Capital punishment is a heated topic in today’s America. Capital punishment is the repercussion of a capital crime; most capital crimes committed in America are murders. The crime of murder can be punishable by the death penalty. A great way to stop future killing from happening is capital punishment but it is only currently allowed in 32 of the 50 states. Murder in America is at such a high rate that there needs to be something done to help stop the climbing rate. In Edward Koch’s essay “Death and Justice”, he states, “A study at M.I.T. showed that based on 1970 homicide rates a person who lived in a large American city ran a greater risk of being murdered than an American soldier in World War II ran of being killed in combat.” It is hard …show more content…
The punishment of life in prison is not enough to deter a killer from killing. If there is capital punishment, the killer may think again before committing murder and weigh the risk of being killed him or herself. Smith later says, “The recidivism rate among executed murderers is a perfect zero percent.” (199). If a murderer is executed, there is no chance he or she can kill another human being. This alone is a big reason that capital punishment should be a part of all state governments.
For murders that are so horrific and heinous, the only equitable punishment for these crimes is the death penalty. A murderer who kills an innocent human being does not deserve to have the right to live. In Smith’s words, “Did Adolf Hitler deserve the death penalty or counseling?” (197). This question lightens the mood a little around the debate of capital punishment but it is also a serious question to consider. Hitler, who wrongfully murdered millions of innocent people, should not get the right to continue to live; his part in the Holocaust was so heinous that he deserves to be executed through capital punishment. Armstrong Williams comments in an article titled “The Death Penalty Vs. The Right to Live”, “By convicting King of a capital crime, they decided that when someone acts in such an heinous manner as King, we must remove that person from our society, just as a doctor would cut out a cancerous tumor.” A murder so wrong should not be punished by a
Capital punishment is one of the most controversial topics in today’s world. Many people believe that it is morally wrong to have capital punishment as a sentence to a crime. People also do believe that it is morally permissible for a severe crime. Capital punishment is also known as the death penalty. It can be given as a sentence when somebody is convicted of an extremely violent crime. The biggest issue that can be seen with this is that somebody could be innocent and sentenced with the death penalty because of the nature of the crime that they have been accused of even if they didn’t commit it. I believe that there is a moral line between using the death penalty and using other forms of punishment.
In “How the Death Penalty Saves Lives”, written and published by David B. Mulhausen on September 29, 2014, Mulhausen speaks of the reasons why the death penalty is a proper way to bring murderers to justice. He believes that “some crimes are so heinous and inherently wrong that they demand strict penalties” (Mulhausen). Not only does he believe that the death penalty is useful to set criminals to justice, but he also believes that the enforcement of the death penalty deters crime rates.
As far back as one can look into human civilization, justice for a murder victim has always been by taking the life of the killer. In today’s society capital punishment is needed to defend it from further harm, bring justice and/or vengeance to the victims of the loved ones, and encourage psychological deterrence. As of today, there are thirty-two states which offer the only just punishment for a crime without parallel and eighteen states having abolished the death penalty.
More than two centuries ago, the death penalty was commonplace in the United States, but today it is becoming increasingly rare. In the article “Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?”, Diann Rust-Tierney argues that it should be abolished, and Joshua Marquis argues that it should not be abolished. Although the death penalty is prone to error and discrimination, the death penalty should not be abolished because several studies show that the death penalty has a clear deterrent effect, and we need capital punishment for those certain cases in which a killer is beyond redemption.
The death penalty is the ultimate punishment. There is no harsher punishment than death itself. This nation, the United States of America, is currently one of fifty-eight nations that practice the death penalty, if one commits first-degree murder as of 2012. People that believe in the death penalty also believe that it will deter murders. In this paper I will argue that the death penalty does not deter criminals and that this nation should outlaw the practice.
A review was conducted from the Law and society Association, American society of criminology and the Criminal Justice sciences Academy and it revealed that a big majority concluded that capital punishment was not a deterrent to homicide. More than 80 percent of those interrogated believe that the survey doesn’t hold up the effect of deterrence for the death penalty. Other criminologists suggest that more homicides are caused due to the fact that there is death penalty. The outcome of brutalization argues that the rates of homicides will increase because of the example served by state executions.
