The Irreversibility Of The Death Penalty

What place does the death penalty have in the criminal justice system? Should it be used to deter other criminals, should it be used to punish those who commit crimes, or does it have any place at all? In understanding the issue of the death penalty from a moral perspective, it is important to look back at philosophers of the past to better understand the ethical ramifications of the concept of capital punishment. We will be examining two notable philosophers—Aristotle and Immanuel Kant. Through their ideas on justice and theories of punishment for crime, we will be able to better understand how they viewed an issue such as the death penalty. Moreover, in modern day discussions of the issue, sides will argue consequentialist factors such as; the pain that capital punishment might inflict, evidence (or lack of evidence) of deterrence, and the cost of an extensive appellate process. Here, however, we will simply be examining the issues surrounding virtue and duty with regards to capital punishment, as Aristotle and Kant were virtue and duty based philosophers, respectively. Through this unique lens we may better understand the issue and ethical complications surrounding the issue as we observe how Aristotle and Kant make their arguments.

Annotated Bibliography: Death Penalty Have you ever wondered during any point of your life about the severity or how influential the death penalty is on criminals and the U.S citizens? If you haven’t never given it consideration before, you will after this argumentative essay. The death penalty is a government practice where a person is sentenced to death by a state for a crime they have committed and even dates back to the 1600s. Out of fifty states, thirty-two still have the death penalty in effect. Even with the death penalty still occurring in these states, not too many states sentence criminals to it anymore. However, Texas is one of the states that still rely on the punishment heavily which then corrupts their state spending for beneficial things such as emergencies, roads, or economy. Although the death penalty might seem like a good idea to end a person’s life, I for one, however, believe that the death penalty is outdated for the 21st Century and should be abolished.

Each year, approximately about 10,000 innocent people in the United States get convicted of serious crimes that they did not commit. And at least four percent of them receive the death penalty being completely innocent. Scenarios like this happen all the time because there are more and more false persecutions each day which can be easily avoided. Many people are occupying prisons all over the world, for felonies they did not execute. More than 200 people have been exonerated through DNA testing nationwide. But why do these wrongful convictions keep happening?

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.

Throughout the history of man there has always existed a sort of rule pertaining to retribution for just and unjust acts. For the just came rewards, and for the unjust came punishments. This has been a law as old as time. One philosophy about the treatment of the unjust is

Each year approximately about 10,000 innocent people in the United States get convicted of serious crimes that they did not commit. And at least four percent of them receive the death penalty being completely innocent. Scenarios like this happen all the time because there are more and more false persecutions each day which can be easily avoided. Many people are occupying prisons all over the world, for felonies they did not execute. More than 200 people have been exonerated through DNA testing nationwide. But why do these wrongful convictions keep happening?

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

Troy Davis, a black man who was suspected as the killer of a white off-duty police officer, was executed in 2011 with insufficient evidence in the state of Georgia (Bedau). There was no physical evidence or weapon presented in the prosecution and so they had to base their judgement all from eyewitness (Bedau). His execution raised an “international outcry” due to seven out of nine eyewitnesses contradicted their trial testimony and many of them confessed that they felt pressured or threatened by the police at the time (Bedau). Troy Davis have come close to execution three times previous to his death because of the doubts that linger of his innocence (Bedau). However, after passage of a federal law in 1996, it became significantly harder for petitioners to get a hearing from judges because they have limited the amount of times they can appeal death sentence (Bedau). When Troy Davis did get a hearing, the judge required Troy to have a “proof of innocence” – an impossibly high standard according to American Civil Liberties Union and so Troy was not able to defend himself (Bedau). Even with the doubts that was present in this case, the Georgia Board of Pardons persists on executing Troy Davis (Bedau). A modern country in the 21st century like America has lots of resources to almost everything, but we still use a law system as old as time itself. Although the death penalty has been necessary in the past, it is no longer justified in the 21st century.

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.

The death penalty has been a controversial topic among society for ages. An issue often brought up when discussing the legality of capital punishment is wrongful convictions. Advocates of the death penalty say that, while wrongful convictions are an issue, those few cases do not outweigh the need for lawful execution of felons who are, without a doubt, guilty. On the other hand, the opponents argue that the death penalty is wrong from both a legal and moral standpoint, an ineffective form of punishment, and should, ultimately, be outlawed. With both advocates and challengers constantly debating on this topic, the death penalty and wrongful convictions continue to be hot buttons issues for Americans and people throughout the world.

The death penalty, as we know it today, didn’t exist in the United States until 1976. However, the American penal system has incorporated capital punishment since the earliest settlements were founded in the early 1600’s. The first recorded execution in the United States occurred in 1608 in Jamestown, Virginia when Captain George Kendall was executed just one year after the Jamestown settlement had been established after he had been convicted of being a spy for Spain (Part I: History of the Death Penalty). Over the next 250 years, several states moved toward abolishing capital punishment altogether. While there has been serious push towards ending capital punishment, more than half of state governments within the United States cling onto their right to execute criminals who perform truly heinous crimes.

Since the 1970 's, almost all capital sentences in the United States have been imposed for homicide. There have been intense debates among Americans regarding the constitutionality of capital punishment. Critics charge that executions are violations of the “cruel and unusual punishment” provision of the Eighth Amendment; while supporters of the death penalty counter that this clause was not intended to prohibit legal executions. In the 1972 court case of Furman vs. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment was no longer legal. However, in Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the court allowed capital punishments to resume in certain states, and shortly thereafter, Gary Gilmore was executed by a firing squad in Utah. Since the reinstatement of capital punishment in the United States, a separate penalty trial has been required for some capital cases, at which time the jury reviews circumstances that suggest the need for capital punishment. In 1982, Texas became the first state to execute a prisoner using lethal injection; other common methods of execution used in the United States include lethal gas and electrocution.

Introduction The debate on whether or not the death penalty should be abolished has been ongoing for quite a long period of time. While there are those who believe that the death penalty does not serve its intended purpose, proponents of the same are convinced that the relevance of the same

Death penalty is a constant source of controversy and divided opinion depending on who you ask. The punishment of death is given to criminals who commit severe crimes. The severity of crimes that attract the death penalty is debatable due to the severity of the crime. The justice system is based upon punishment for crimes committed by emphasizing the punishment fitting the crime committed. Countries such as China and Singapore, and United States, issue the death penalty to punish murderers or rapist, therefore fueling the already going debate on how to befit the punishment is in such cases. All the death penalty aims to achieve is the punishment to those who break the rules. The death penalty has well documented weaknesses as well as strengths. Not least of is brutality and finality, some of these frailties lead to the calls for its abolishment. The death penalty is inhumane. Wrongly applied as well as completely unjustifiable sometimes killing innocent people irrespective of the crime. Life sentence of imprisonment without parole or pardon achieves all that the death penalty seeks to achieve without costing the society its moral standing and families losing those they love.

Bright, Stephen B.: "The death penalty as the answer to crime: costly, counterproductive and corrupting"; 35 Santa Clara Law Review 1211 (1995)