The Death Penalty Is Justified

The code of Hammurabi, dating back to 1772 BC, is one of the oldest recorded legal codes and reflects the early Babylonians’ views of justice. The code is best known for “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” By enumerating punishments for certain crimes the code removes ambiguity and combined with its relatively harsh penalties, especially on lower class citizens, served as an effective deterrent. More profoundly however, Hammurabi’s code formally shifted justice-seeking responsibilities from the individual to the state. Today, most modern legal systems are structured similarly to Hammurabi’s code with their own codified laws and listed punishments. Capital punishment and the idea that “the punishment should fit he crime” are

The first established death penalty laws date back to Ancient Babylon. Their tyrannical ruler Hammurabi established The code of Hammurabi most known to the laws an “eye for an eye and “tooth for a tooth”. Throughout the past this was the correct way of life, on the other hand the question is risen today, is the death penalty still reasonable? Coming to the question of bringing what makes our system better if we kill those who kill? The very idea of the state putting individuals to death is too much to endure. Capital punishment brings no benefits, undermining the constitution for reasons such as flawed executions, racism, innocents being framed, bias, revenge cost, and other critical reasoning. It is not only impractical, but it also does not prevent crime. Death row fails to recognize that people who are found guilty throughout the system have the potential to change, but how can they do that if they are denied the right to regain redemption in society. Nevertheless, the Death penalty should be eradicated based on the unlawful justice and its incapability to serve as a deterrent.

Many people question the need for the death penalty, the execution of those who have committed certain crimes, as a capital punishment. For instance, the author of “Against the American System of Capital Punishment”, Jack Greenburg, who is a Professor of Law at Columbia University, argues that the death penalty does not benefit society and is not necessary. Likewise, Kevin Johnson, writer of “Study Finds No Evidence Death Penalty Deters Crime”, also argues against the use of the death penalty by pointing out the flaws in the common research of deterrence. On the other hand, some may also argue for the many aids the death penalty offers. Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Policy at Fordham University, Ernest Van den Haag, with his “The Ultimate Punishment: a Defense”, and authors James M. Reams and Charles T. Putnam, with their article, “Making a Case for the Deterrence Effect of Capital Punishment”, both give arguments for the grander justice the death penalty offers. While each of these articles give very well thought out claims for the necessity of the death penalty, using arguments including racism, and deterrence, Van den Haag’s claim gives the clearest and best arguments.

Costs and Consequences of the Death Penalty, written by Mark Costanzo, neatly lists reasons for opposition, and abolishment of, the death penalty. Costanzo provides a review of the history of the death penalty, a review of how the death penalty process is working today, questions on whether or not if the death penalty is inhumane and cheaper than life imprisonment. He also questions if the death penalty is fairly applied and the impact, if any, that it has on deterrence. He closely examines the public's support of the death penalty and questions the morality of the death penalty. Finally, Costanzo provides his own resolution and alternative to the death penalty. Each of these items allows the reader an easy, and once again, neat view

The death penalty is a lot like the statement “crying over spilled milk” in the sense that it is pointless and makes no real difference with regards to the situation. The death penalty was created as a punishment for crimes committed, but even from the beginning crime was still a problem and the punishment was not a deterrent. The history concerning the death penalty is extensive and can be found documented all the way back to Ancient Babylon in 18th Century BC (Reggio). It was used as punishment for a variety of crimes varying from place to place and was, in some instances, used as the punishment for all crimes. In every one of the places and time spans where the death penalty was implemented crime was still present. Criminals were not deterred by the threat of death even then and today is no different. If someone wants to commit a crime badly enough, not even death can change their mind.

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

It can be said that the death penalty is a form of the government’s hypocrisy. It stresses that when society tolerates execution as a solution to those who are criminals, it has effects. The effect being that this is leaving an imprint on the young minds in the world and that the acceptable approach to violence is to exploit violence. To kill someone who has committed murder is a starting cycle to just be repeated. It is a craving for revenge in which is a human’s weakest link. It has been proven by many, that states with the death penalty have a much higher murder rate than those that do not carry out capital punishment. Violence is violence, no matter who commits it. Capital punishment is sending messages to others that murder is okay and the government will carry it out.

