Jason Hann's Argument Against Capital Punishment

Often, when a criminal is sentenced to the death penalty for committing a murder, people begin to question the legality and morality of it, and try to defend or attack it. One of the first few things that come to mind when people try to defend the death penalty is the statement, “an eye for an eye,” or the principle of lex talionis, meaning we treat people the way they have treated others (Textbook, 538). Although this argument is well-backed up, it does not always prove to be the best principle when determining the type of punishment, one deserves. Stephen Nathanson, an abolitionist to the death penalty, discusses this idea in his article “An Eye for and Eye,” specifically within his argument stating that equality retributivism does not justify the death penalty and that it should be rejected (Textbook, 539). Equality retributivism, which is the idea that we penalize criminals with punishments that are equal to their crimes, serves as a great principle for some crimes but not all. I find this statement, along with Nathanson’s argument, to be true because not all crimes can have a punishment equal to it. Throughout this paper, I will discuss Nathanson’s argument, some objections raised, and lastly, whether the objection succeeds or not.

“Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect,” stated John F. Kennedy at Berlin on June 26th, 1963. Kennedy is most certainly correct in this subject because no government is ever “perfect.” There is always room for improvement in government and sometimes there are instances in which a law needs to be changed or repealed. Almost everyday, it seems, that there are outrageous crimes being committed and the criminals are being jailed rightfully so. Sometimes, a judge would decide that that criminal should receive the death penalty or capital punishment. Capital punishment has evolved over centuries from the ancient method of “an eye for an eye”, to beheadings, lynchings, electric chairs, etc. While most of

The United States should make the death penalty illegal because, the death penalty models the behavior it seeks to prevent, it does not deter crime, and the death penalty costs more than life in prison. With these reasons, it is justifiable that the death penalty should no longer be legal in any state of the U.S. No person should have to make everyone else suffer; there needs to be a stop to this manner of justice. Bringing the death penalty to an end would offer a sense of closure to the many people who are involved including the families who have suffered along the

This is news report that I saw in my local newspaper a few weeks ago, that I found interesting because it involves Minnesota and Oregon. This news story is about a man named Craig Dennis Bjork who is facing the death penalty in Oregon. Around 35 years ago, Bjork killed two women (one was his girlfriend and the had a history of prostitution arrest) and his two young children ages 1 and 3. He was sentenced to three life terms and 20 years for these crimes. While being incarcerated Bjork has been a problem prisoner. In the mid 90’s he wrote a letter to the warden in Stillwater Prison asking to be moved back to another prison he’d been assigned too, otherwise he threatened to kill someone. The warden declined Bjork’s request. Well a little over a year later he killed a fellow inmate. After this incident Bjork was transferred to the Oregon Department of Corrections, through a program called the Interstate Corrections Compact. In 2013, he killed another inmate in OSP in Salem, Or, and is now facing being sentenced with the death penalty. This is where the controversy comes in

     The death penalty is absolutely outrageous. There is no real reason that the government should feel that it has the right to execute people. Capital punishment is murder just as much as the people being executed murdered. The is no need for the death penalty and it needs to be abolished. It goes against the Constitution which states that there will be no cruel and unusual punishment. There is nothing crueler than killing a person.

have laws for capital punishment. However, upon review of these punishments it is easy to see why they should be unconstitutional. These punishments harm the innocent, waste money, and are simply barbaric. When executioners can perform state sanctioned executions without batting an eye there is a problem. Executions simply do not work and cause unnecessary agony. Instead of punishments states should try to focus on

Have you ever thought about if the person next to you is a killer or a rapist? If he is, what would you want from the government if he had killed someone you know? He should receive the death penalty! Murderers and rapists should be punished for the crimes they have committed and should pay the price for their wrongdoing. Having the death penalty in our society is humane; it helps the overcrowding problem and gives relief to the families of the victims, who had to go through an event such as murder. Without the death penalty, criminals would be more inclined to commit additional violent crimes. Fear of death discourages people from committing crimes. If capital punishment were carried out more it would prove to be the crime

Capital punishment is wrong as you are killing human beings. Even though the prisoner has committed serious crimes, they

Capital punishment is used predominantly for, but not exclusively to, the crime of murder. This employs the “eye for an eye” sort of belief system that has been in use for hundreds of years. This type of thinking is backed by a principle that was a key point in Machiavelli’s “The Qualities of a Prince.” Machiavelli contends that “it is much safer to be feared than loved.” This is a mindset that is shared with those who support the death penalty. This is because if one knows that they will die if they perform a certain act, they will generally be unwilling to perform that act. People who use even the slightest bit of logic and reasoning could reach the conclusion that it is better to use the threat of death to keep potential murderers from killing innocent victims than to abolish capital punishment and sacrifice innocent lives.

     Capital punishment should be viewed as the stripping away of humanity from a person. The death penalty itself should be "executed" because of racial inequities, the concept of murder, the possibility of error, lack of deterrence, the cost, and an overwhelmed legal system. "The goal of capital punishment is revenge" (Introduction 1). Capital punishment is simply an outlet for the bloodlust of the American people (Introduction 1).

The state murdering people because of their crimes simply does not equate to justice. It is real easy to hear about how the government is doing this wrong or that,but the death penalty is abounded with so many injustices and faults that it's an embarrassment to our entire due process of law. Supporters of capital punishment subscribe to religious and ethical points of view rather than facts, and when they do offer facts it's always the same argument: "It's a deterrent." The death penalty is extremely flawed, most notably it comes with a very high price tag to an already under-funded correctional institution in America; no stable argument has been installed to warrant it as a deterrent; and the moral decay it establishes creates among other things a feeling of revenge and spite within society. The flaws of capital punishment become too many shortly after they total one. This is because of the focus of the death penalty that being human life. Innocent people being sent to death or being released within weeks of execution are becoming frequent stories on the nightly news. The legal system is disturbingly unable to correctly administer the death penalty. Every day individuals who can't afford a lawyer have to have one appointed to them under the constitution. These

While criminals must be punished for their criminal actions, “legalized murder”, as author Coretta Scott King put it, is immoral. The death penalty is legalizing the very thing that many on death row are charged for, murder. There is a multitude of lawful alternatives, to the death penalty, of reestablishing a better reputation for the criminals. The Constitution has no true right to allow such a felonious form of rehabilitation.

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.

I believe that every human being is put on earth for a reason, and no individual or state has the right to take away a life. When a crime of death row caliber is committed, that criminal should not be killed, rather, that individual should be placed in prison without parole. States who continue to apply this punishment must realize that the cons outweigh the pros and abolishing capital punishment is morally correct, can save people thousands of dollars, and will ultimately end a useless punishment. Nothing good comes of hate, and nothing good can ever come of capital

Welcome to America, the land of the free, of the prosperous, of the opulent. America the Beautiful, one of the only places in the world where all citizens regardless of race, background, or social class are constitutionally guaranteed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—that is unless you're on death row. In modern day America we are still faced with the antiquated ritual of capital punishment, a practice that interferes directly with the law of the land. The same forms of punishment used during the middle ages are still in effect today, the same ideas that should have been abolished had the U.S. government revised it's penology. Capital punishment is cruel as well as unusual and inadequate for our advanced society. The United