Pro Death Penalty Is Wrong

    The death penalty is an overkill of our society’s morality. Our humanity will be lost if we allow the death penalty. Humanity consists of our ability to have moral considerations towards life which is looking at more than just happiness that utilitarians tend to do. Innocence, being understanding, valuing people and things in life, and being virtuosic are views that keeps our humanity. There comes a time when people act off of emotions and decide to push away their morals.  Some may consider killing someone for their crime, but that makes us just as bad as them. Now, we are the killer. People have impulses that can become irrational and

It is cruel to kill a person no matter how horrible the crime they committed is. It shows people that if you do something, the same will be done to you, it is an eye for an eye. This type of justice is completely wrong. The punishment should be geared not only towards scaring others from committing a similar crime, but also to correct the offender and reintegrate him/her back to the society. Therefore, punishment by death does not achieve this objective in any way.

The death penalty is a punishment given to people who commit heinous crimes. Since 1976, there have been over 1,390 executions. But does that make the death penalty, necessarily, a correct and justifiable form of punishment? “The death penalty is our harshest punishment,” states Ernest van den Haag, author of “The Ultimate Punishment: a Defense.” Van den Haag, in his article, argues how the death penalty is effective and should be used. However, Jack Greenberg, James P. Gray, and Jeffery Reiman, all concur that the death penalty should not be used as a punishment for criminals. Jack Greenberg, author of “Against the American System of Capital Punishment,” argues how the death penalty is an

First, the death penalty gives some closure to the victim's families who have suffered enormously. Family members of the crime victims may take years, even decades to recover from the shock and loss of a loved one. Though, some may never recover. But the one thing that helps hasten this recovery is to achieve some kind of closure. Because life in prison only means that the criminal is still around to haunt them. A death sentence would enable them to close that

Life is sacred. This is an ideal that the majority of people can agree upon to a certain extent. For this reason taking the life of another has always been considered the most deplorable of crimes, one worthy of the harshest available punishment. Thus arises one of the great moral dilemmas of our time. Should taking the life of one who has taken the life of others be considered an available punishment? Is a murderer's life any less sacred than the victim's is? Can capital punishment, the death penalty, execution, legal murder, or whatever a society wishes to call it, be morally justifiable? The underlying question in this issue is if any kind of killing, regardless of reason, can be accepted. In this

Proponents of the death penalty say that it is a just punishment for men and women who have taken the lives of others. Following the “eye for eye, tooth for tooth” proverb, proponents conclude that killing murderers, rapists and other criminals is justifiable and gains retribution for the victim and their family.

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.

In any case, surviving family members deserve more closure than the criminal justice system has the power to provide. The death penalty is a reasonable punishment for a murder or any other serious crime. The bible verse Matthew (5:38) says, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.” The victim’s family need closure for their loss. Murder is not the right thing, but in serious cases it is the best option. Losing a loved one is hard to cope with, so the death penalty is good closure if you consider the circumstances.

To many of us death is a scary thing. We will all die one day, but when someone else takes another person’s life we think of that as wrong in many ways. Killing is wrong. If you take someone else’s life in the United States of America you go to jail. Of course you must be proven guilty of that murder before being charged. It doesn’t matter where you live in almost every state, city and town if you kill someone you are looked down upon and you will suffer the consequences of that action. The question is, if murder is wrong then why is the death penalty okay? Is that setting a good example for society? If you kill someone then we kill you. How much sense does that make if we are

Although the family victims of these criminal activities feel a need for retribution for the victim, many do not seek a sense of revenge with the death penalty. They want justice which usually means life time punishment in prison. It is my opinion, that the desire for revenge is one of the lowest human emotions, and “to kill the person who has killed someone close to you is just going to continue the cycle of violence and destruction” (Schroth). There is no means to an end with this type of punishment. Does anyone really believe that the death penalty is a deterrent for criminals? I would say no. Does this penalty make them really think twice about what they did? I would surmise an emphatic no. If the criminal cannot think like a “normal person” whatever they may be, then this very expensive punishment to tax payers is not a viable option. Hence our forefathers sought to create equality among the masses. As a country based on Christian beliefs and standards, we do not believe in “an eye for an eye.” Everyone was a right to life. As a whole community, I believe killing people is wrong. By strapping someone to a chair and injecting a needle into them, we are sinking to the level of the killer. We are a compassionate and caring community. As said by Anna Quindlen “what many people want from the death penalty, they will never get.” Even thinking that an execution

"I didn't want to hurt them, I only wanted to kill them." Is a quote that was stated by David Berkowitz. Killers like David Berkowitz had the chance to live, yet some were punished for their actions. Is that ethically right? Is that justice? Ethics plays a very important role when it comes to capital punishment. Ethics are the foundation of the criminal justice system: It's what helped us develop the moral reasoning we use, how we define criminal activity, and what we as a society deem as acceptable punishment. A form of punishment that some may deem as acceptable and some may not is capital punishment, also known as the death penalty. The death penalty is the execution of a convicted criminal by the state as punishment for crimes known as capital offenses. Capital punishment is a topic that

If someone takes the life of another human being, is it worth taking their life too or let them rot in a cell? One of the biggest arguments in the U.S. today deals with the death penalty on whether we should get rid of it or keep it around. Being also know as capital punishment it is used in order to keep people in line. The very first known use of capital punishment was back in Eighteenth Century B.C., which assigned twenty five different crimes. The death penalty is characterized as a cruel punishment by death penalty in states, pros of the death penalty, cons of the death penalty, and the Constitution.

The death penalty continues to be a huge problem in the United States. Anyone who has or used to live in the United States of America understands about the death penalty. The death penalty is described as when the justice court of a state is allowed to execute of that person who was convicted of a crime and is sentenced to the execution. The death penalty only happens depending on crimes that are in to the criteria for the execution. The execution has been used since the very early times in some, but not all throughout the United States.

The death penalty occurs when someone kills another human being for money, ether intention, knowing or even recklessly. “The death penalty violates the right to life as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the right to be free from cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.” (The Ultimate Denial of Human Rights) in this world, no one has the right to take another human being’s life, every human being is entitled to life.

No issue posed by capital punishment is more disturbing to the public than the prospect that the government might execute innocent people. Proponents to the death penalty are, of course, also against executing an innocent person (Hook and Kahn 91). Most everyone would agree that killing someone is wrong. Proponents and opponents agree that murder is a heinous act and should be punished. Despite their hatred for those who kill, proponents support the killing of murderers as a just punishment for their deviant behaviors. In this sense, execution can be termed, “legal murder” because “executions shares enough of the characteristics of murder to be counted as part of the general category: it includes a victim who does not want to die, and an agent that nonetheless kills [the victim]” (Yanich 98]. Murder is synonymous with kill, as found in the Britannica- Webster Dictionary. To kill is to deprive one of life or to put one to death and murder implies motive and intent or premeditation. With respect