The Death Penalty Is A Morally Appropriate Punishment

Society needs to change the eye for an eye mentality in order for civilization to advance past the revenge philosophy that leads to an endless cycle of violence (ACLU, 2012). The American Civil Liberties Union (2012) says that capital punishment is a violation of civil liberties and goes against everything that our democratic system stands for. The death penalty system in the United States is applied in an unfair manner against people based on how much money they have and the race of the victim (ACLU, 2012). African Americans are more likely to be executed than white people, especially if their victim was white (ACLU, 2012).

The people that are mainly given a conviction of death are those of minority and the poor. Oppositionist feel that if a white or rich person committed the same crime would be sent away with a lesser punishment or a slap on the wrist. Economic and racial bias is an argument that is made across the board in our justice system. This is an argument that has caught the eye of many Civil Rights unions.

As Bryan Stevenson, executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative in Alabama, said 95 percent of the 3,350 people on death row were poor in 2007. People who cannot afford to pay high lawyer fee have a higher chance to receive the capital punishment. Horace Dunkins, Gary Drinkard and John Eldon Smith are the examples that were sentenced to death because their lawyers failed their responsibilities. Dunkins’ lawyers failed to show his mentally retarded to prove his non-intention; Drinkard’s lawyer failed to prove that he was unable to murder due to his back injury; Smith’s lawyer lacked of awareness of changing rules. However, in the case of Ethan Couch, he killed four people and got 10 years’ probation with a recommendation for treatment of his “affluenza” only. Punishment failed to accomplish its purpose. It punished the innocent but leave the criminal away. This really hesitated me to support death

Aristotle once said “the generality of men are naturally apt to be swayed by fear rather than reverence, and to refrain from evil rather because of punishment that it brings than because of its own foulness.” Capital punishment has been intertwined in United States history for centuries with a number of crimes that could lead to the death penalty if convicted, many of them are some form of murder. Since 1977, three thousand and ninety-five defendants have been on death row and of that, only one thousand thirty eight defendants have actually been executed. But the perilous question is whether or not the defendants were sentenced based on solely the facts and nature of the crime or crimes, or were there other contributing factors that influenced the severity of the verdict. There are several social controversies that surround the people who are sent to death row, predominately bias and discrimination issues which are based on ethnicity, gender, and mental health.

Along with inequality, the death penalty punishes the poor. In recent studies if a defendant cannot afford good legal representation they are more likely to head towards the death penalty. If the defendant can afford good legal representation they are likely to get a lighter charge. In this situation money is key, which is unfair to the poor as they cannot improve their situation. It is present that a large percent of defendants cannot afford to hire a skillful defense lawyer and are required to use inexperienced court

Capital punishment, in reality, does not single out the worst criminals and exclude them from society. The death penalty, ultimately, singles out a random group of criminals based on fears of the public, and then sends those criminals to death row. “With respect to race, studies show that a death sentence is far more likely where a white person is murdered than a black person.” (Death Penalty Information Center 2). We see that capital punishment could also be considered discriminatory in certain situations.

Many Americans view the criminal justice system as a beneficial resource our country provides to ensure safety and general welfare of the people. While this notion may have been the initial intent, the United States justice system is extraordinarily biased and is failing at lowering crime rates. Criminal punishment in America is not based by intensity of the crime committed, but instead is determined by social status. The higher the class of the individual, the easier said individual will be punished. Being found guilty of a crime is mostly a threat to the poor, a class which not only is persecuted more frequently, but often receives grander punishments compared to those of a higher economic standing. Since most of the power is held by the

People with higher socioeconomic status are more likely to support the death penalty. A case study of Harris County Texas by S. Phillips revealed that a defendant who killed someone with a higher socioeconomic status and a college degree was more likely given a death sentence than a criminal who killed lines, most criminals on death row at the time of this case study (ca. 1992-1999) had lower socioeconomic statuses (DPIC). This same case study found that race had a similar pattern. White people are more likely to support capital punishment, while African Americans are more likely to oppose it.

Concepts and expectations of “appropriate justice” have changed over time as society matures. There appears to have been two basic arguments in favor of killing murders when the law was enacted. First, it was

The death penalty is not a justifiable or moral punishment for Dick Hickock’s actions on the night of November 15, 1959, because he is mentally impaired, which causes him to act antisocially and impulsively without thought of future consequence. Additionally the only crime he committed that night was breaking and entering, and robbery.

Many people question whether the death penalty is right or wrong. Issues regarding the possibility of putting an innocent man to death based on faulty investigative work and a flawed legal system are often explored. References to the concept of lex talionis are made, wondering why rapists are not raped and sadists are not beaten in a legal system that kills killers. A killer takes another 's life, liberty, or chance at happiness? Is it wrong to take the same from them? How can taking a life for a life be considered justice? So, is the death penalty genuinely considered justice, or is it blood thirst?

“Man…I’m not…something’s wrong,” said Clayton Lockett as he lay on the execution bed. He had begun to twitch only seconds after the drugs were administered, and then the convulsions became worse.

President Obama was quoted in 2006 saying, “If an offender has committed murder, he must die. In this case, no possible substitute can satisfy justice. For there is no parallel between death and even the most miserable life, so that there is no equality of crime and retribution unless the perpetrator is judicially put to death (Audacity of Hope 2006). As the leader of the free world and the President of our great nation, his values empower our society to believe in the same thing. The strength and influence of politics when it comes to such highly debated issues like capital punishment is substantial.

The death penalty is often thought of to be a deterrence to murder. The idea is that criminals are supposed to think what their consequences could be before committing the crime which in this case would be the death penalty. However, what are the chances that a criminal is actually going to stop and think about whether or not the death penalty could be a consequence. If criminals want to engage in violence, they are going to. Consequences are not going to alter that state of mind. According to Richard Dieter, director of the Death Penalty Information Center, police officers all over the country “do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder” (Dieter). In fact, states in which the death penalty is legal are the states with

Executions have occurred in many forms for thousands of years. From Roman crucifixion to American lethal injection, capital punishments have one common goal: to offer retribution to a guilty party. However, in recent years, the death penalty has come under intense scrutiny. There are a great number of people who believe it should be abolished entirely and some who believe it should be used only in the most humane ways. In this paper, I will argue that the death penalty is justifiable in cases where a defendant is found guilty of murder.