Rogerian Argument: Capital Punishment Essay

Capital punishment has been a controversial issue that still exists in America today. Capital punishment is a law passed by the government to punish any individual that has been convicted of committed a heinous crime. The death penalty has been a method used throughout history as punishment for criminals. The punishment also known as the death penalty is a scheduled execution, which would be done with lethal injection. The reason why this punishment is chosen is because when crimes are committed that shock the conscience, the immediate emotional reaction is to retaliate with severe punishment (Schnurbush 2016). The death penalty is debated when it is brought up, opinions vary from one group of people to another, one side says the execution is murder, and the other saying that it is justice being done. Each side presents valid arguments to why people should be for it or against it; people’s opinions are formed by personal beliefs.

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.

It is believed that punishment works to protect people from their criminals as it used to be seen as a fear in people’s mind to avoid inappropriate behaviour against other people, harming other people in certain ways and breaking the laws set by society or government. Punishment is a common view of human beings and they choose to behave appropriately towards their duty to follow rules set out by government laws to avoid fines or sentences. Sentencing is categorised n various degrees depending on the type and severity of crime committed, and imprisonment is considered as most common way to protect communities from its offenders and deterrent to re-offending all over the world. As Murray (1997) claims that punishment reduces crime

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

In the public eye today, the expression "Capital punishment" mixes up a great deal of discussion and feelings. At whatever point the word comes up, in-your-face extremist from both sides hollers out contentions to bolster their position. One side says "eye for an eye", the other side says there 's a capability of executing a pure man; one says equity, reprisal, and discipline; the other side says execution is homicide. Wrongdoing is a clear a portion of society, and everybody knows that something must be done about it. A great many people know the danger of

Capital punishment remains, as it has always been, controversial and heavily debated on both philosophical (moral) grounds as well as on a strictly financial basis. Both sides, however, seem to be able to crunch the

The death penalty is a controversial issue because it involves a dispute between sides which hold opposing views. Those who support the death penalty believe that it deters criminals and makes them think twice. Some supporters claim that it is morally right and gives victims justice. Furthermore, supporters of the death penalty think that it is the only way to fully protect society.According to “Solid Majority Continue to Support Death Penalty” ”About six in ten americans favor the use of death penalty for a person convicted of murder”(Solid 2016). On the other hand those who oppose death penalty think that the cost outweighs the benefits. They also argue that the death penalty can be faulty at times. Opponents argue that the death penalty

Few issues in the United States today are as emotionally charged and controversial as the death penalty. Formally know as capital punishment, the death penalty has been hotly debated not only as a legal issue, but as a religious, ethical, and political one, historically as well as in the present day. Although many states currently administer the death penalty, Texas has been put in the spot light this past year because of the recent presidential race. The moral question of whether or not it is right to kill another human being is ever-present in today's society. However, when looking at it from a political standpoint, one must also consider whether or

The first argument that I shall contend with is that capital punishment does not deter crime. Opponents of capital punishment say the death penalty is not necessary. Other countries that no longer have the death penalty have not experienced an increase in the number of murders. The idea is that the death penalty does not deter crime. Countries such as Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, and Belgium have not carried out executions since the early part of the century, yet these countries have not experienced a rise in crimr rates (Block, 1983). However, deterrence is not the question when you are looking at the retributive value of capital punishment. In short, deterrence can only work if the threat of punishment is combined with the conviction that the forbidden acts are not only illegal and therefore punishable but immoral. Without the conviction of morality, the easily frightened will not break the law, but the fearless will break the law, the irrational will break the law, and all others will break the law.

In regards to the argument in support of capital punishment, the means do not come from thinking about the death penalty in theoretical ways, but is justified as a form of retribution for individual cases. Certainty, instances of individual stories are important, however, dangers do exist as a result of such stories dictating the overall thinking about an issue that has profound social consequences. Abolitionists argue that capital punishment has never been proved to be effective in deterring others from committing murder, thus, the evil that follows capital punishment far overshadows any possible beneficial factors the opposing argument may state. Quite the reverse, murder demonstrates a lack of respect for the human life. Any life is valuable

In the wise words of the philosopher Immanuel Kant, “a society that is not willing to demand a life of somebody who has taken somebody else’s life is simply immoral.” When considering the issue of capital punishment, many arguments are made in favor of proponents and abolitionists. There are utilitarian arguments, retributive arguments, and egalitarian arguments.

The death penalty, in its current state, is ineffective at deterring serious crimes. While there are studies that will show that the death penalty is or is not effective based on the bias trying to be proven, the fact is, there is no evidence that shows any punishment is universally effective at deterring crime in our criminal justice system. According to Randi Hjalmarsson, a professor at The University of Gothenburg who specializes in crime research, in her article addressing this very issue, her studies show that even on a local level, once all the data is reviewed, any deterrent effect can only be recognized on an individual basis. Another study was done by Steven Durlauf; a social scientist, Chao Fu; an assistant professor

There is an ongoing problem in our society regarding punishment and responsibility. We, as a society, tend to look away when it comes to how criminals are being punished and maybe we should be paying more attention. Violence seems to be an integral part of our society, some raise their children with violence, we watch it on television, read it in newspapers and books and now we are even playing violent video games. When it comes to the judicial system the majority of citizens do not even know how individuals are being punished or if the punishment is too harsh, not severe enough or if the individual even needs punishment because what they may need is psychiatric help.

Despite all the pros and cons of capital punishment, society must think about what is truly correct and most practical for our world. Capital punishment is not functional in today’s legal system. There are countless amounts of evidence that proves these legal killings to be ineffective. We, as Americans, must correct this irrational practice before it does anymore permanent damage.

Although hard to agree with, it is easy to see how the anti-capital punishment movement bases its arguments. If murdering a person is immoral, then they believe the state has no right to murder the criminal. The biggest issue for the opposition is the idea that death is permanent and the guilty defendant loses their “right to have rights”, as argued by Supreme Court Justice William Brennan in Furman v. Georgia. However, when one disregards