Pros And Cons Of Capital Punishment

Now many would think what type of pros can you receive the death penalty? One pro would be retribution this is just to make sure that the person takes full reasonability of the crime they committed and know that they are being punished for it. The next one would be deterrence which will help them understand that they should engage in no form of a crime because of the consequences behind it, however, I don’t believe that it actually works all the time because many individuals learn the consequences of a crime in elementary school from DARE. Less damage is adopted to prevent more now this can mean different levels to many. Well, a criminal is like the flu, they are an airborne virus to society. They affect everyone’s life rather they realize it or not. The death penalty is actually cheaper than what people think. Society pays less for individual who are sentenced death than those who are not. The death penalty eliminates all the negative on society if a person kills someone we never have to worry about that person again because they will be put to death and never have a chance to hurt society

Capital punishment is also observed to be beneficial for the society because it deters the criminal from committing another crime and it prevents the other criminals from committing the same crime, however there is no scientific research that proves a causal connection or a cause and effect relationship between capital punishment and the commission of a crime. Killing a human being as a deterrent to crime is, in principle, using a human being as a means rather than an ends. If we agree with the fact that killing is wrong except in self-defense and therefore the killed would need to be punished. Then the argument follows that the killer’s punishment is to be killed can be seen as highly contradictory. This just turns into circular reasoning because to kill someone because they killed someone then this circle would just go on and on and people would continue to kill and kill and keep the cycle going. To kill the person who has killed someone close to you is simply to continue the cycle of violence which ultimately destroys the punisher as well as the offender. Executing someone for killing your loved one does not always necessarily give the family closure but may actually bring more pain because than that

The thought of retribution as a form of capital punishment makes a whole lot of sense too many people. According to Adams (2004) “Retribution has its basis in religious values, which have historically maintained that it is proper to take an "eye for an eye" and a life for a life” (p.1). People have come to believe that if one has done something horrible they should be punished for their actions regardless of religion. When a life is taken by a person the equilibrium of fairness becomes deeply disturbed by nature. The fairness of the life that was taken if it does not receive any justice the people will uproar into violence. The taking of the killer’s life can restore the balance that society needs and shows society that murder itself is intolerable with a hefty consequence attached to it. The taking of the murder’s life will not bring back the victim to their family but it will bring the closure needed for the killer’s crime. The death penalty is needed for the heinous crimes that deserve the worst punishment possible under the law. Any less punishment then this is merely undermining the value that society places on protecting lives. (http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/student/c/about/arguments/argument2a.htm) Elizabeth Adams

PRO: "The crimes of rape, torture, treason, kidnapping, murder, larceny, and perjury pivot on a moral code that escapes apodictic [indisputably true] proof by expert testimony or otherwise. But communities would plunge into anarchy if they could not act on moral assumptions less certain than that the sun will rise in the east and set in the west. Abolitionists may contend that the death penalty is inherently immoral because governments should never take human life, no matter what the provocation. But that is an article of faith, not of fact. The death penalty honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a free moral actor able to control his own destiny for good or for ill; it does not treat him as an animal with no moral

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

Most death penalty cases involve the execution of murderers although capital punishment can also be applied for treason, espionage, and other crimes. The death penalty gives justice to the murder victim’s families, it also brings relief because now they can rest without worry knowing that the killer is dead. The death penalty should be utilized for the serious crimes (Jost 2). The Death penalty can be useful because by killing off the criminals the jail space can be decreased because it's not holding barbaric animals. The criminals are just waste of life pieces of trash that need to put into the incinerator. These facts make it evident that the death penalty is greatly needed.

There are many ways that a trial could go for criminals. Capital punishment, also known as the “Death Penalty”, is used as a punishment for criminals who commit heinous crimes. The Death Penalty is determined in trial by the jury; in some cases a judge will override the verdict that a jury declared, either sentencing the criminal to death or removing the verdict all together. The death penalty should be continued, because overall the end result is beneficial for communities as a whole. The Death Penalty has been debated between people on whether or not the process of determining who gets put to death is racist, whether or not it deters people from committing crimes, if it is “cruel and unusual punishment”, and if it violates the eighth and fourteenth amendments.

