The Global Debate on Death Penalty

The legitimacy of the use of capital punishment has been tarnished by its widespread misuse , which has clouded our judgment regarding the justifiability of the death penalty as a punitive measure. However, the problems with capital punishment, such as the “potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness and racial skew" , are not a basis for its abolition, as the world of homicide suffer from these problems more acutely. To tackle this question, one must disregard the currently blemished universal status quo and purely assess the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty as a punitive measure. Through unprejudiced examination of the death penalty and its consequential impacts, it is evident that it is a punishment that effectively serves its retributive, denunciatory, deterrent, and incapacitative goals.

Should capital punishment be practiced in the United States? This question has been highly debated for many years because of the numerous, often conflicting perspectives from which various parties have attempted to answer it. These parties range from high-ranking politicians seeking to lower the national crime rate to the average United States taxpayer who does not want to see his or her money being spent inefficiently. In addition to such empirical concerns, moral issues such as conceptions of justice arise as well. After examining the history of the issue, its international status, and the arguments of the opposing factions, we will recommend that capital punishment

Capital punishment has been a part of our justice system since the beginning. For many years the controversy of the death penalty has created social issues that question the validity and fairness based on concerns of moral and human rights. Even though many other nations use this form of justice, the fact that the United States views itself as a leader of human rights brings question to whether we are practicing what we preach. Nevertheless, the majority of US citizens are in support of the death penalty but does that make it rational? In the following paragraphs I will discuss my opinions on capital punishment and talk about issues concerning the death penalty as a deterrent to crime, should it be

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, has existed in many societies for as long as one can remember. This form of discipline is enforced on those individuals who display the most unfathomable criminal behavior against other fellow beings. In recent years, there has been great controversy over the necessity of methods such as this, and whether this form of inhumane discipline is justified. Some would agree that it is the correct way to punish severe acts of crime. Others would argue that murder is a crime, not a punishment, regardless of the act being committed by the justice system or the regular civilian. In this paper, I will be addressing some of the issues surrounding capital punishment. There will be a brief description of what capital punishment is and its origin. I will also be observing the effects that this disciplinary method has on the deterrence of crime, to distinguish the success of this method compared with those less severe. I conclude that the death penalty is not humane, nor necessary, to inflict on any individual, considering the risks.

Over the past forty-years, 1,421 executions have been conducted by thirty-one states and the federal government under the capital punishment sentence (“Facts About the Death Penalty”). Throughout those years however, controversial opinions have aroused on whether the capital punishment should be permitted, its success on reflecting a deterrent effect, and even its morality. Although it is often argued that Capital punishment is appropriate when the crime reaches an egregious extent, the revocation of constitutional securities, discrimination within race and income status, as well as the insufficiency to achieve a deterrent effect prevail over the validation of society’s ultimate punishment–the death penalty.

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is one of the most debated issues in politics. It is a subject with a long and varied history; countries have adjusted their laws about it many times. The methods of the death penalty have changed over time as well, from public to private executions and from hanging, firing squads and beheading to lethal injection. Despite this evolution, there are some questions yet to be answered, such as: Does capital punishment have benefits? Does a person’s religion factor into his/her perspective about the death penalty? What are the reasons behind established capital punishment? could they be out of a desire for rehabilitation, or out of a desire for retribution? Whatever the answers of these questions, it is basically a way to take a life. Thus, Capital punishment should be prohibited by our justice system because it violates human rights, is a savage way of applying justice, and does not dissuade criminals.

There are vast differences in the way people view the death penalty. Some oppose it and some agree with it. There have been many studies trying to agree or disagree with the death penalty. Some have noted the death penalty as a deterrent, and some have noted it as state sanctioned murder and not civilized. The death penalty has been attributed to societies for hundreds of years. More recently, as we become more civilized, the death penalty has been questioned if it is the right step towards justice. During this paper, I will review the pros and cons of the use of the death penalty as we, Americans, know it. The death penalty is a highly controversial subject. No one knows who’s right or who’s wrong-it’s fifty percent speculation and fifty percent research.

The death penalty has been an issue that has continually caused tension in today’s society. The main discussion over this is whether or not the death penalty serves as a valid and justified form of punishment. We have reached the point where if the topic is brought up, extremists on both sides immediately begin to argue the matter. One side says increase in crime rate, the other says failure to discourage crime; one says failure to rehabilitate, the other says it saves lives; one says justice and retribution, the other says revenge. As a society we know that crime is a major part of our lives, and we are all aware that something must be done about it. The only problem now is coming together and finding common ground as to how we solve it.

