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.
The controversy over the legal process widely applied in ancient times— the death penalty— has always intrigued me because of the reasonable stances from both sides on whether it should be legal or illegal. The dispute goes between the biggest issues of immorality behind the act, if it gives the best suffering over jail time, and human rights. Personally, I side with illegalization of the capital punishment, yet can resonate with some of the common legal sided thoughts.
Capital punishment, which is also known as the death penalty, is the punishment of a crime by execution. This extreme retribution is reserved for those who have committed heinous, or capital crimes against society, therefore considered an ongoing threat. Capital punishment was abolished from the Canadian Criminal Code in 1976. It was substituted with a compulsory life sentence without possibility of parole for 25 years for all first-degree murders. However capital punishment is still practiced in over 30 of the 50 states in the USA. Some say that Capital Punishment is an unjust solution to crime, and others say that it isn’t a solution at all, as it is subject to flaws just as any system can be flawed. Dating back, before the Eighteenth Century B.C., Capital Punishment has been an integral part of the judicial system in the majority of countries. Considered to be the ultimate punishment, few criminal offenders will receive this ultimate form of retribution. The State of Texas has the highest record of executions at 300 since the 1970’s. Those executed are murderers and those who have committed serious offenses. The idea is "an eye for an eye", but as Gandhi wisely stated, “An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind”. Shockingly, there have been convicted criminals executed only to be proven innocent later, this is far too late after they have long been
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
The death penalty has been in practice for almost everywhere in the world for centuries and seeing the growing pressure against it is a dramatic turnaround. Many nations which ceased the practice of death penalty argue that this is in violation of human rights. According to Dieter, “Spain abandoned the practice in 1995 stating that the death penalty has no place in the general penal system of advanced, civilized societies” (Dieter, 2000). It is acknowledged that Switzerland and South Africa abandoned the practice while linking it to violation of individual’s right to a holistic life. Generally, countries against this death penalty have always brought in issues of human rights. At the
People on death row are not really dying. “In 2010, a death row inmate waited an average of 178 months (roughly 15 years) between sentencing and execution. Nearly a quarter of deaths on death row in the U.S. are due to natural causes.” (Wikipedia, 2015). We are paying tax dollars to have people sit in prison for up to 15 years, and to have three quarters of them executed. Should we even have capital punishment?
Andrew was only twenty three years old when he robbed the liquor store on South Lincoln Avenue. He was a high school dropout and didn’t know where his life was headed at that time. If he could go back, he would not have let his friends talk him into doing it. Yes, they needed the money for rent but looking back at the event, it just was not worth it. He’s always had good intentions, but never a drive to discover his potential, which resulted in this. He is now serving his eighth month in prison so far and has put a lot of thought into the lifelong impact this will have on him. “How long will it take him to find a job?, Where will he stay?,Will his mom and sister, take him back after what he did?” He never explained why he did what he did
Cantu was age 17 when he was accused of committing capital murder in 1993. The teen was found guilty and executed. 12 years after his death, Texas investigators found that there was no way possible that Cantu could have committed the murder. The worst part is the police had little evidence to go by and there were only a few eye witnesses that convicted and executed this innocent minor. Debates over capital punishment have been around since its first use in the U.S. in 1608. With the increase of controversies regarding the topic, the need for the right information and facts is prominent. Due to the death penalty’s many detrimental effects on society such as innocent lives taken, ineffectiveness, and the resources being sucked up, we should consider banning it in all 50 states.
It is nearly certain that in today’s society, extremely violent crimes occur and it is up to the people to decide which kinds of crimes deserve a stiffer punishment than others. The question of the death penalty being a morally permissible sentence in the case of homicides, such as murder or manslaughter, is a current controversial topic, and is also a contemporary moral issue. This idea has been practiced throughout history for thousands of years and is currently used today as a means of justice. It is handed to those who have been found guilty of a capital crime. It is considered to be taking ‘an eye for an eye’. Due to this increase in crime rate, the proposal of capital punishment has emerged in today’s society. Thirty one states have
Many ethical and moral questions can be asked concerning capital punishment. We condemn murder, but we also legally allow murder of individuals. How is it that we condemn the mercy killings of terminally ill patients, but can legally allow judicial killings of convicted murderers? It seems that the law contradicts itself by condemning murder then accepting death as a punishment. The morals are inconsistent and are not beneficial to justice if it cannot be consistent.
The justice system being so corrupt making seem like most punishments does not seem to adequate fit the crime and making it seem like a slap on the hand. When in reality, this is not solving the problem but instead worsening it. Unnecessary evil of modern society should be deterring a murderer from murdering again because it is a vicious cycle that must be put to a halted. Killers should be disciplined for the crimes they have committed and must pay for the price of their crime. The death penalty is necessary because the punishment should fit the crime like a life for a life, it is less cruel to euthanize than to keep a murderer in prison for the rest of their lives and it is costly to keep them in prison.
Is the taking of an individual’s life a just punishment for the most heinous of crimes? Is it humane to kill another person to administer justice? How should society deal with the most dangerous members of our population? The answers to these critical questions are not easily derived. Capital punishment is a widely debated and sensitive subject, as it probes the judicial system and morality. Most individuals would argue that criminals who commit the most despicable of crimes deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law. While this deduction is perfectly reasonable, capital punishment should not be the end to this mean. Executing prisoners for their crimes has several flaws: it does not deter crime more than life without parole, it is financially more burdensome than sentencing a person to life imprisonment, and is an inhumane and anachronistic method of attempting to serve justice.
This position paper will attempt to challenge previous opinions regarding capital punishment. The objective is to persuade the audience to oppose capital punishment by revealing biblical, political, and moral perspectives, as well as supplying effective counters to traditional thinking. This paper seeks to balance each rationale in order to appeal to several mindsets, and beliefs in regard to capital punishment.
What are your opinions of the death penalty? Do you believe that it should be a rightful punishment or do you believe that it does no good for the system? Many believe in the "eye for an eye" statement for the fairness of justice while others believe that capital punishment is not a strong way to go by. The death penalty is an efficient way to discipline criminals for the wrongdoing and the hurt that they caused for the families affected by it and to help bring closure for those individuals. Perry Edward Smith and Richard (Dick) Eugene Hickock deserve to be punished for the gruesome murders of the Clutter family.