Plato Death Penalty

In 1972, at the time of Supreme Court’s Furman, the majority of public tends to agree with the death penalty. The major reason for support of the death penalty was the serious violent offenders need to be executed in the interest of public safety. However, according to a Gallup poll, supporter for the death penalty dropped from 76 to 53, public started to against the death penalty. Since then, the world has the trend toward of abolishing the death penalty.

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.

Throughout United States history, there has been controversy over the death penalty. Should serious criminals be punishing with death, or should we outlaw the death penalty? Many people think that deterrence is one of the good justifications for the death penalty, but others believe that death penalty is the same type of crime that the criminals commit. The violation of the human rights is the main reason why some people want to outlaw capital punishment; also the state violates the human’s rights for inmates during the cruel time that they spend on death row. The evidence that capital punishment may very well deter murder had been in doubt, based on the irrational idea that killing another human life can be a bad example for society. In

In the United States there are currently thirty one states that still practice Capital Punishment leaving the remaining nineteen states with death penalty bans such as the state of New York. The authors moral compose dictates a personal position that regardless of what actions a person takes against another, even if it is violent in nature, all life is precious and being put to death as a penalty is not an option. In line with the abolitionist view “Retribution is uncivilized” and putting someone to death cannot bring back the victim or in any meaningful way repay the victims loved ones(Souryal,

Capital punishment, the state imposed penalty of death, continues to be one of the most controversial issues in contemporary American public policy. Since the earliest days of its employment in the colonial era until today, citizens have struggles with the issue of when and under what circumstances the taking of a human life by the state can be morally or legally justified. For some opponents of the death penalty, the simple answer is that the taking of a human life is always morally and ethically wrong, even when conducted under the auspices of state authority as a legal punishment. In contrast, proponents of capital punishment have contended with equal fervor that the death penalty is morally justified as a form of retributive justice,

The use of capital punishment in the U.S. is a growing concern for most American citizens. According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty percent are against it. These statistics show that few people are against capital punishment (“Fact” 1). With the use of the death penalty growing the controversy is becoming more heated. With only twelve states left not enforcing it the resistance is becoming futile (“Fact” 4). Many debates have been made and even clauses have been invoked, such as, the “Cruel and Unusual Clause” that was invoked by the Supreme Court in 1962 (Meltsner 179). The use of death as a punishment has been viewed as “cruel

Some individuals believe that justice is only served when an offender’s punishment has effects of the some degree to that of their victim in relation to the crime committed against them. In this case, they argue that execution is a more punishments compared to other forms of punishments aimed to help the criminal reform; since the sentence makes the criminal suffer in a similar degree to their victims. However those opposing capital punishment argue that a sentence is meant to help on to reform and learn from their mistakes. However ones an offender is executed via the death sentence nothing is learnt since one cannot learn when dead. As a result in such a case the justice did not have any impact nor serve its purpose.

As Robert Blecker, a Professor of Economics and American University, says, “An unpleasant life in prison, a quick but painful death…can help restore a moral balance” (Blecker). Some people agree with the death penalty because of moral fairness; however, some people oppose the death penalty because of family relationship, financial costs with education, false conviction, bias and religious perspective. In the article “With the Death Penalty, Let the Punishment Fit the Crime,” the author Robert Blecker argues about which method of execution would best fit the crime and the unequal situation in prison. Although Blecker explains the reason of death penalty and discusses about choosing better method of execution, based on the research, I oppose

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.

Since the mid 1900’s, capital punishment has brought many individuals into many diverse view points throughout the years. Capital punishment is a way of punishing a convict by killing him or her because of the crime he or she committed. Capital punishment will always have its pros and cons. There are opponents who absolutely disagree with capital punishment. And then there are advocates who support the idea. In the advocates view point, capital punishment is a way to minimize the threat in the world today. In the opponent’s point of view, opponents disagree with capital punishment, because of the high expenses it brings to the states. Also, opponents argue that capital punishment

Capital punishment, otherwise known as the death penalty, is a controversial subject which has been argued for decades due to the ethical decisions involved. People believe the death penalty is the right thing to do and that it is the perfect example of ‘justice’ while others believe that it is immoral and overly expensive. The death penalty is not a logical sentence for criminals, it doesn’t give them the right type of justice and it is immoral.

In society there many things that are debated among the people based on their beliefs, morals, and values. For this paper chose the death penalty because it is one of the highly debated topics in not only today’s society but also in the past. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, it used as a procedure of retaliation against those who commit violent crimes such as murder and other capital crimes. There are many forms of this punishment, for instance, the electric chair, lethal injections, and the firing squad. There are many feelings and arguments in relation to capital punishment. Some people believe that the death penalty is moral because they deserve it and it provides protection to the society. However, in this paper I will argue that capital punishment is totally immoral because it is not fair, is it unnecessary, and unethical.

I think that if I was caught shoplifting by the police, I would be more afraid of receiving criminal punishment rather than having to face friends or families. The worst thing about receiving criminal punishment is that a person will receive a record of it. The effects of criminal punishment outweigh the thoughts of family of friends. Furthermore, facing family and friends varies on the type of people a person would associate themselves with.

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

The debate on whether or not the death penalty should be abolished has been ongoing for quite a long period of time. While there are those who believe that the death penalty does not serve its intended purpose, proponents of the same are convinced that the relevance of the same cannot be overstated and hence it should not be abolished. In this text, I examine the arguments for and against the death penalty.