The Five Arguments For The Death Penalty

From the statistics used by Mulhausen in the article, “How the Death Penalty Saves Lives”, it seems that the goals of the death penalty were achieved to begin with, but since then it looks as if the death penalty threat is no longer a threat at all. In observing statistics provided to us by the Death Penalty Information Center, since 1990, murder rates have steadily declined; a very good sign for the nation as a whole. What interests me about the statistics is that even when the numbers were just beginning to be taken in 1990, the murder rates in states that do not enforce the death penalty are lower than those in states that do. This observation is very significant in correspondence to the debate regarding the effectiveness and need, or lack thereof, of the death penalty. The numbers back up my claim that the death penalty is not the best method. You cannot make the case that the death penalty itself is destroying crime because the states without the penalty have a declining crime rate, or the case that it destroys crime at a higher or faster rate because the numbers tell a different story. It cannot conclusively or confidently be said that the death penalty does not destroy crime whatsoever, but the facts of the matter do inspire doubt in my mind. Criminals who know they are likely to face death, if caught, are more willing to commit crimes than criminals who know for a fact that the death penalty is not, and cannot be invoked upon them if caught and convicted. This tells me one of two things: the criminals committing these crimes in death penalty states are so good at what they do, they do not fear getting caught, or that these criminals know even if they do get convicted and sentenced to death they are getting the easy way out. These death row convicts do not have to go to prison and suffer

Many people who are supporters of the death penalty say that it’s a successful deterrent. But this isn’t true because the death penalty is administered very inconsistently and arbitrarily. “Only a small proportion of first-degree murders is sentenced to death, and even fewer are executed” (Bedau). There are also several states that have a lower criminal rate without using capital punishment. For example Wisconsin, Iowa, and Michigan all get along just fine without the use of the death penalty. Also “…all other Western industrial countries get along quite well without killing their citizens” (Ryan). There are many judges that are against the use of capital punishment as well.

All of the research that I have done suggests that the death penalty is not a major source of deterrence for criminals to commit severe crimes such as homicide. In a 2009 survey of America’s top criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and written by Professor Michael Radelet, eighty-eight percent of the expert criminologists stated that they do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent for criminals to commit homicide. Respondents to this survey were asked to base their answers on research, rather

Those that are for the death penalty claim that it will serve as a deterrent and is the only way for retribution against murderers. Both issues are highly debatable and have even been a subject of criticism. Punishment as a deterrence has been used for ages. This concept does work, however it should not be applied to all criminals, in my opinion. Some pro capital punishment individuals claim that it is an efficient deterrence against criminals. In an article “Death penalty is a deterrence”, the authors claim that by practicing the death penalty, violent crimes will decrease.”violent crime has declined eleven percent, with murder showing the largest decline at even more than twenty two percent. We believe that this has occurred in part because of the strong signal that the death penalty sent to violent criminals and murders.” These statistics taken from this article may be inaccurate and should be closely examined.

Which is proven to lead to stress, anger issues, and insane crimes but from my point of view if you really think about it the Death Penalty could show killers that killing is okay and let me explain why. It's basically a cycle, the Death Penalty shows that you should pay for what you did criminals might think the same way for example let's say you owe someone some money but you never gave them the money that person reacts and kills you you're consequence for not paying is your death. The Death Penalty works the same way for example you break the law and kill somebody and they catch you and you get sent to death row your consequence would be your death. Also in my research it stated that the Death Penalty could reduce crimes in our society but according to my other research it stated that crime rates went up and it also give facts that compared to the time when the Death Penalty was invented crime rates went up. All in all my perspective on the Death Penalty is that we should get rid of it because it can lead our world to more negativity. So I advise you fellow American Citizens to agree with me that the Death Penalty is bad and should not exist. So just remember that this paper is to inform you to

Yes, I agree that the death penalty works as a crime deterrent in this country. Although life imprisonment without opportunity for parole seems to be a popular alternative to the death penalty in polls, a problem with the LWOP alternative is that many people are very skeptical about the ability of correctional authorities to keep capital murderers imprisoned for life (Bohm,Haley 2014). Therefore, many American citizens fear the worst as far as convicted delinquencies believing that if they are set free before their time of receiving the necessary consequence of such crime, they may be prone to returning back into society and commit a similar crime. However, I feel that some criminals learn from their mistakes and few rarely return back into

The death penalty is a rather controversial topic, people tend to have a very strong opinion of being either for or against it. The reasons vary as to why a person is for or against the death penalty. Often those that oppose the death penalty argue for the sanctity of life, while proponents for the death penalty argue that it deters crime. The most convincing argument for the death penalty is retribution, the punishment must fit the crime.