Arthur Shawcross, who was one of New York’s most ruthless serial killers, illustrated the importance of capital punishment. In 1973, Shawcross was first convicted of brutal rape and murder of two children in upstate New York. At that time, the death penalty had been declared unconstitutional, and Shawcross was only sentenced to prison. After serving only 15 years in prison for his punishment, he was paroled in 1988. Shawcross took 11 more lives in just a 21-month killing spree after his release (Pataki).
“The use of the death penalty in the United States has been rapidly declining since the end of the 1990s” (Dieter, 2015). This is contrast to the believes of the Founding Fathers where “the death penalty was widely accepted at the time the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights were ratified” (Gardner & Anderson, 2014). While the crimes have not changed, aspects of capital punishment which were once viewed as constitutional, today are deemed cruel and unusual. The prevailing liberal view sees the death penalty as morally unjustified and a vengeful form retribution. “It is the most brutal form of state power, requires massive state administrations and it costs significantly more than life imprisonment which is both more humane and equally effective” (Davidson, 2015). They point to the lack of deterrence it provides and highlight the racial and gender biases of the criminal justice system and the potential for the execution of the innocent by the State. In contrast, those in favor of capital punishment see it as a valid, moral and constitutional punishment as punishments should be imposed in proportion to the crime. The death penalty is reserved for the most violent of crimes in society and without it, justice is not achieved for victims and their families. The death penalty must be viewed again as a valid, moral and legal
For the past decades capital punishment has been one of the most hotly contested political issues in America, but this debate is definitely a complicated one. Capital punishment is a legal, practical, philosophical, social, political, but also a moral question. The notion of deterrence has been at the very center of the practical debate over the question of capital punishment. Most of us assume that we execute murderers primarily because we
A study conducted by the Journal of Quantitative Criminology reveals that for every execution performed, fifteen murders take its place (Durlauf, et al). The study compiled execution statistics and murder rates across states in order to determine the efficacy of deterrence. Granted, executions do not directly lead to murders, but the data exposes the fact that the death penalty has not been successful in preventing them. In fact crime rates increase in states that resume the practice of the death penalty. For example, Florida had a twenty-eight percent increase in murder rates after executing a prisoner in 1979 for the first time after fifteen years (“White
Capital punishment (the death penalty) is a legal procedure which is known as the most severe punishment where the law authorizes execution as a punishment for criminals (Gerald, 2008). Many people claim that allowing such a punishment will help decrease the crime rate, and also give closure to the victim’s family, but if you as American citizens analyze this situation in more detail you can see that taking a life for taking a life is more of a personal matter than justice. When comparing the states that allow capital punishment with the states that have abolished it, the crime rate does not differ. Hence, those who argue that death row has a positive effect on making criminals
In an effort to make sure that innocent men and women are not wrongly convicted in capital punishments cases, they are given a wide range of appeals procedures. Immediately following sentencing an automatic appeals process called Direct Review begins. It is during this process that appellate courts review the lower trial court’s decision, checking for errors and making sure the case was tried on sound judgment. If any errors are found
Last but not least, from a sociologic perspective, capital punishment does not work as intended, to deter crime rate, rather, it might brutalize individuals, at the same time does nothing good to the victim’s family other than brutal vengeance. The origin of death penalty is served as a vehicle to put a warning for those potential future criminals that such kind of behavior will lead to death. However, so far, no clear evidence can be seen that capital punishment, as a mechanism of deterrent, actually cut down the local crime rate. Ironically, a reversal trend was found by Death Penalty Information Center (2010) in the USA that the death penalty leads to an increase in local murder rate. To die might be too easy for the mindless murderers. Also, for the relatives or friends of criminals put into death through capital punishment, they are more likely to be
Perhaps we should give the judge a knife and tell her that if she has
Capital punishment has been around for many years as a way of executing criminals. Despite what most believe, capital punishment is not functional in the American society. Defenders of the death penalty often claim that the execution of criminals will teach others not to do bad, initially decreasing crime rates. Unfortunately, statistics prove that thought to be wrong. Capital punishment also has great flaws. For example, many innocent people have been put to death because of capital punishment. There also is no consistency. Two of the same crimes can be convicted in two different states and the consequences with be different for both offenders. The death penalty shows to be