The Death Penalty Controversy

Good Essays
The Death Penalty Controversy

The methods for carrying out the death penalty or capital punishment have varied throughout history. The word ‘capital punishment’ comes from the Latin word, capitalism (‘meaning the head’) since it was carried out through decapitation. Methods for carrying out the death penalty have ranged from boiling to death, flaying, disembowelment, impalement, stoning, shooting with a gun, and dismemberment.
The death penalty or capital punishment is a type of sentence that carries an outcome of death. This type of punishment has been a heated topic and gets voted on around the country. The death penalty has been a form of punishment throughout human history and across societies, most commonly used for the
…show more content…
The death penalty is a very controversial topic and some believe in it and some do not. I believe that capital punishment is a very good idea because it proves to the family of the victim that the state doesn’t only care about the community, but they care about those people in general. Capital punishment is also a great idea because it also keeps the community safe. Capital punishment proves to criminal offenders that the state will take a state and not put up with everything they believe they can get away with. When the state kills those whose guilt is in serious doubt, or when the state kills those to whom it has not given fair justice, it doesn 't just perform an injustice upon the individual, the rule of law, and the Constitution. It also undermines the very legitimacy of the death penalty itself, for its continuing use as a sentencing option derives its civic and moral strength mostly from the fiction that it can be, and is, credibly and reliably imposed (“Capital Punishment”). Supporters of the death penalty argue that it provides the only fair punishment for the most heinous crimes. A prison sentence, even a life sentence without possibility of parole, does not adequately avenge the cruelest and most calculated murders, proponents say. A convicted murderer has taken life, they argue, and the government has a moral obligation to
Get Access