The Death Penalty Elizabeth del Rio San Jose State University
Abstract
This paper will propose all the arguments for and against the use of the death penalty as a form of punishment. The death penalty, also known as Capital Punishment, is a punishment for criminals who have committed murder other capital crimes. It is Congress or any state legislature that can prescribe execution as a form of punishment. In order to be sentenced to the death penalty the crime has to be
…show more content…
The methods used for a prisoner on the different legislations from state to state across the United States, but whether these forms of deaths should be viewed as punishment is the controversial topic that brings up many different points of argumentation such as the first and foremost argument- is the death penalty moral? Many argue that the death penalty is completely immoral on the basis that the state and federal governments do not deserve to kill those whom it has imprisoned. People argue about the factors that determine whether the government will administer a death penalty, such as racial bias and ethnic discrimination. Also, those who oppose the death penalty argue that the criminal justice system often treats the wealthy and guilty better than the poor and innocent. The system in sentencing death is therefore unjust and immoral because it has often shown cases with racial apartheid and in favor of criminals with higher income. This argument does stand strong because the premises all point out to strong conclusion, there actually has been many reports of racial and class bias has taken place. On the contrary, those who believe in the death penalty deny it’s immorality because the defendant is treated with dignity when in death row. In order to refute the argument made by those against the death penalty,
The legitimacy of the use of capital punishment has been tarnished by its widespread misuse , which has clouded our judgment regarding the justifiability of the death penalty as a punitive measure. However, the problems with capital punishment, such as the “potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness and racial skew" , are not a basis for its abolition, as the world of homicide suffer from these problems more acutely. To tackle this question, one must disregard the currently blemished universal status quo and purely assess the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty as a punitive measure. Through unprejudiced examination of the death penalty and its consequential impacts, it is evident that it is a punishment that effectively serves its retributive, denunciatory, deterrent, and incapacitative goals.
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.
The debate on whether or not the death penalty should be abolished has been ongoing for quite a long period of time. While there are those who believe that the death penalty does not serve its intended purpose, proponents of the same are convinced that the relevance of the same cannot be overstated and hence it should not be abolished. In this text, I examine the arguments for and against the death penalty.
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
Throughout mankind has been using the death penalty as a form of punishment. Many people argue with this type of punishment because they believe in an eye for an eye. Many people that it is okay to murder a human being due to them having killed an individual over time. There have been many cases that have proven that they death penalty violates the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment, being very expensive, and innocent lives are convicted.
The use of the death penalty in the United States has always been a controversial topic. The death penalty, also known as Capital Punishment, is a legal process where a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a heinous crime. The judicial decree that someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence, while the actual enforcement is an execution (Bishop 1). Over the years, most of the world has abolished the death penalty. But the United States government, and a majority of its citizens, defend and support its continued use. There is evidence, however, that some attitudes about the death penalty are changing.
Does the Death penalty still serve the fundamental purpose that was originally proposed, and if no, is there another way? Overall the argument on the use of death penalty can go either way. The real issue is defining the gray areas in constitutionality of the death penalty process and actually seeing if it serves as an effective benefit for society. This research essay will dig into what the death penalty actually means, the history context, the use of the precedents, views on both sides, and come to decide what we can do to make the death penalty more
The jurisdiction of the death penalty in the United States for decades the death penalty has been an emotional and almost unmentionable controversial issue that has affected people in a many of different ways. This Essay addresses head-on most of the common arguments that are used in favor of the death penalty and some that are opposed.
The death penalty has become a heavily debated topic in society, due to the uncertainty of its moral context. Supporters of the death penalty reason that those who have committed blameworthy crimes should have their lives go worse as a result of their actions. They believe in retribution. Protestors of the death penalty believe that it is counterproductive. They say that by legalizing the behavior that the law is trying to prevent, which is killing, they are being hypocritical. William Baude’s article raises the question of whether or not the death penalty is constitutional. The death penalty has plenty of ethical, legal, and moral matters associated with it. The moral dilemma of the death penalty can be viewed from deontological and utilitarian perspectives. Both theories allow the death penalty to be a morally acceptable punishment, but the difference is the reason behind each theory.
