The Debate Over Death Penalty

The death penalty is the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime (law.cornell.edu, 2015). The first Congress of the United States authorized the federal death penalty on June 25, 1790 (deathpenalty.org, 2011). The death penalty can also be referred to as capital punishment, however capital punishment also includes a sentence to life in prison, as opposed to strictly executions. A convict can be sentenced to death by various methods including lethal injection, electrocution, gas chamber, firing squad, and hanging. After the death penalty was established, many debates have arisen arguing that these methods violate several of the United States’ Amendments. Select cases have been accused of violating the Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments. It is important to note that the judiciary goes through a series of processes prior to deciding a sentence for a capital crime. Many factors influencing the verdict include proportional analysis, individualized sentencing, method of execution, and classes of people not eligible of the death penalty. This paper will discuss brief descriptions of the methods used for executions, economical issues, the Supreme Court’s opinion regarding the death penalty, as well as important factors that make up the proportional analysis, individual sentencing process, method used, and determining classes of people who are not eligible for the death penalty.

Death Penalty should be allowed under circumstances also known as capital punishment, where congress or any state legislature recommend the death penalty for murder and other capital crimes. Majority of the states are favor in death penalty, roughly around 32 states are favor and 18 states are against death penalty. In most cases, many argue that death penalty has violated the 8th amendment, where it bans cruel and unusual punishment. Therefore, they would go against death penalty. However, without the sentence to death, the chances of prisoner escaping prison are really high. If they are able to escape prison and get away with it, then they can continue committing crimes. Although some may argue that death penalty is harsh because if you kill someone; and then you take another person’s life, then why should yours be freed? I personally do not agree with death penalty because taking away another person’s life is not going to regain the victim’s life back. However, the victim’s family would want the person to be sentence to death, so the victim can rest in peace. I think that death penalty should be only allowed under circumstances, but then how can you really determined if the case should be ruled with death penalty? And how would the justice system know that they have made the correct decision? Did the decision of sentence to death turn out to be wrong, where the person is later found innocent? There are multiple of questions that people will be more concern about. The

In the article "The Case Against the Death Penalty," which shows up in Crime and Criminals: Opposing Viewpoints, Eric Freedman contends that capital punishment does not discourage fierce crime as well as conflicts with decreasing the crime rate. This essay will analyse Freedman 's article from the perspectives of a working man, a needy individual, and a government official.

On September 9, 1993 a seventeen year old boy, Christopher Simmons, and a few of his friends met up to discuss and devise a plan to commit a robbery and possibly even a murder, just for the sake of fun. Simmons’ plan was not complicated: find someone to burglarize, tie up the victim and either leave the victim tied to a tree or push them off a bridge. Simmons and his accomplice climbed through a window and proceeded into the bedroom of the victim, Mrs. Cook. The two teenagers tied the woman up and loaded her into the back of her own minivan. They drove to the state park at the edge of town, where they had planned to dispose of the body and that is exactly what they did. The boys were caught later on that month and put on trial for cold

Capital Punishment has historically divided the United States and its meaning has changed depending on the time period. Capital Punishment, the “punishment by death for a crime,” has existed in societies throughout history. In the United States, the constitutionality of Capital Punishment is a debated topic; but the morality behind the death penalty is an often passionate and intense argument. At the birth of the United States and creation of the Constitution, the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments have been interpreted to permit the death penalty. While the Fifth Amendment states, “no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law;” the Fourteenth Amendment restricts “cruel and unusual punishment.” Bruce Nelson,

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

The use of death as a punishment for one’s crimes is not a new concept in early American history. Up until the 1960s, the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution have permitted the use of death as a penalty to those who committed heinous crimes. However, the fundamental legality of the death penalty is being

The debate on whether capital punishment is an effective way to prevent or reduce crime is a source of constant controversy. Supporters of capital punishment believe that it can be used to prevent future crimes. People against this topic, on the other hand, think that “an eye for an eye” mentality is barbaric and goes against basic human morals.

Johansen, Jay. "The Death Penalty Deters Crime." The Death Penalty. Ed. Mary E. Williams. San Diego: Greenhaven, 2002. N. pag. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 15 Nov. 2016. In this article, the author examines the crime rates when it comes having the death penalty. The information I want to include is the dates of when crime decreased when the death penalty came in, in order to refute it. This article is different from the article I will be using to refute this, for it does have data compared to this article.

The crime I think is the most severe is murder. Taking another's person’s life without their approval is the most horrible thing you can do. So therefor it deserves the most severe punishment. It is here the huge debate about the death penalty comes in. Should it really be allowed to kill murderers? Everybody's opinion is different when it comes to this subject, people agree on some things, but disagree on others. I am deeply conflicted when talking about this but most of the time i think of it as the easy way out. In my eyes dying instead of spending your life in the prison is like taking a shortcut in a marathon. You get to the goal either way but one of the options are cheating. No matter what way the prisoner gets they are still going to

The methods for carrying out the death penalty or capital punishment have varied throughout history. The word ‘capital punishment’ comes from the Latin word, capitalism (‘meaning the head’) since it was carried out through decapitation. Methods for carrying out the death penalty have ranged from boiling to death, flaying, disembowelment, impalement, stoning, shooting with a gun, and dismemberment.

Capital Punishment (also known as the death penalty) continues to remain as one of the most controversial topics when it comes down to guilty criminals. The death penalty ‘is a government sanctioned practice by which a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime’. Crimes that usually end in death penalty are known as capital punishments or capital offenses. The topic of the death penalty has been quite a controversial topic since it first began. It has become such a problem that some states and countries have even decided to destroy the death penalty from their system of government. A total of 102 countries have decided to completely get rid of it. As of 2016, about fifty eight countries still use the death penalty. A total

The death penalty is a very controversial subject for everyone, especially in the US. Some people think that it should be abolished and others think that it should stay a part of the government’s form of punishment. People think that the death penalty is a good way to deter crime because it should scare the person who is committing the crime. Some also feel that keeping the death penalty will cut down on government costs. The opposing side believes that the crimes would happen with or without the death penalty around. The different methods bring up many other issues as in are they humane or are they inhumane. Another argument they bring up is what is killing someone for killing someone teaching?

In my judgment the death penalty doesn’t make much of a difference we haven’t seen any crime lowered in the states where it is executed, many argue that this helps to lower crime, but the reality is different. Another

I found a chart on the website http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state. The chart on the site shows that murder rates were actually higher in states with the death penalty than in states that did not have the death penalty (Death Penalty Information Center, 2010). If the death penalty is a deterrent, wouldn’t these rates be reversed? In an article published in the New York Times entitled ABSENCE OF EXECUTIONS: A special report.; States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates, states that states who do have the death penalty actually have higher murder rates than the national average and in the past twenty years the rates have been found to be 48 to 101 percent higher than the states who do not have the death penalty (Bonner, Raymond and Fessenden, Ford, 2000). The article also states that as of 1998 Hawaii had the fifth lowest homicide rate in the nation and Hawaii is one of the states in which no death penalty is enforced (Bonner, Raymond and Fessenden, Ford, 2000). This illustrates to me that the death penalty in fact does not act as a deterrent for one to not commit violent crime. If it were a deterrent it would show that states with the death penalty had lower homicide rates than those states without the death penalty. There is also a statement in the article from John O’Hair, a Detroit District Attorney, that basically stated that