The Death Penalty Is Wrong

These statistic, the death penalty will reduce further crimes, are used by some to claim that the death penalty is an ok method of punishment. This is not actually the case. Scientific studies have consistently failed to

In this paper I will be discussing everything you need to know about the death penalty such as its pros and cons. While the innocent can be killed, the death penalty has its pros because it prevents them from killing again if they are released or have escaped from prison, it helps overpopulated prisons, and it can help victims’ families get justice and closure. Not only can the innocent be killed, but in the past the death penalty was very inhumane. To some its feels right but to others they feel like 2 wrongs don’t make a right. Most people think that the defendant deserves the death penalty, but what does the defendants’ family think?

The death penalty has been considered one of the most severe punishments by governments. However, recently, many people have rebelled against the death penalty. The death penalty is an act that is similar to being ruled under fascism instead of democracy. Under the rule of democracy, citizens are responsible for the acts of other fellow citizens, which can be inferred that crime is caused by the lack of responsibility in society. The victim's loved ones suffer due to the victim's death. It is understandable that they would want the murderer dead, but society often does not work that way. People need to think on behalf of the society.

The “Does the death penalty bring closure to a victim’s family?” article shares how this family believes that the death penalty does not necessarily bring closure, but it brought relief. I feel that providing two different perspectives will cause the audience to be open to my findings and have questions that I will later address in the paper. At the end of the introduction, I will share my ethos on the topic. While I do not have a lot of ethos I can share that I, like the readers, want to understand the topic more as I am now a tax payer and if the U.S. should still use this form of

Hugo Bedau also argues that deterrent effects cannot decide this debate. He states that the deterrent effect is strictly a fact and not a moral principle. He says, “The facts as they currently stand do not point strongly and overwhelmingly to the futility of the death penalty” Therefore deterrent effects cannot decide this debate.

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.

“A recent study by Professor Michael Radelet and Traci Lacock of the University of Colorado found that 88% of the nation’s leading criminologists do not believe the death penalty is an effective deterrent to crime. The study, Do Executions Lower Homicide Rates? The Views of Leading Criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Crimonology, concluded, “There is overwhelming consensus among America’s top criminologists that the empirical research conducted on the deterrence question fails to support the threat or use of the death penalty.” A previous study in 1996 had come to similar conclusions.”

The death penalty is a controversial issue because it involves a dispute between sides which hold opposing views. Those who support the death penalty believe that it deters criminals and makes them think twice. Some supporters claim that it is morally right and gives victims justice. Furthermore, supporters of the death penalty think that it is the only way to fully protect society.According to “Solid Majority Continue to Support Death Penalty” ”About six in ten americans favor the use of death penalty for a person convicted of murder”(Solid 2016). On the other hand those who oppose death penalty think that the cost outweighs the benefits. They also argue that the death penalty can be faulty at times. Opponents argue that the death penalty

When it comes to the raging topic of the death penalty there will always be two sides, those who are anti- death penalty and those others who are pro- death penalty. Those who are anti- penalty argue that there are multifarious reasons why the death penalty should be abolished. According to CNN, the United States is one of the top six countries in the nation with most executions. Over the past 40 past years, executions in the U.S have increased drastically. The increase of the death penalty is due to lack of proper consideration for human morality and actual value of life. If we succumb to the notion of death being the right way to about dealing with criminals doesn’t that make us just as bad as them. Where’s the humanity in that.

According to statistics, they have proven that death penalties keep dangerous criminals from committing the same crimes over and over. Ten percent of those who are on death row already have a previous homicidal record. Murder rates have decreased ever since the death penalty was enforced. Advocates have also proven that the cost of keeping a murderer locked up for the rest of their lives becomes an economic burden on the state. Abolitionist have argued and argued that the death penalty does not deter murder. That is like saying, “Statistics show that older people have more dogs than younger people. Therefore, the older you get, the more dogs you will have.” Correlation does not imply causation (Capital).

However, no individual has ever been able to present any credible evidence that supports the theory of deterrence. Decades of research across the country has failed to produce signs of a higher murder rate in states that have abolished the death penalty. The theory of deterrence assumes that a murderer is examining the costs and benefits of the anticipated criminal act and taking a moment to think rationally. In the United States, the death penalty is only handed down for about one out of every one hundred homicides. A murderer has a greater chance of being killed by the planned victim or in a confrontation with the police, and therefor has no reason to fear the death penalty if there is only a one in a hundred chance they will actually receive it (Jackson, Jackson, and Shapiro 33). Moreover, most homicides are unplanned, impulsive acts and to imply that a murderer is thinking calm and cooly outweighing their options in such an emotionally charged environment is simply idiotic.

There is substantial evidence supporting the fact that the death penalty does not deter crime in the United States. Death Penalty Focus, a website dedicated to providing the public with information about the death penalty, stated that scientific studies have constantly failed at proving that the death penalty deters crime more that long prison sentences, including life in prison without parole.

2. Many researchers say deterrence data is “fraught with technical and conceptual errors, including inappropriate methods of statistical analysis, and failures to consider all relevant factors that drive murder rates.”

In contrast, the question of deterrence can be answered objectively using common sense and statistics. By analyzing different arguments for and against the death penalty, such as the "fear of death" myth, the cost of the death penalty, and the racial and economic bias of the death penalty, it can be shown that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent of crime.

An issue that has continually created tension in today's society is whether the death penalty serves as a justified and valid form of punishment. Whenever the word "death penalty" comes up, extremists from both sides start yelling out their arguments. One side says deterrence, the other side says there's a potential of executing an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder. Crime is an evident part of society, and everyone is aware that something must be done about it. Most people know the threat of crime to their lives, but the question lies in the methods and action in which it should be dealt with. In several parts of