The death penalty can be summed up entirely in one word, bias. For a country that prides itself on “justice for all” and “all men are created equal”, the death penalty falls short of such boast. The subsequent arguments are not formulated to defend the individual and their horrific crime, rather they are presented in order to support why the death penalty is unfair and should be eliminated. If such brutish punishment if seen as just for the crime committed, should it not apply equally to all, regardless of race? The debate of whether the death penalty is inappropriate has been been thoroughly investigated for many years by scholars and journalists alike. I shall defend my position against this sanction based on erroneous convictions, racial biases, and the the high costs associated with the prosecution and detention of death row inmates.
Burgess, Regehr & Roberts (2013), lamented “The Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791, controlled the use of capital punishment by prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment in the Eighth Amendment” (p. 175). The justice system has valid alternatives to the death penalty, such as life imprisonment without parole, that constitute adequate punishment even for the most repugnant crimes. Moreover, it is dangerous to engage in ethical equivalencies and hierarchically rank human beings; the point should not be to judge whose life is more vulnerable, but rather to affirm that all human life must be valued. A system that ends a human existence cannot stand in a righteous and just society. The solution is for the justice system to provide remedy to victims, not vengeance. Moreover, this view fails to give due credence to the reality that the death penalty system has not been and cannot be proven to be a successful deterrent, is more expensive than relevant alternatives because of the appellate process, is subject to human error, and is often riddled with economic and racial bias in its application. The irrevocable nature of the death penalty renders it an unsustainable and indefensible remedy in an imperfect justice system. What should be done to the death penalty is not an intellectual exercise. The death penalty can divide and damage families, due to the fact that death is final and because individuals have deeply held feelings about the morality and utility of executions, unlike any other punishment the death penalty creates irreconcilable conflict amongst the surviving family members of murder
One of the first issues that are always brought up concerning the death penalty is its morality. Those for the death penalty, they addressed the fact that the opposition would suggest that the death penalty is inherently immoral because no one or one government should take someone’s life. In the cases sentences to the
The death penalty is a controversial capital punishment which is involving a crime. It is controversial because some people are for it and some people are against it. In this paper, I am going to show you why I think we should abolish the death penalty; it doesn’t deter the rate of crimes, and innocent people get accused of crimes they didn’t even commit.The purpose of the death penalty is to give closure to the victim’s family, to punish crimes, and to prevent the crime from repeating again. They incorporate the capital punishment to try and scare future victimizers from making the same mistake as the others. The goal of the death penalty is met simply by removing an offender from society. Therefore, opponents of the death penalty can and
The death penalty has been considered an issue since the Eighteenth century, when the first established death penalty laws were in effect. There are vast differences in the way people view the death penalty; some oppose it and some agree with it. In the recent decades the death penalty has become a more popular controversial topic. The people who oppose the death penalty have very different reasons than people who agree with it. Death penalty advocates believe that the death penalty deters crime rates and is completely constitutional, whereas anti death penalty advocates believe that the death penalty is unconstitutional and doesn’t deter crimes. Through research and writings I will go in depth on this topic. Thus the question remains,
Is it ethical? Are they truly guilty? The multitude of society asks the same questions when debating the death penalty process as a form of punishment. The death penalty can be debated on both sides, for or against, and the debate brings controversial since this is a long standing debatable issue. Both sides have researched statistics and produced evidence with certain factors in favor of or against, in result the death penalty stands in most states but the execution process now has strict guidelines. The guidelines were established for the protection of an innocent inmate wrongly accused being sentenced to death. In response to the guidelines, the financial amount to support a death row inmate expanded greatly due to judicial process and imprisonment requirements for solidarity. Evidence of reduced deterrent value has been inconclusive as the death penalty possesses no value to crime control. Executions of death row inmates have declined drastically while the death penalty is still being sentenced as punishment. Evidently through evidence and statistics, defeasance of the death penalty is preponderant and, ultimately irrefutable.