The Death Penalty Is A Cruel Punishment

that offenders will not commit these crimes again. The United States should use the death penalty because it is economical and continues to be a deterrent for potential offenders.

America is within the top four countries for the number of executions due to the death penalty since 1999. Citing the, “Amnesty International in For What Tomorrow (2004), more than 1,800 people were executed in 31 countries, the vast majority of these in China (1076), Iran (165), Saudi Arabia (103), and then the United States (98)” (NAAS, 43). The death penalty is currently an intense debate involving the idea of whether or not we as people should be able to sentence another person to death. According to the ethical and moral reasoning of the philosophers Jeremy Bentham, Peter Singer, and Hugo Bedau, the death penalty should not be a legal punishment.

The U.S. is part of only a handful of countries that allow the execution of juvenile offenders. Currently, 38 states authorize the death penalty; 23 of these permit the execution of offenders who committed capital offenses prior to their 18th birthdays. Victor

The following description of Evans's electrocution was sworn to and verified by Russell F. Canan on June 22, 1983:

The death penalty is a serious and permanent sentence. The prison system should not hand out this sentence freely; yet 1,442 people have been executed since 1976. (DPIC) This is unacceptable due to the fact that the procedure is not a guarantee against “cruel and unusual punishment” (Unah). Also some of those who were given the death sentence were wrongly accused (Simonovic). Should it then be legal to take innocent lives that have committed no wrong? By banning the death penalty unjust accusation of innocent people are less likely to occur, and legislators and the public can figure out how to solve punishing serious and capital crimes without

Capital Punishment is Not Only Unusual, But Cruel      The most widely known aspect of the eighth amendment is the fact that it prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Cruel and unusual punishment is perceived as punishment that causes “an unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain” (Bailey). Is capital punishment cruel and unusual? It is one of the most controversial topics in America today. In effect since the 1600s, the US Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was “cruel and unusual” in 1972 but reversed this decision when a "cleaner" way to bring about death was found in 1976 (Encarta).

The death penalty how much does society really knows or understand about the process? Many people view the death penalty a justice “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” They it is justice and feels safe because of the option of the death penalty; however, most do not really know much about the process of executing a death row inmate, how much more the death penalty cost comparing with keeping an inmate in prison for life without parole. The death penalty is unethical and waste of millions of dollars, because the death penalty is a very slow process, and waste of tax payers’ money.

The death penalty was established as a form of punishment as far back as the 1600's. There are many controversial issue's in our world today whether it goes against our civil rights or not. As of today there are thirty-two states who still allow the death penalty and seven states who have completely abolished it ( Norton,W.W.& Company, Inc 115.) Even though the use of the execution has gradually decreased, there have still been many cases in the past years that states have still used it. At one point there was a time the Supreme Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional, but after a couple years the court allowed states to bring back the death penalty. The courts have struck down many laws where states have tried making it mandatory in

The death penalty till this day remains to be a very controversial topic. Some people may argue that it should be considered a form of cruel and unusual punishment; others may rebuttal in saying that the death penalty is capital punishment. When visiting the idea of placing someone to death one must bear in mind the possibility of condemning an innocent person through such torture, the brutalizing effect on society it may leave, and the serious psychological trauma that a defendants family and friends may face. Is this really what the justice system is willing to place on the line in order to gain a form of so called justice. I mean reasonably speaking what will anyone gain from such an action. It definitely will not bring the harm to be undone. As stated in the encyclopedia under the theory of judicial torture “ the use of torture was confined to capital crimes, for which the death penalty or mutilation could apply” (PIHLAJAM, 2004). Looking at how the death penalty is conducted people should not be treated like animals, given a due time to be put down. No human being deserves such treatment whether or not his or her offense was so horrific and traumatic. Is that not the lesson being taught to society when the criminal is captured? Yet, the law as a jury of peers, men just like the accused, may cast the same sin upon him. Why should this action be considered in any way to be fair or believed to be capital punishment?

1. What year and in what case did the US Supreme Court decide that the administration of the death penalty was unconstitutional? Provide a compelling statement form the opinion in this case.

The 8th amendment of the United States Constitution states that “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Specifically, the idea of cruel and unusual punishment has been a topic of dispute since its inception. Although the United States practiced execution as a punishment beforehand, “the Supreme Court did not address the death penalty issue until 1972.” It is often debated how we are to define cruel and unusual because of the vague nature of the terms. Because it is thought that the terms were kept vague in order to keep up with new forms of cruel and unusual punishment that would come into being after the constitution was written, the standards for determining what is cruel and unusual has been set by “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” meaning that it changes depending on what our society deems decent or indecent at the time. The problem is that our society has always been split on this issue. Whether it involves the death penalty or the quality of prisoner confinement, some hold the opinion that these people deserve to be treated as less than human because of the crimes they have committed. Others vehemently disagree saying that everyone, no matter what they’ve done, deserves to be treated as humanely as possible. Those of this opinion are generally opposed to the death penalty. For future interpretation of this facet of our constitution, the cruel and

As of the end of 1998, the execution of prisoners 16 years old or younger was permissible in a dozen states. Eight of which did not specify a minimum age for which the death penalty could be imposed.

The death penalty has been around for centuries. It dates back to when Hammurabi had his laws codified; it was “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”. Capital punishment in America started when spies were caught, put on trial and hung. In the past and still today people argue that, the death penalty is cruel, unusual punishment and should be illegal. Yet many people argue that it is in fact justifiable and it is not cruel and unusual. Capital punishment is not cruel and unusual; the death penalty is fair and there is evidence that the death penalty deters crime. 
A big part of abolitionist’s argument is that the death penalty is not humane. They pull in Amendment 8, “…nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” What the victim went though was indeed “cruel and unusual punishments’.” The murderers’ death is not cruel. The people will demand justice for what he or she has done (Bidinotto 19). Hanging and the electric chair are topics more reasonable to argue, but now because of lethal injection capital punishment has become more humane. The death penalty is not barbaric, the pain and agony that the victim went through is barbaric. Abolitionists were very upset in 1996 when rapist and murderer John Albert Taylor was executed by firing squad; they said his death was barbaric (Feder 32). Charla King, the poor 11-year-old girl he raped and strangled with a telephone cord, her death was barbaric! It makes no sense to think that John

kill a man in few second is more cruel than let him die day by day?

Death penalty should be scrapped because it can lead to the execution of innocent people. The justice system is bound to make mistakes and so, the accused people should be given a chance to appeal, and prove their innocence other than being murdered because of mistakes made by judges. There are many cases whereby individuals are imprisoned and