Research Proposal Argument Paper

The death penalty, although an ultimate punishment in America, is a very unfair and unjust punishment. If a person has the right to rape, torture, kidnap and/or murder someone else and infringe on another’s freedom; then they should be justly punished however death is not the answer. It should no longer stay as an integrated part of our country’s judicial punishment system. However, we should raise the sentences for these serious crimes, compared to what is currently occurring in today's judicial system.

Throughout history, societies have witnessed deviance and criminality among its citizens, and criminologists have spent centuries attempting to understand what causes deviance, why do people act how they act and do what they do. No matter how criminals come to be, the criminal justice systems have consequences in place in order to maintain peace in the communities. One of these consequences is capital punishment, the authorized killing of a person as punishment for a crime, and in most states in the United States of America, lethal injection is the common practice used for ending the life of someone. In one state particularly, Arizona, many citizens are calling for a reexamination of the death penalty due to its effect on the economy and crime rate, and how it is arbitrarily applied within the criminal justice system.

The death penalty is arguably one of the most controversial issues of our time. Currently, only eighteen states and Washington D.C. have abolished the death penalty. However, the question remains: what does research say for or against the death penalty? In 2009, a study was done that found the statistic that 88% of criminologists believed that capital punishment is not a deterrent to murder (Radelet and Lacock, 2009). The majority of research also points to the conclusion that the journey from arrest, to trial, to execution is extremely expensive, even more so than that of a life sentence. Finally, who considers the people tasked with performing the execution? What about their mental health? Through examining the death penalty’s facts, deterrence,

Many people claim that capital punishment is a deterrent for excessively violent crimes, but this is obviously not the case. Our country's northern neighbor of Canada abolished the death penalty in the mid 70’s, and the rate of violent crimes has been steadily decreasing. Since its peak in the early 90’s, the rate of police-reported crime has dropped

Society agrees on the matter that crime is corrupt and the criminal justice system needs to find a way to put a stop to it. The death penalty seems sensible and logical in every way, until we ask the question: do we need the death penalty to be ‘tough’ on crime? The answer is yes, we do.

The death penalty is only considered against serious crimes. Those who are considered for the death penalty have violated crimes against life and have taken away the rights and lives of other people. They have no regard for other people and their lives so they violate them and deserve capital punishment.

Multiple factors contribute to the alleged declining rate of the violent crime in the USA. Thus it is challenging, if not impossible, to determine the exact role of the capital punishment in a prevention of potential future crimes. From the financial perspective, the deterrence argument for the death penalty seems cost ineffective and inefficient. Given the small number of death row inmates, which is 2905 as of July 2016, based on the most recent data available, the cost of maintaining capital punishment seems to be prohibitory high (Death Row Inmates, 2016). Not every one of those 2905 convicts will be eventually executed, hence the actual number of crimes deterred would be even lower, making such approach costly and less effective than

Due to the brutality of capital punishment, two human rights are breached when the death penalty is used on convicted criminals: the right to life and the right to live free from torture. Rights for humans are tremendously important to the human race. They are protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“Death Penalty”). Within the Universal Declaration, the right to life and to live free from torture are protected. When a person is executed, the death penalty violates both of them. The right to life is a moral principle based on the belief that a human being has the right to live and, in particular, should not be killed by another human being (“Death Penalty”). The judge sentencing a person to death is breaking the human right

The death penalty, it has been the argument of ethics and politics, yet there has never been an agreement on whether to abolish it or not. It has been part of the US history as well as the world history; its practice was show through cruel actions and has become the current lethal injection. It is the debate that never ends and will never end. In this debate called “Abolish the death penalty”, Diann Rust- Tierney and Barry Scheck argue for the abolishment of the death penalty, while Robert Blecker and Kent Scheidegger argue against the abolishment of the death penalty. Diann Rust- Tiereney, the executive director of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, begins her debate by trying to prove that the death penalty is

We all look at the justice system, a system that is established to control crime and appoint penalties to those who violate laws. We hope it serves us right, but how each system works, depends on the jurisdiction that is in charge, because different jurisdictions have different law agencies and how they manage. One thing they all have in common is to seek Justice. The abolishment of the death penalty is in my favor because, sometimes the legal system gets it wrong, as well, death is the cruelest act of society and its irreversible, and it is an added cost to the government and taxpayers’

The controversy over the death penalty has plagued the world for years. Individuals such as William Tucker – The American Spectator’s New York correspondent and CEO of TheElevator.com – believe that the death penalty reduces crime. Meanwhile, those who oppose the death penalty, such as Eric M. Freedman – a professor at Hofstra University School of Law – argue that it is unneeded. Freedman’s article The Case Against the Death Penalty and Tucker’s article Why the Death Penalty Works reflect why

does not reduce murder rates. Not only that the states with the death penalty actually have had a

Although capital punishment can decrease the population of many inmates that may have committed gruesome crimes, it cannot decrease the gruesome murders that are accruing every minute on the other side of prison walls. Since 2006, North Carolina has stopped executing inmates and since then the murder rate has declined. Most death row inmates committed their crimes because they are mentally ill, they are under the influence of drugs and alcohol, or just because they wanted too. This is because future consequences does not affect their behavior, which leaves them to continue to commit crimes regardless of if they get caught or not. Capital punishment will not straighten up America’s attitude. According to the Death penalty information center, states that abolished the death penalty has a murder rate that is almost 46% lower than states that still use it (‘NCCADP’).

As Johnson has suggested, “Capital punishment in the United States is administered in an economically discriminatory way...It is always ‘you get what you pay for’ rule.” (2001) Consequently, on the one hand, those indigent defendants cannot afford to hire accomplished lawyers. On the other hand, even though the Supreme Court provide a court-appointed attorney for those people, the compensation is not high enough to entice or hire excellent defense attorneys for those people. In some cases, lawyers are indifferent about the cases or even be drunken during the trial. Innocent People on Death Row

Actually, many people think that killing a criminal is cruel, even an evil practice with revenge instead of retribution as the main motivating factor. This essay will explore the most credible and valid arguments that justify death penalty as the last legal resource of justice.