The Debate On Capital Punishment

Capital punishment has been a controversial issue that still exists in America today. Capital punishment is a law passed by the government to punish any individual that has been convicted of committed a heinous crime. The death penalty has been a method used throughout history as punishment for criminals. The punishment also known as the death penalty is a scheduled execution, which would be done with lethal injection. The reason why this punishment is chosen is because when crimes are committed that shock the conscience, the immediate emotional reaction is to retaliate with severe punishment (Schnurbush 2016). The death penalty is debated when it is brought up, opinions vary from one group of people to another, one side says the execution is murder, and the other saying that it is justice being done. Each side presents valid arguments to why people should be for it or against it; people’s opinions are formed by personal beliefs.

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.

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

“The use of the death penalty in the United States has been rapidly declining since the end of the 1990s” (Dieter, 2015). This is contrast to the believes of the Founding Fathers where “the death penalty was widely accepted at the time the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights were ratified” (Gardner & Anderson, 2014). While the crimes have not changed, aspects of capital punishment which were once viewed as constitutional, today are deemed cruel and unusual. The prevailing liberal view sees the death penalty as morally unjustified and a vengeful form retribution. “It is the most brutal form of state power, requires massive state administrations and it costs significantly more than life imprisonment which is both more humane and equally effective” (Davidson, 2015). They point to the lack of deterrence it provides and highlight the racial and gender biases of the criminal justice system and the potential for the execution of the innocent by the State. In contrast, those in favor of capital punishment see it as a valid, moral and constitutional punishment as punishments should be imposed in proportion to the crime. The death penalty is reserved for the most violent of crimes in society and without it, justice is not achieved for victims and their families. The death penalty must be viewed again as a valid, moral and legal

The use of the death penalty in the United States has always been a controversial topic. The death penalty, also known as Capital Punishment, is a legal process where a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a heinous crime. The judicial decree that someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence, while the actual enforcement is an execution (Bishop 1). Over the years, most of the world has abolished the death penalty. But the United States government, and a majority of its citizens, defend and support its continued use. There is evidence, however, that some attitudes about the death penalty are changing.

The controversy with capital punishment has been debated for hundreds of years. The Supreme Court is likely to sway its opinion often about whether it should be abolished or instituted throughout the United States. There have been many court cases and lawsuits regarding this issue that has suggested that legislation would be the most effective way to ending the discussion once and for all. In order to abolish the death penalty, the majority has to agree in support of abolition for any legislature to repeal it. This support would have to defend itself through the occasional questions of reinstatement of capital punishment. In order to abolish capital punishment, abolitionist have to provide alternatives to the death penalty that would make sure the criminals that committed the crimes receive harsh enough punishment that would please those wanting to keep the death penalty. Whether or not they are able to accomplish such a task is hard to say. The death penalty needs to be removed on the grounds that is unconstitutional.

Cases tend to occur frequently in urban areas where poverty and weaker social ties are prevalent. Groups like Amnesty International are working hard to intervene in cases where vital evidence was suppressed, human rights were violated, or DNA evidence could have been used to exonerate the individual. Failure of the Appellate Courts to intervene in cases where significant evidence of innocence or human rights violations have occurred is appalling and downright disgusting. The only way for this injustice to be rectified is by amending current laws, remove loopholes that allow governing officials to sit idly by ignoring the problem, or abolish the death penalty altogether.

There's a long history of capital punishment in the USA as it has been used since colonial times. The American constitution gives each state the right to govern over their own criminal laws. 31 states still have capital punishment and they use it on a number of crimes, including treason and crimes causing death, and use a number of different methods to kill those convicted of capital crimes. The death penalty has its supporters and opponents. Both groups have heated and emotional reasons for their point of view, plus, they each have their statistics to strengthen their argument. Additionally, each side uses the US Constitution to bolster their argument. Proponents use the Fifth Amendment which outlines the conditions for capital crimes. Opponents

Capital punishment which is also known as the death penalty refers to the court-ordered execution of a prisoner. It is a punishment of a serious crime called the capital offense and generally involves felony murder and more. Not all states have laws that support the death penalty but those that do are prisoners sentenced to death. There are people who agree with the death penalty because people see capital punishment as payment for murder. Those who oppose capital punishment like me argue that the death penalty is unjust, immoral, and indefensible state sanctioned murder of a human being. Even though they have committed a heinous crime, that vengeance is not the answer for healing the grief of victim’s families or communities or other loved ones. It does not act as a deterrent to crime, and is not an acceptable alternative to long-term imprisonment because the death penalty carries the possibility of wrongful execution of an innocent person.

