Stay With Me Debate

“Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect,” stated John F. Kennedy at Berlin on June 26th, 1963. Kennedy is most certainly correct in this subject because no government is ever “perfect.” There is always room for improvement in government and sometimes there are instances in which a law needs to be changed or repealed. Almost everyday, it seems, that there are outrageous crimes being committed and the criminals are being jailed rightfully so. Sometimes, a judge would decide that that criminal should receive the death penalty or capital punishment. Capital punishment has evolved over centuries from the ancient method of “an eye for an eye”, to beheadings, lynchings, electric chairs, etc. While most of

The Americans have known the "Bribery" that the XYZ agents have brought, and they reacted to the XYZ with a shock and anger. Realized that President Adams was too weak politically and could not suited for the President job; The Republican newspaper heaped abuse on Adams as " a person without patriotism, without philosophy, and a mock monarch". With the temper so dangerously high and fears that political dissent was perhaps akin to treason, the Federalist leader moved to muffle the opposition. In mid 1798, Congress hammered out the Sedition Act; the Sedition Act made conspiracy and revolt are illegal, however, the Sedition Act also prohibited the right to speak or writing anything that defamed the president or Congress which is considered the citizen as

(James Madison and Thomas Jefferson)” The people’s freedoms should be respected and they should not be broken. The people deserve their rights and they are laws that need to be followed. John Adams says that the law, “affects only foreigners who are conspiring against us. (Timothy Pickering)”

Treason is a political crime committed against a state or government to which the person charged with treason owes a duty of allegiance. The dictionary defines treason as a violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of ones country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies. The men signing the declaration of independence were aware of the risk they ran of committing treason against the British king. The value that defense remained to be determined in a civil war. In civil wars, every man chooses his party, but generally that side with prevails arrogates the right of treating those who are vanquished as rebels. In the weeks preceding the Declaration of Independence,

Prisoner #48551-083 is a 69-year-old white male named Robert Philip Hanssen. The former FBI-counterintelligence-agent-turned-Soviet-spy is serving life in prison without the possibility of parole at the Administrative Maximum facility in Florence, Colorado, where he is kept in solitary confinement. The United States government originally accused Hanssen of trading more than 6,000 pages of confidential information to the KGB in exchange for cash and diamonds and of blowing the covers of double-agents that the FBI had recruited from the Soviets (Willing & Watson). At the time of Hanssen’s arrest, then-FBI Director Louis J. Freeh said that the charges exemplify “the most serious violations of law – and threat to national security” (“Espionage case”, 2001). This opinion should make us question why, when traitors and spies should be executed in accordance to the United States Code of Law, we as a country are so lenient in our punishments of convicted spies such as Hanssen. Is it because we believe that we cannot decide if someone lives or dies? Are we afraid to acknowledge that the information fed to enemy governments could possibly mean the end of the United States as we know it? Or even the end of our own lives? How many people should be allowed to betray our country until we stop this issue before it is continually perpetuated? Although critics believe that the death penalty should be abolished, I use a combination of retributivist and deterrence arguments to argue that

A question that has been asked since the foundation of our country was made is, “Can the death penalty be considered Constitutional?” Thomas Jefferson was known to have written letters with the same topic. Now only thirty-one states, along with the federal government, still believe that the death penalty is within the boundaries of the Constitution. Twenty executions of the death penalty occurred last year, 2016, and approximately 1500 have since the 1970s (Pennekamp).

In fact, one may observe the use of the death penalty in modern society as one of the holdouts of ancient legal codes. Although many are opposed to the use of the death penalty, the debate over its use and legality continues to rage. One of the more high profile cases involving the use of the death penalty is in the case of convicted Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was sentenced to death for his role in the bombings in May 2015. Such a conviction, although it is extreme, is found to be justified under the law despite its retribution-like quality. The question of whether such laws and rulings are just will continue to be debated. In the interim, however, it appears that the death penalty will continue to exist as an option in many U.S. states. It is simply interesting to note how, despite the numerous advances in case law over the last several centuries, the concept of retribution and a punishment fitting a crime continues to exist to this day.