The death penalty, also called capital punishment, has been a topic of debate among the public for many years, gaining very little ground in changing the legality of it one way or the other. The topic is very controversial because many people feel that it is wrong to take the life of another person. On the other hand a very comparable number of people push for the legality of capital punishment for condemning convicted criminals that have committed a crime of a certain degree. For example murder, rape, kidnapping, human trafficking, and drug trafficking. Another reason behind the skepticism of capital punishment are the morals influencing the sentencing of the accused. As former President George W. Bush said, “I don’t think you should support the death penalty to seek revenge. I don’t think that’s right. I think the reason to support the death penalty is because it saves other people’s lives.” This quote is a good example of the morals needed in order for the death penalty to be an effective method of punishment and deterrent for future crimes.

The death penalty has been a huge part of many political debates for decades. Most citizens of the Unite States believe there are two sides, those for and those against its continued use. Those for, tend to believe that it is necessary to keep these criminals out of society and that it deters crime, while those against tend to believe that the practice is medieval and unethical in society today. With a controversial topic like the death penalty, it is important to determine why this controversy exists and if there is a possible solution. The focus at hand is whether or not the United States Government should continue its use of the death penalty and how this answer could be implemented.

Is the taking of an individual’s life a just punishment for the most heinous of crimes? Is it humane to kill another person to administer justice? How should society deal with the most dangerous members of our population? The answers to these critical questions are not easily derived. Capital punishment is a widely debated and sensitive subject, as it probes the judicial system and morality. Most individuals would argue that criminals who commit the most despicable of crimes deserve to be punished to the fullest extent of the law. While this deduction is perfectly reasonable, capital punishment should not be the end to this mean. Executing prisoners for their crimes has several flaws: it does not deter crime more than life without parole, it is financially more burdensome than sentencing a person to life imprisonment, and is an inhumane and anachronistic method of attempting to serve justice.

Capital punishment has been a recurring, controversial issue throughout the history of the United States of America. When an individual is accused for a heinous crime such as murder, one of their sentences could possibly be the death penalty. Taking a life for a life seems simple on the surface, but in reality, there are many setbacks and controversies that come with it. Capital punishment has been around for a while but it hasn’t been contested as much as it has today. People who are for the death penalty believe that these criminals are a threat to society and should be terminated. People who are against the death penalty often believe that taking someone’s life is cruel and unusual punishment, thus being unconstitutional. Despite the feud between the two arguments, capital punishment still persists in many states in the US today. There are some people who are even caught in the middle of the two opposing arguments. The issue is often brought up in courts and is constantly bothersome to the political process of the United States. Also, it is one of the most dire and important issues that are consistently brought up in the media today. Due the mass amounts of controversy this topic receives, it should be a problem that the United States makes a priority to resolve.

Capital punishment, otherwise better known as the death penalty, has been instituted in the United State’s constitution for centuries with the purpose of being a deterrent to dangerous crimes and murder. However, as time has passed since capital punishment has been established, there has been much controversy seen regarding the issue leaving American citizens divided amongst themselves. With some opposing the validity of this form of punishment and others defending it, the debate revolving around this contentious aspect of the United State’s legal system is still raging in the modern era. While it has many supporters, the United States government should not allow for the death penalty to remain legal.

The death penalty has been a huge part of many political debates for decades. Most citizens of the Unite States believe there are two sides, those for and those against its continued use. Those for tend to believe that it is necessary to keep these criminals out of society and that it deters crime, while those against tend to believe that the practice is medieval and unethical in society today. With a controversial topic like the death penalty, it is important to determine why this controversy exists and if there is a possible solution. The focus at hand is whether or not the United States Government should continue its use of the death penalty and how this answer could be implemented.

Capital punishment has been utilized as a sentence long before the establishment of justice systems and since that time has been a highly contested debate. With the advent and addition of justice systems, much of the topics of debate have remained the same with proponents arguing both sides and citing information to support their claim. Debates over whether capital punishment as a threat deters future crimes, the repercussions of making a legal mistake in handing a death sentence, and the morality of the issue are fiercely contested. I argue in favor of capital punishment by disproving the opposing side’s arguments and providing support for pro-capital punishment.