Capital Punishment is defined as the “legally authorized killing of someone as punishment for a crime”. This is also known as the Death Penalty. The death penalty has been an ongoing debate in the United States since as early as the colonial period. Most people including myself are for the death penalty for many reasons. The death penalty provides closure for victims; it is a warning to other criminals because it acts as a deterrent. I believe criminals should face consequences for their actions (an eye for an eye). I will later compare and contrast two great philosophers known as Jeffery Reiman and van der Haag. These two philosophers have two opposing theories regarding Capital Punishment.

The United States of America is quite divided on the issue of capital punishment, also known as the death penalty. Capital punishment is defined as one person taking the life of another as a punishment for a crime. The death penalty carries a risk of punishing the innocent, is unethical, and is an ineffective deterrent of crime versus the alternative of life in prison without parole. Since capital punishment is the most severe order of punishment, people would believe the system to be perfect before ended someone else’s life. As humans, it is inevitable for us to make errors. However, when a life is at stake, error cannot be an option. The sad reality is that the system of execution has serious flaws and this is why the United States should

A rarity exists in a single topic that can cause a degree of controversy so large that it attracts politicians, judges, community organizers, economists and even religious officials to discuss it. This issue is one that some support and others oppose; that is, the issue of capital punishment. Capital punishment is loosely defined as the execution of an offender who is sentenced to death after conviction by a court of law for a criminal offense (Encyclopedia Britannica). This execution of an offender model exists in many nations and also in many forms. For instance, in the country of Zimbabwe, executions are carried out for individuals convicted of treason and drug trafficking, and is exclusively in the form of hanging (Death Penalty Worldwide 2015). Although capital punishment exists around the world, the focus of this paper will be centered on the United States, on the state level. Capital punishment is legal in some states, but the legality does not imply that it is free of problems. There have been growing concerns and strong evidence of the problem of capital punishment. However, the two issues featured in this paper will be issues on racial bias, questions of innocence. These concerns will be analyzed in the following sections: definition of the problem, unit of analysis, analysis of political coalitions, analysis of policy

Burgess, Regehr & Roberts (2013), lamented “The Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791, controlled the use of capital punishment by prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment in the Eighth Amendment” (p. 175). The justice system has valid alternatives to the death penalty, such as life imprisonment without parole, that constitute adequate punishment even for the most repugnant crimes. Moreover, it is dangerous to engage in ethical equivalencies and hierarchically rank human beings; the point should not be to judge whose life is more vulnerable, but rather to affirm that all human life must be valued. A system that ends a human existence cannot stand in a righteous and just society. The solution is for the justice system to provide remedy to victims, not vengeance. Moreover, this view fails to give due credence to the reality that the death penalty system has not been and cannot be proven to be a successful deterrent, is more expensive than relevant alternatives because of the appellate process, is subject to human error, and is often riddled with economic and racial bias in its application. The irrevocable nature of the death penalty renders it an unsustainable and indefensible remedy in an imperfect justice system. What should be done to the death penalty is not an intellectual exercise. The death penalty can divide and damage families, due to the fact that death is final and because individuals have deeply held feelings about the morality and utility of executions, unlike any other punishment the death penalty creates irreconcilable conflict amongst the surviving family members of murder

The death penalty is quickly becoming one of the more controversial topics in the United States. Currently, there are 31 states where capital punishment is legal. As of April 2016, there have been 1,431 executions in the United States, but the number of executions in recent years has been steadily decreasing (Timmons 2017). The death penalty can be put up for moral debate, and one can ask oneself whether the death penalty is ever morally permissible. There are some pros and cons to having capital punishment. For example, deterrence and prevention are good reasons to have the death penalty, but, in reality, the cons far outweigh the possible benefits that may come from capital punishment. The

Putting people to death that have been judged by their peers to have committed certain extremely heinous crimes is a practice of ancient standing, but in the United States in the last part of the twentieth century, it has become a very controversial issue. Changing views on this difficult issue and the many legal challenges to capital punishment working their way through the courts resulted in halting all executions in the United States in 1967. Eventually, the Supreme Court placed a moratorium on capital punishment in 1972 but later upheld it in 1977. Restoring capital punishment is the will of the people, and yet many voices are raised against it. Heated public debate