Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, “is the lawful infliction of death as a punishment.” (thefreedictionary.com). The topic is quite controversial, as its merits and effectiveness as a deterrent for crime have been argued many times over. However, the death penalty is perfectly within reason, as it rids the streets of criminals that have committed serious crimes and is also cheaper for the government versus giving life sentences. Even so, there are many who are against the death penalty. One such argument that has been made is that the death penalty is barbaric because many innocents have been sent to their deaths. Although this would be true if these opposers lived before 1986, that is not the case in today’s world considering there is access to DNA tests and profiling. According to www.interpol.int, “Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) molecules contain the information all living cells in the human body need to function. They also control the inheritance of characteristics from parents to offspring.” (interpol.int). DNA profiling plays an important role in crimes as it has the potential to link a series of crimes and to place a suspect at the scene of a crime. Not only that, but also DNA can help to prove a suspect’s innocence. With DNA testing, no innocent person will die from the death penalty on the grounds that DNA tests can be used as concrete evidence to prove the suspect’s innocence.
To open, one should know what exactly DNA profiling is and its use for
I acknowledge that the occasional execution of an innocent person is a tragic event, and the answer is not to dismantle the system, but to exercise even more care in its application.
Capital punishment is one of the most controversial topics in today’s world. Many people believe that it is morally wrong to have capital punishment as a sentence to a crime. People also do believe that it is morally permissible for a severe crime. Capital punishment is also known as the death penalty. It can be given as a sentence when somebody is convicted of an extremely violent crime. The biggest issue that can be seen with this is that somebody could be innocent and sentenced with the death penalty because of the nature of the crime that they have been accused of even if they didn’t commit it. I believe that there is a moral line between using the death penalty and using other forms of punishment.
Senator for Utah Orrin Hatch once said, “Capital punishment is our society’s recognition of the sanctity of human life,” (Brainy Quote). While the arguments for both sides of the debate over the morality of the death penalty are vast, the bottom line is that the death penalty does not disregard human life, but rather it reveres it, as Hatch said. Morality is defined as, “The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct,” (The Free Dictionary). One who seeks to protect a person who has committed a heinous crime such as murder is arguably not in accords with what is right and wrong. Therefore, although killing is generally accepted as being wrong, the death penalty is sometimes the only solution to bring justice to a
There are many reasons to both support and oppose the death penalty. Many people can feel very strongly about whether or not they approve of this method of punishment. I feel that the death penalty is wrong, and I believe that there is much support to back this up. I believe that the death penalty is wrong because it is not an effective deterrent, racially and economically bias, unreliable, expensive, and morally wrong of society.
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 death penalty is absolutely outrageous. There is no real reason that the government should feel that it has the right to execute people. Capital punishment is murder just as much as the people being executed murdered. The is no need for the death penalty and it needs to be abolished. It goes against the Constitution which states that there will be no cruel and unusual punishment. There is nothing crueler than killing a person.
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
Why should the death penalty be abolished? The death penalty should be abolished because of many reasons. Many people believe the saying, 'an eye for an eye'. But when will people realize that just because someone may have killed a loved one that the best thing for that person is to die also. People don't realize that they are putting the blood of another person life on their hands. This makes them just as guilty as the person who committed the crime: the only difference is that they didn't use weapon except their mouth to kill them. The death penalty should be abolished because it is racist, punishes the poor, condemns those who are innocent to death, and is a cruel punishment.
Thousands of people will attack the death penalty. They will give emotional speeches about the one innocent man or woman who might accidentally get an execution sentence. However, all of these people are forgetting one crucial element. They are forgetting the thousands of victims who die every year by the hands of heartless murderers. There are more murderers out there than people who are wrongly convicted, and that is what we must remember.
The death penalty has long been the most prevalent and the most severe punishment in the world. Humanity has been using death as a sentence seen the time humans acquired the ability to slay each other. In many primitive societies, the act of killing a person as retribution for violating a crime was adopted by the governing powers of that those societies. Since the establishment of the Ancient Laws of China, one of the oldest continuously operating legal system on the Earth, the death penalty has been recognized as an adequate punishment for certain offenses. Also, in the 18th Century B.C., the Babylonian code of law or the Code of King Hammurabi recognized legalized execution as punishment for twenty-five different crimes. The death penalty as its roots in America before the colonization of the New World by the Europeans. Since the time of the Natives American tribes, the death penalty has been used to punish thief’s, murderers, and so on. Then when the Europeans colonies defined themselves as the United States of American in 1776, a new guideline of rights was ratified. These rights make up the Constitution of America and lay down an expectation for the treatment of America’s citizens. However, is the death penalty appropriate or even constitutional in this age?
The Death Penalty Discussion In today’s world terrible crimes are being committed daily. Many people believe that these criminals deserve one fate; death. Death penalty is the maximum sentence used in punishing people who kill another human being and is a very controversial method of punishment. Capital punishment is a legal infliction of death penalty and since ancient times it has bee used to punish a large variety of offences.
There is a lot of controversy about whether the death penalty should be legal or not. It is widely used, with only 18 out of the 50 states having abolished it, but should it be permitted, regardless of the popularity of it? The answer is no. It should be abolished because it demeans life, is cruel, prison is a better punishment, and it is not effective.
Life is sacred. This is an ideal that the majority of people can agree upon to a certain extent. For this reason taking the life of another has always been considered the most deplorable of crimes, one worthy of the harshest available punishment. Thus arises one of the great moral dilemmas of our time. Should taking the life of one who has taken the life of others be considered an available punishment? Is a murderer's life any less sacred than the victim's is? Can capital punishment, the death penalty, execution, legal murder, or whatever a society wishes to call it, be morally justifiable? The underlying question in this issue is if any kind of killing, regardless of reason, can be accepted. In this
Is it OK for a man to commit heinous murders but not OK for our valued legal
Do you believe that people should get the death penalty? People should get the death penalty because Americans are just wasting our money on criminals who aren't learning their lesson. People should get the death penalty because they have far too many privileges in prison that people actually want to go there. People should get the death penalty because if there is a bigger consequence for their actions there wouldn't be as many people in jail. It would be advantageous for the American civilization to adopt the death penalty as a common penalty.