jennifer Arceo
English 1301.1CY
09, June 2015
Is The Death Penalty Ever Justified?
In the American society many citizens argue daily, is the death penalty justified? The United States is sharply divided, and equally strong among both supporters and protesters of the death penalty. Arguing against capital punishment, many believe "The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights (White).” Some simply believe it to be premeditated and cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state in the name of justice (about.com). It violates the right to life. Some would even argue that this violates the Eight Amendment for no cruel or unusual punishment inflected. Many argue that the death penalty diminishes all of us, increases disrespect for human life, and offers the tragic illusion that we can teach that killing is wrong by killing.
However, I completely disagree that the death penalty is cruel unnecessary punishment. If an individual intentionally and knowingly commits a crime that deserves the death penalty then I believe it is justified. For example, if someone kills an innocent citizen then I feel it would be okay to take the life of the person who committed the crime. The phrase, "Life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, (New Testament)” is punishment in which the offender suffers what the victim has suffered, exact retribution. There are defendants who earn the ultimate punishment that society has to offer by committing murder
Throughout the United States an argumentative topic is the death penalty - should it be legalized across the 50 states or be declared unconstitutional? Some believe the death penalty is a better option for those who deserve the highest form of punishment available. However, others argue capital punishment is a waste of resources and should be brought to an end. Therefore, while many believe the death penalty should be legalized throughout the United States because it offers a higher form of punishment, others believe the death penalty should be repealed because it causes unnecessary deaths.
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.
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.
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.
This was an extremely hard question for me to answer. I spent a good hour trying to figure if I believe it’s justified or not. When I think about the mass murdering that has happened from people who have unjustly killed a great amount of innocent people, for example the Charleston Church Shooting and the Boston Bombing, I get angry, I want the retribution to be the death penalty. Then I think about the morals that my parents instilled in me. “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind” Vengeance disguised as justice, isn’t something America should promote because reacting to violence with more violence breeds a culture of violence .The 8th Amendment states, “Excessive bail shall not be required nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. I”m pretty sure the death penalty falls into the “cruel and unusual” part of The 8th Amendment, so wouldn’t that make the death penalty unconstitutional? Are we violating The Bill of Rights? While others may think that the death penalty is warranted, I believe it’s unwarranted because it’s not necessary to kill someone to prevent them from causing further harm, and from the data displaying the use of the death penalty and the murder rates across the states, it shows that the use of the capital punishment doesn’t dissuade criminals from committing
“We oppose the death penalty for what it does to those guilty of heinous crimes, but for what it does to all of us; it offers the tragic illusion that we can defend life by taking life” by Joseph Fiorenza states that the death penalty is cruel and unjust. It may take lives of all those who are wrongfully convicted and may cost people millions of dollars. However, some may argue that the death of a criminal may bring closure to families of victims.
Capital punishment is a very divisive topic in the United States and also in our home state of West Virginia. This is a topic that sparks passion within people about the equality and effectiveness of the American Judicial system. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion about this topic but the throbbing question that lingers in the air is that is it morally right? Capital punishment also known as the death penalty is the brutal ordered execution of a prisoner as a punishment for a serious crime which might be murder or treason. The amounts of problems associated with capital punishment are massive, ranging from the innocent dying for a crime he/she never committed to racism, and the only way to resolve these problems is to eliminate
The controversy that surrounds the use of capital punishment argues issues that surround the death penalty, but not the death penalty itself. I believe that those who sit on death row are reserved for criminals who commit the worst acts and deserve to have their life taken. These criminals should not be given a second chance, because the life that was taken did not get a second chance. Those who are given the death penalty show the result that they are a danger to society, and they shouldn’t have the possibility of hurting any more people. One could argue that justice would be served while the criminal stays behind bars, two wrongs don’t make a right, and by committing the same offense that the criminal had done while saying it’s okay to do the same only because the state says it’s acceptable. I believe that keeping the death penalty is a morally justified action and is supported by Utilitarianism and the greatest happiness principle. The death penalty is something that should only be used for brutal and premeditated crimes, because of its effectiveness to deter crime, receive retribution, and give closure for victim’s families.
The Death Penalty. Immoral or moral; just or unjust? These are just a few of the questions people ask themselves when debating the Death Penalty which is arguably the most controversial topic of the United States today. Every time these words come up, we start yelling out our opinions on what we feel is right. Pro death penalty people shout deterrence across the room while the anti death penalty supporters shout about potentially killing an innocent man; some argue that is just and the murders deserve their punishment while others say we are murdering people too if we kill the suspect.
There are many controversial points of view on the death penalty in America’s society. Is the death penalty socially correct? Is it just? The death penalty is an execution sentence that a person convicted of a capital crime must face. A person can only be sentenced to death in 33 states (deathpenatly.org). There have been as of April 1, 2012, 3,170 death row inmates in the Unites States history, with an exception of the two inmates in New Mexico and eleven in Connecticut that remain on the death row due to the law not being made retrospective to these inmates. The controversy whether the death penalty is just or unjust has been a debate in America for many years. There have
Since the foundation of our nation the Death Penalty has been a way to punish prisoners that have committed heinous crimes, however since the turn of the 20th century the practice of Capital Punishment has been questioned on its usage in America and the world as a whole. The Death Penalty is used in America to punish criminals who have committed murders, or taken the life of an innocent person, and while the death penalty seems like it is doing justice to those who have killed others it is actually being used improperly in most situations, while also hindering our economy and is a means of ending more lives than necessary. The Death Penalty can be a valid source of punishment for criminals in the US however due to the misuse of this power by the government it is a huge detriment to our nation and the people that inhabit it. Because of the fact that Capital Punishment is used unfairly, and ineffectively in our nation it is an obsolete form of punishment and should have no place in the United States justice department.
A historical moment in United States history was shortly after the “so called,” “Boston Massacre. Many British soldiers were being accused of murder; but one Patriot, John Adams, who would one day become our second President, asserted that everyone deserves a fair trial. There was no killing. Only trials, observation, and questions. Our country states that everyone deserves the right to a trial, and not automatic death. The theory of capital punishment, or as most of you call it, the death penalty, is a violent way to sort out the criminals of an event. Capital punishment is a serious issue, and most of United States is on it. In fact, it is on the 2016 Presidential ballot, whether it should remain or be abolished. To inform people, capital punishment is a government practice where a person is put to death for a crime they committed. These capital offences are of serious issue, but should it really determine whether a person is allowed to live? No! I am an opponent for the death penalty being used anywhere in the world.
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
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