We often seek to “do unto others which is done to us”. The concept of revenge is directly mirrored in our prison system. Once someone commits a crime, they are then, through the 7th Amendment of the United States Bill of Rights, subject to go to trial before a jury. If a jury of the defendant’s “peers” then deems the appropriate punishment for the crime that they are being tried for. The evocation of the death penalty grew very controversial mostly due to that reason. Essentially what was implied is that a human’s life is put into the hands of total strangers who in most cases are only knowledgeable of a minimal section of that person’s life and character. In an editorial research report on the death penalty, written in 1963, Jeanne Kuebler includes a quote by A. Francart on the appeal of capital punishment. “Capital punishment, its opponents insist, is revenge, not deterrence or protection, and as such lessens reverence for the sacredness of human life. ‘The lesson the scaffold always provides,’ Francart wrote, ‘is that human life ceases to be sacred when it is considered useful to suppress it…’” (Kuebler). A key point that Francart makes in his quote is the idea of revenge. Our society views revenge as a readily available convention to utilize whenever they see fit. Revenge, in its simplest form, deals with the notion that we all must become equal. In the ancient Code of Hammurabi this concept is referred to as “An Eye for

The United States is a country whose ideals is founded on protecting the rights of its citizens, making sure each action they take will benefit its people without compromising the liberties America had fought to earn. However, once those liberties are compromised, this may lead to protests and violence which in turn may cause large rates of incarceration and possibly death. The issue of capital punishment has existed since the 18th century BC, and it is an issue that will continue until justice and individual liberties find a common ground that they share. With a growing debate over universally banning capital punishment in the states, as shown by 61% of voters in a 2010 poll, or forcing all states to conform to using the death penalty, the

America has a long history of treasonous behavior. Some will even argue that America was founded on the very act of treason. When a group of Bostonians, led by Samuel Adams heaved “342 chests of tea into the Boston Harbor to protest a new tax imposed by King George III of Great Britain,” they were considered traitors to England. Upon secession from the Union, and during the Civil War, Confederate officers, soldiers, and sympathizers were accused of treason. American history is peppered with accused traitors, some of whom clearly violated U.S. law, but there are others for whom the accusation isn’t as black and white.

the Modern Death Penalty Is a Failed Experiment” is an article written by David Von Dregle and published in time magazine. In this article, the author believes the death penalty is wrong. He begins his essay by giving facts about the death penalty and the moral implications of why the death penalty is chosen citing the case of Dzhokar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon bomber. He shows the logically reasoning as to why, as a society, we are willing to give the death penalty. However, he makes the point that Tsarnaev will not be executed soon as “he is one of more than 60 federal prisoners under sentence of execution in a country where only three federal death sentences have been carried

In this paper, the authors examine how the death penalty argument has changed in the last 25 years in the United States. They examine six specific issues: deterrence, incapacitation, caprice and bias, cost innocence and retribution; and how public opinion has change regarding these issues. They argue that social science research is changing the way Americans view the death penalty and suggest that Americans are moving toward an eventual abolition of the death penalty.

American Constitution describes treason as consisting of merely imposing War against the United States or in collaboration with American enemies by helping and comforting them. The constitution goes forward to say that no person will be sentenced of treason other than for two witnesses’ testimony to very similar overt Act, or on open Court Admission. Where of he/she they shall stand accused, this individual(s)shall be pronounced guilty against the U.S. of treason as well as will be sentenced to death. The Constitution limits the treason offense into (1) the charging of conflict against the U.S.; and (2) assisting their enemies and giving them ease(Kawashima, 2013). The crime of treason has been thought to be the utmost offence that is capable of being done in civil civilization. Since its goal is a coup of the Administration and a communal confrontation forcibly of its just authorities, its propensity remains creation of world wide hazard and fright, and on this interpretation it has frequently been visited with the cordial public antipathy.

Some people disagree and say that the death penalty should never be used as a punishment against traitors. Scholars say that the death penalty should never be used because it is morally wrong. Human life is valuable and that value cannot be taken away. (11.2, 11.3) The Bible says that God created man in His own image and it is wrong to kill a man who was made in His image. God also commands man not to kill in His Ten

An issue that has continually created tension in today's society is whether the death penalty serves as a justified and valid form of punishment. Whenever the word "death penalty" comes up, extremists from both sides start yelling out their arguments. One side says deterrence, the other side says there's a potential of executing an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder. Crime is an evident part of society, and everyone is aware that something must be done about it. Most people know the threat of crime to their lives, but the question lies in the methods and action in which it should be dealt with. In several parts of