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

The death penalty has been in practice for a very long time, but murders and other capital crimes have not been stopped, and neither have the perpetrators been deterred from the act. Every year several people are murdered with almost the same frequency and brutality as ever. No proof exists that the death penalty is a better deterrence than life imprisonment. Why not settle for a punishment that is effectively deterrent yet humane enough (Michigan State University,

The whole reasoning behind the death penalty is very ignorant and idiotic. John Deer, Jesuit Priest from the Society of Jesus, said, “Behind it lies an illogical maxim: we kill those who kill to show that killing is wrong.” If the government actually believed that killing was wrong, the death penalty would have never been contrived. The only things it does is create vengeance, does not serve the cause of justice, and allows pointless infliction of immoderate punishment while less dreadful punishment can sufficiently reach the same purposes. Not only is it a bad solution but a mindless one as

Since the foundation of our nation the Death Penalty has been a way to punish prisoners that have committed heinous crimes, however since the turn of the 20th century the practice of Capital Punishment has been questioned on its usage in America and the world as a whole. The Death Penalty is used in America to punish criminals who have committed murders, or taken the life of an innocent person, and while the death penalty seems like it is doing justice to those who have killed others it is actually being used improperly in most situations, while also hindering our economy and is a means of ending more lives than necessary. The Death Penalty can be a valid source of punishment for criminals in the US however due to the misuse of this power by the government it is a huge detriment to our nation and the people that inhabit it. Because of the fact that Capital Punishment is used unfairly, and ineffectively in our nation it is an obsolete form of punishment and should have no place in the United States justice department.

The death penalty, also known as capital punishment is a legal procedure in which a state executes a person for crimes he/she has committed. This punishment has been implemented by many states, and is normally used for atrocious crimes, especially murder. It is also used on crimes against the state such as treason, crimes against humanity, espionage, and violent crimes while other states use it as part of military justice. There are mixed reactions on capital punishment depending on one’s faith, and the state they come from. In my view, I am not in favor of death penalty, as I strongly believe that, death penalty is unacceptable and an inhumane practice for it denies one the right to live. Death penalty does not deter crime, it is an act

The Death Penalty has been a part of humanity since its origin, with the first recorded laws dating back to the Fifth Century BC in Rome.[1] Over time, there have been many different forms of execution, from hanging, to burning at the stake, to the current lethal injection. I believe that the Justice System must enforce penalties that fit the crime. The argument against the death penalty is one that stands on murderers, and other people who commit the worst of crimes, being entitled to live long, easy lives, when their victims had theirs cut short. While there is a concern about executing innocent people, death row inmates receive much higher exoneration rates, they account for one percent of the prison population, but they receive twelve percent of the exonerations.[2] Lethal injection is also called into question as an execution method, and rightly so. It is too expensive, and the drugs used are often untested as a result of attacks on pharmaceutical companies that provide them. There are several other methods that are not only cheaper, but much more effective. When someone is executed due to lethal injection, there is a much higher change for a botched execution than any other method.[3] The Death Penalty is a punishment that the United States of America needs to maintain, however, it does require some reform in order to be the most beneficial to society. If used effectively, the number of prisoners serving life sentences would be reduced, and the cost to the taxpayers

How would you feel if one day you were sleeping at home and someone broke into your house and barbarically murdered someone in your family and didn’t get what they deserve? The death penalty was first put into use in 18th Century BC It was a way to treat the barbaric acts of others. It is still used today in many forms like the “death serum”. The death penalty is a good thing to have in all countries, is brings justice to the ones that deserve it, and it is typically quick and painless. I believe that the death penalty is the largest controversy over the death penalty and that it is that it sometimes is unethical, but many believe that the death penalty is sometimes the only way to have someone get what they deserve. One of the big reasons that the death penalty is used is for the most heinous of crimes such as murder treason or espionage. Another reason why they are used is because they are an important punishment that preserves law and order, it decreases crime, and is less costly for the prisons to hold them in imprisonment for their life.

The death penalty has been around for ages, but criticism about the death penalty is new. The has been criticism has soared to a new high because some people believe it is inhuman. In recent years debate about death penalty has risen to a new height. The pros and cons of the death penalty are being weighed in court rooms across America because of court cases killing innocent people. While the cons have noble intentions behind them for saving a human life. The pros far outweigh the cons because certain situations, the only true justice is through the death penalty. The death penalty is beneficial to America due to the cost of keeping prisoners in prison, and it is the only moral way to punish some crimes while also keeping some crimes from happening.