The primary reason why people argue against the reinstation of the death penalty is because of the execution of innocent people which in turn, leads to serious miscarriages of justice. This is the primary argument as to why Capital Punishment should not be reinstated because, there have been unlawful executions of innocent civilians who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. This argument aims mainly towards the Derek Bentley case as Derek Bentley was wrongly executed for the murder of a police officer when it was his accomplice, Christopher Craig who pulled the trigger and killed the police officer. It was the phrase “let him have it” that was interpreted to state that it was Bentley who told Craig to kill the officer instead of surrendering the weapon. This case was one of the main pieces of evidence required for protestors to protest about having Capital Punishment abolished in the United Kingdom as Bentley was only 19 when he was executed. The conviction for Derek Bentley was eventually abolished in 1998. Mahmood Hussain Matan was another example of a wrongful execution as he was executed in 1952 after being wrongfully convicted for the murder of Lily Volpert. His case was eventually quashed in 1998 by the Court of Appeal making it the first case referred to the Court of Appeal under the new Criminal Cases Review Commission. This proves why people want the Death Penalty to stay abolished because, over time, there have been serious miscarriages of justice towards the

Many people who are supporters of the death penalty say that it's a successful deterrent. But this isn't true because the death penalty is administered very inconsistently and arbitrarily. "Only a small proportion of first-degree murders is sentenced to death, and even fewer are executed" (Bedau). There are also several states that have a lower criminal rate without using capital punishment. For example Wisconsin, Iowa, and Michigan all get along just fine without the use of the death penalty. Also "…all other Western industrial countries get along quite well without killing their citizens" (Ryan). There are many judges that

Proponents of the death penalty also view it as a deterrent to crime. (“Same old”, 1990). Just by having the possible punishment of death as an end result to a heinous crime has lowered the murder rate in some states. The feeling is that the more executions you have, the lower the homicide rate you will have. Not to mention the innocent lives you will save. Supporters of capital punishment will cite studies showing that murderers who are allowed to live will inevitably kill again. Studies have shown that murderers awaiting their death penalty sentence to be carried out have killed correction officers, knowing there could be no additional fate assigned to them.

The Supreme Court of the United States yesterday ordered the suspension of executions of prisoners waiting on death row since before 2012, when the practice was abolished, reiterating once again that this punishment is completely unconstitutional. This happened after the adoption of a law at the state level was established three years ago in the state of Connecticut banning since then again condemn capital punishment convicted of serious crimes , except for 11 prisoners who were already awaiting their conviction.

The death penalty deters criminals, even more so than life imprisonment. A common question asked by many professionals today is “Do death penalty executions deter criminals?” This is usually followed by asking if it deters better than a life imprisonment term. The process of punishing these criminals for their crimes will make other would-be felony committers think twice about doing it. A way to better stop these crimes would be to make states automatically execute death row inmates after they have been imprisoned for at least a year and no new evidence has been found in their case. Using harsher executions methods such as hangings, firing squads, or electric chairs would increase the deterrent effect even further. My reason for dealing with this issue is because I believe that the effectiveness of the death penalty is an important issue that must be addressed. I can not personally attest to the effectiveness because I have had no interaction with the death penalty, but I still believe in its effectiveness.

The death penalty has been a controversial issue for many years. Those who support the death penalty find it to be a fitting form of punishment for criminal actions. Others suggest that the death penalty is an inhumane practice, even towards criminals. Over the years, it is clear that there are some fatal flaws in how the death penalty operates. Too often in the past has the death penalty fallen victim to courtroom biases. Furthermore, the death penalty is an incredibly expensive and time-consuming process. However, the determining factor of whether the death penalty can be considered justice or not depends primarily on how it affects the overall crime rate. In light of this, William Tucker - the American Spectator’s New York correspondent and CEO of TheElevator.com – and Eric M. Freedman – a professor at Hofstra University School of Law – present evidence of the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of the death penalty system.

Many questions arise from this punishment because there is no real justification. The death penalty should not be legal because it does not deter crime effectively as it should. There is no credible evidence that capital punishment deters crime. The death penalty advocates that it would deter crime but that is not the case. Studies have consistently failed to demonstrate that executions deter

Capital punishment serves as a deterrence to the would-be murderers. However, many people do not think it is true as many previous studies have been proven false (Rubin). The reason why all those previous study fail is, because they do not take account enough constant factors in a statistical sense. Now this problem will not occur as we have better data and better statistical techniques than were available to others back then (Rubin). Studies has indicated that if we decide not to execute murderers, then we are making a decision that will lead to many additional murders in society (Rubin). “In United States, during a period of increased use of the death penalty, the murder rate had dropped by 26 per cent from 24,562 in 1993 to 18,209 in 1997, the lowest for years (Pakistan: 10 Arguments).” It is estimated that each state execution deters somewhere between 4 and 25 murders per year during the 1978-1997 based on the panel data (Zimmerman). Both data implied that execution indeed help deter additional murders as murder rate decrease in the article, Pakistan: 10 Arguments Each For and Against Capital Punishment.