Pros And Cons Of The Death Penalty

The death penalty is still in use in the united states. The state with the most executions is in Texas with a total of 545 from 2017 to the year 1976 (Number of Executions, 2017). The death penalty is a very big debate. There are many reasons why and why people do and don’t like the death penalty.

According to Listverse “the execution (death penalty) does engender a feeling of relief at no longer having to think about the ordeal.” Clouser has changed the way we talk about the rationale for the death penalty. Families of the victim most of the time take years to recover from the loss of their loved one. The death penalty helps this by taking the life of a person who committed a crime and provides closure to the victim's family. Families of the victim most of the time take years to recover from the loss of their loved one. Life in prison just means the criminal is still around to haunt the victim's family. A death sentence brings finality to a horrible episode in the lives of the victim's family. The institution of capital punishment or also known as the death penalty must exist to give closure to the victim’s

Many times the major question is do those convicted of a crime deserve to die or whether the state deserve to kill them. In other words what purpose would it serve by killing the person? What rehabilitation could they do if they are dead? This is one of the questions facing the justice system. Although the answer is not an easy one, it requires some thought and negotiation between the justice system and the state in order to determine the answer for each state. Each state must look hard and long at its financial situation as well as what is legally, morally and sometimes politically right.

A common argument for the death penalty is the idea of “an eye for an eye.” If someone commits murder then they

Considering more than half of the convicted individuals that are on death row are there for murder, as it is simply hypocrisy to execute them. Life without parole is a simple alternative. Although it is very surprising, in many cases, victim’s family would prefer the defendant to be sentenced to life without parole than to exercise the death penalty. Thomas Volgyesi, the brother of a murder victim, stated in court that although the two boys who shot his sister and parents deserved the death penalty, it would not bring him any closure for the death of his family (Life). The death penalty serves absolutely no justice. Therefore, it should be abolished. Life without parole is a much better alternative because it gets the horrible people off of the streets, but it also does not give the felons the chance to take the easy way out. Whenever an individual receives life without parole, they have to actually pay for the crime that they committed, instead of taking the easy way out and ending their

The Government used to have a death penalty where you would have to sit in a chair that shocks you all the way to your death. When time has come passed the electric chair was eliminated and now their using the lethal injection where you are poisoned and killed instantly. Out of everybody on the death row 42% are Black, 43% are Whites, 13% are Hispanic, and 2% are other races. In the US there was 3,035 people on death row last October. 150 death row inmates were released due to their innocence being found. In Cali people who killed whites where 3 times more likely to get the death row then those who killed blacks.

he death penalty serves the right justice for capital murder. Many people think that the death penalty does not serve any justice, but it takes away the number of cold murderers on the street. Life in prison may do justice on some occasions, but if a person kills another person, then that person deserves the death penalty.

(C-SPAN, 2014) The death penalty is a controversial area of public policy. It is up to the states within America if they will allow it or not. Thirty-one states have allowed the death penalty and nineteen have outlawed it. “The most persistent argument in favor of the death penalty is that it acts as a deterrent, and, as a result, leads to a reduction in heinous crimes.”(© 2014 C-SPAN) Another one of the most common arguments that goes against the death penalty is that it violates the “cruel and unusual punishment” clause of the Eighteenth Amendment in the U.S Constitution. People of the death penalty have also said that a lot of minorities and people with intellectual disabilities have been executed.

The death penalty can be good for some cases but The Oregonians for Alternatives to The Death Penalty said that most corrections personnel who are conducting the executions suffer from PTSD. Death Penalty is bad because of rehabilitation failure, it is a defense mechanism, mentally ill people are set to die, people who conduct the deaths can be scarred, and it violates the 8th amendment.

“There is no justice in killing in the name of justice” (Azquotes). This quote from Desmund Tutu represents some logic behind the extermination of the death penalty. There can be no justice in the death penalty. Also, the death penalty has been and always will be wrong on a moral level. Killing is morally wrong, no matter how justified. Some might say that the death penalty lowers crime rates, or saves lives in the long run, but this may not be the case. There has been no evidence that the death penalty lowers crime rates (“What’s New”). Others might say that the death penalty has been reserved only for the “worst of the worst”: people that have committed the most brutal crimes (“Top 10 Pro”). However, many cases have been presented in which the accused may not be considered the “worst of the worst”, or even deserving of jail time (“What’s New”). For these reasons alone the death penalty should be abolished. It is unconstitutional and morally wrong.

There are always two sides to an argument and when it comes to the death penalty there is no difference. Those who are for the death penalty and are keeping the practice say that the death penalty aids in giving victims’ families peace as well as preventing the perpetrator from doing those despicable crimes again. According to Kyle Gibson in the article Death Penalty Repeal: It 's Necessary to Use Capital Punishment in a Free World the only way for many families to have any peace in their loss is for the perpetrators to die for what they have done. The author also mentions that death many not be enough to stop the pain and help them to move on with their lives (Gibson, Online).

Scores of researchers, including such eminent criminologists as Edward Sutherland and Thorsten Sellin, have examined the possibility that the death penalty has a greater deterrent effect on homicide rates than long-term. While some econometric studies have claimed to find deterrent effects; these studies have been sharply criticized. Overall, the vast majority of deterrence studies have failed to support the hypothesis that the death penalty is a more effective deterrent to criminal homicides than long imprisonment. As two of this country's most experienced deterrence researchers conclude after their review of recent scholarship, "The available evidence remains 'clear and abundant' that,

The death penalty also known as capital punishment has been administered for thousands of years ever since the eighteenth-century B.C. the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon. Capital punishment has been and will continue to be a controversial topic due to its deferential of perceptions ethically and morally. The death penalty can best be described as a government sanctioned practice whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. I personally view the death penalty as a distinctive and compelling hindrance against murder. Even though murder is viewed ethically and morally wrong, certain sorts of homicides are legitimate. Advocates of the death penalty likewise frequently guarantee that it deflects potential killers from wrongdoing when all is said in done and murder specifically. In some popular feeling surveys, prevention shows up as the regularly referred to explanation behind supporting the death penalty. More than once on the battle field President Bush emphasized his help for the death penalty since it spares lives. The death penalty, a legitimate cause of death as a punishment for committing crimes against the law. The contention in support depends on equity and the idea of an ethical group, which requires that every individual regard the life, freedom, and opportunity of others. The individuals who carry out awful violations devastate the premise on which an ethical group rests and relinquishes their rights to citizenship and even to life

I support this claim with evidence because they have interviewed criminals who have said that the death penalty scares them. The death penalty was made for justice and to prevent crimes. And it is working to an extent. The murder rate in the USA has gone down by 2.8 percent in the last 5 years. Although, the normal

The first recorded execution in the United States; within the lines of the law, dates back to 1608 with the death sentence of Captain George Kendall in Jamestown, Virginia (“Death Penalty”). Though Kendall himself was put to death due to his position as a Spanish spy, others during that era were condemned for committing even the pettiest of actions; stealing grapes, killing chickens, and trading with Indians (“Death Penalty”). The constant fear of being put to death that lingered over the heads of the colonists operated as a determinant to the conduction of juvenile acts. Though it has been over 400 years since the death penalty first stepped foot onto United States soil, the common belief that the threat of death will deter crime is what prevents the death penalty from exiting United States borders. The death penalty has remained a familiar topic, within United States law due to the belief that it plays a role in decreasing the rate of crime, however, its place within the system is continually threatened by multiple cases of flawed implementation and crime statistics.