Also, retribution is carried out justly in the death penalty. If you think about it, shouldn’t people who have committed crimes such as murder have to pay the price that is considered equivalent to the pain they caused? Retribution provides justice. Families who have lost members due to murder don’t get the peace and justice they deserve if the one who committed the crime doesn’t pay the equivalent price. Committing a crime disrupts the way society is ordered. Lives, peace, and liberties are all taken away from society when these crimes happen. A way to reestablish order in society is to give the death penalty. The death penalty isn’t an act of revenge and it is not motivated by spite. The definition of retribution literally says it all, “retribution is a state sponsored, rational response to criminality that is justified given that the state is the victim when a crime occurs” (“Justifications for Capital Punishment). I believe that the need for justice is important and you’re not going to get any justice just by throwing someone in prison for life or so that’s what I believe.

The following essay explores the pros and cons of capital punishment. A brief history of how capital punishment was introduced into modern society is included. Various resources have been used for research which include online articles, studies, and textbook references. This paper suggests the costs of capital punishment to be very high, but brings closure and justice to families, and even brings forth new evidence in some cases. While this form of punishment is seen as inhumane to some, it has been a successful method in various cases that are mentioned in this essay. This paper will conclude with the authors personal viewpoint

Just a few facts about the death penalty is that 153 people have been exonerated and out of those 153 only twenty of them was because of a DNA evidence. Also six states have completely removed the death penalty such as New York, New Jersey, Illinois, New Mexico, Maryland, and Connecticut. The death penalty is also called a capital crime, killing those for things that they have committed such as rape or killing another human being. One of the main reasons the death penalty should not be allowed is because it is like an easy way out of a punishment, a way to not serve a lifetime of a sentence that should be served. That way they have time to consider what they have done and how they hurt that person or their family member. You do not have to use death penalty as a way to show you are tough on crime, putting someone in jail for as long as possible with what they did is just as good. Making sure they get the time they deserve is good enough. “My major problem is that it is impossible to separate the death penalty from revenge; which is hardly a worthy substitute for justice.”(Gates, 2010). The death penalty is a way to get justice for what they have done, but also a way for revenge to be in the place of justice. A person could want revenge for what that person has done instead of clarity, they want to get revenge for what had happened to a loved one that they do not tend to think it is the right way to get justice for their loved one, when in all

In rebuttal, opposition would say the amount crimes decreases is not at all significant. This could not be farther from the truth. Numerous studies have shown that “between three to eighteen lives would be saved by execution of each convicted killer” (Tanner). Saving those that many lives is worth the execution of one, no doubt about it. Putting the innocent people at risk is a high price to pay for protecting a criminal from punishment they deserve. These pieces of evidence back up the fact that the death penalty ultimately provides better public safety. As well as holding offenders responsible for the crimes they committed, and not by any other judgement. Martin Luther King, Jr. expressed the idea in which we “judge not by the color of skin, but by the content of their character”. Capital punishment is an effective way to tell possible lawbreakers these crimes will not be tolerated and will be punished to the harshest extent.

The death penalty, also known as capital punishment is a legal procedure in which a state executes a person for crimes he/she has committed. This punishment has been implemented by many states, and is normally used for atrocious crimes, especially murder. It is also used on crimes against the state such as treason, crimes against humanity, espionage, and violent crimes while other states use it as part of military justice. There are mixed reactions on capital punishment depending on one’s faith, and the state they come from. In my view, I am not in favor of death penalty, as I strongly believe that, death penalty is unacceptable and an inhumane practice for it denies one the right to live. Death penalty does not deter crime, it is an act

Does the death penalty really help deter crime? The theory of deterrence is based on the idea that the threat of punishment must be severe enough to counter the benefits or pleasures that the criminal would receive from the crime. In addition, the punishment must be administered swiftly so that potential criminals will see a clear cause and- effect relationship between the crime and the punishment. The death penalty would be considered a specific deterrence. As a result of their punishment, the criminal can not commit further crimes. There is no doubt that capital punishment serves as a specific deterrent: The executed criminal will never kill again. However, experts and others have long debated whether capital punishment is a more effective general deterrent than life in prison.

Putting people to death for committing murder makes other potential murderers think twice about killing someone. Capital punishment deters many murders every day. If all that had to be done was spend life in jail, getting free meals, having a roof over their head, and place to sleep at night, then killing

Death punishment, gives closure to the people involved with the tragedy. It helps to the overpopulation problem in the prison system, instead keeping an intern 25 years or more. Finally, people who received the death punishment usually are not able to be rehabilitated. If these people have the opportunity they will kill, rape, and torture again. There are many factors that make murders incapable to