Is the Death Penalty Ethical? Essay examples

Capital punishment is a difficult subject for a lot of people because many question whether or not it is ethical to kill a convicted criminal. In order to critically analyze whether or not it is ethical, I will look at the issue using a utilitarianism approach because in order to get a good grasp of this topic we need to look at how the decision will impact us in the future. The utilitarianism approach will help us to examine this issue and see what some of the consequences are with this topic of capital punishment. For years, capital punishment has been used against criminals and continues to be used today, but lately this type of punishment has come into question because of the ethical question.

We kill people to show them killing is wrong. The death penalty does not punish people for killing but for murdering someone. Murder is "the unlawful, malicious, or permitted killing of one human being by another" (Carmical 1). The slogan should be ?We execute people to show people that murder is wrong.? The death penalty is racist, it punishes the poor, it causes the innocent to die, it is not a deterrent against violent crime, and it is cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is wrong and it should be abolished.

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

     One argument from death penalty supporters is that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to prevent other people from committing murders. It is the belief that people will think out the consequences of their actions before murdering, and consider the

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.

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

There are three main “degrees of murder.” There is third-degree murder, which is a little more complicated than the other two. When people do not meet the standards for first-degree, or second-degree, murder they are usually classified in this category. A third-degree murder is a murder that is not premeditated. The next level up is second-degree murder. This degree is classified as an intended, but not premeditated, murder. The highest degree is first-degree murder. This is an intended and well thought out plan to murder somebody. Being charged with this degree is saying that you thought about how you were going to seek out and kill your victim. People who are guilty of first-degree murder could be tried for the death penalty. This is

Thousands of people will attack the death penalty. They will give emotional speeches about the one innocent man or woman who might accidentally get an execution sentence. However, all of these people are forgetting one crucial element. They are forgetting the thousands of victims who die every year by the hands of heartless murderers. There are more murderers out there than people who are wrongly convicted, and that is what we must remember.

Moreover, not everybody is afraid of being sentenced to death; some wicked person may even want to be condemned to death so that he/she can kill others in order to be executed (ACLU, 2007).Hence, death penalty should not be used as a penalty for murder, since it has neither intimidating effects nor crime rate diminishing effects, therefore death penalty should be abolished.

There is a lot of controversy about whether the death penalty should be legal or not. It is widely used, with only 18 out of the 50 states having abolished it, but should it be permitted, regardless of the popularity of it? The answer is no. It should be abolished because it demeans life, is cruel, prison is a better punishment, and it is not effective.

There are many problems facing our criminal justice system today. Some of the more important ones are overcrowded jails, the increasing murder rate, and keeping tax payers content. In light of these problems, I think the death penalty is our best and most reasonable solution because it is a highly effective deterrent to murder. And, tax payers would be pleased to know that their hard-earned tax dollars are not being wasted on supporting incorrigible criminals who are menaces to society. In addition, they would not be forced to fund the development of new penitentiaries in order to make room for the growing number of inmates in our already overcrowded jails. Moreover, the death penalty would

In the world we as people live in violence. Violence has gotten so out of control that it has affected everyone. The one thing about violence is that it also leads to crimes. And crimes leads to some people being imprisoned, while others are put on death row. But if crimes are crimes, what makes them minor or major? Who decides if they are minor or major? Nowadays minor and major crimes are being pushed together. For example, someone gets shot and the shooter gets 5 years in prison. But if someone is raped it cannot be proven and the victim is left suicidal while the rapist goes about their day. Both are major crimes but one has a sentence and the other one does not. With this happening in the world it makes me wonder if we as the people

Does taking another’s life actually avenge that of another? The disciplinary act of capital punishment, punishment through death, has been a major debate in the United States for years. Those in support of capital punishment believe that it is an end to the reoccurrence of a repeat murderer. The public has, for many years, been in favor of this few and pro-death penalty. Yet as time goes on, records show a decrease in the public and the state’s support of the continuation of capital punishment. Those against capital punishment believe it is an immoral, spends taxpayers’ money improperly, and does not enforce a way to rehabilitate criminals and/or warn off future crimes.

Should one person have the right to end another human's life? It is a question most people have the answer for when it comes to capital punishment. Capital punishment is known to some people one of the cruelest punishment to humanity. Some people believe giving a person the death penalty doe's not solve anything. While other's believe it is payback to the criminal for the crime they have committed. There have been 13,000 people executed since the colonial times, among 1900 and 1985 there were 139 innocent people sentence to death only 23 were executed. In 1967 lack of support and legal challenges cut the execution rate to zero bringing the practice to a complete end by 1972. Although the supreme court authorized its resumption in 1976

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.