The Pros And Cons Of Abolishing The Death Penalty

In this paper I will be discussing everything you need to know about the death penalty such as its pros and cons. While the innocent can be killed, the death penalty has its pros because it prevents them from killing again if they are released or have escaped from prison, it helps overpopulated prisons, and it can help victims’ families get justice and closure. Not only can the innocent be killed, but in the past the death penalty was very inhumane. To some its feels right but to others they feel like 2 wrongs don’t make a right. Most people think that the defendant deserves the death penalty, but what does the defendants’ family think?

4% of the criminals on death row have been wrongly accused of a crime and ended up being killed. You have a say in whether or not you want this atrocity to continue. California's death penalty system has failed. Tax payers money is being wasted on the death penalty and is also a empty promise to victims families and carries the unavoidable risk of executing an innocent person. The article Yes on prop 62 states that “there is no evidence that the death penalty lowers crime” (Hastings) The astronomical costs associated with putting a person on death row – including criminal investigations, lengthy trials and appeals – are leading many states to reevaluate and reconsider having this flawed and unjust system on the books. Proposition 62 is the

Execution has existed for many years, but surprisingly hasn't been used as much which should sound good but it's not. In the article “Voter cheat sheet- prop. 62 repeals death penalty; prop.66 changes death penalty procedures” by Matt Fleming is informing people about both proposition 62 and proposition 66. “Since 1978, only 15 inmates have been executed, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Meanwhile, more than 100 inmates died before execution.” (Fleming) This shows that the process is taking longer than it needs to in which is also causing problems. If proposition 66 passes it will speed up the death row by shortening their time in jail. Although some people don't agree, and think that the opposite will happen like the taxes will

What are we mad about electricity rates, gasoline prices, traffic congestion and crowded schools? We're missing the point here. What were missing here is some good, old and honest anger about an issue that has been a concern for decades – California's Death Penalty. The Death Penalty has long been a problem in California from costs, deterrence, overcrowded prisons, execution of the innocent and so on. Then if were having all these problems why should we continue using this system?

The death penalty is the ultimate punishment. There is no harsher punishment than death itself. This nation, the United States of America, is currently one of fifty-eight nations that practice the death penalty, if one commits first-degree murder as of 2012. People that believe in the death penalty also believe that it will deter murders. In this paper I will argue that the death penalty does not deter criminals and that this nation should outlaw the practice.

) Moreover, the pattern of this kind of murderer, the killer, is almost by definition a person who takes his chances like the soldier of fortune he thinks he is. (37) Most killers do not engage in anything like a cost-benefit analysis. They are impulsive, and they kill impulsively. If capital punishment does deter criminals, it can do so only indirectly. Potential murderers must have some standard of right and wrong. They must acknowledge morals issues. They must be without mental illness and they know and have the capacity to think about what they are doing. This conception of general deterrence seems deeply flawed because it rests upon a doubtful conception of how this murderous population internalizes social norms. Although the perpetrator

The people of California spoke their minds when they decided to keep the death penalty but they also decided to speed up the process by reducing the amount of appeals a convicted inmate is allowed to have. The death penalty pertains to criminals who commit crimes such as; during a kidnapping the victim dies, train wrecking if anyone dies, if a life prisoner assaults someone and that victim dies within a year, treason, first- degree murder under specific conditions (for hire, of a witness to prevent testimony, if committed during a robbery or burglary, of a peace officer, if committed during the course of a rape by force, if committed during performance of lewd and lascivious acts upon children, or by persons previously convicted of murder). The death penalty is not for petty crimes or mild offenses, but it is for those criminals who have done something so horrendously wrong that the community has deemed it fair that they are given the ultimate punishment for their actions. Putting another person to death is a heavy decision but once decided it should be done right away. There should not be years and years of waiting and appeals by the defendant when they have already been found guilty. This is a waste of time and money. They have already been convicted of their

Next, I must begin and say that I cannot fathom the pain it must be to lose someone to a heinous crime or to be a victim of any crime that can warrant the punishment to be execution. However, there are more complications than benefits to the subject of capital punishment. A problem is how the severity of the death penalty can affect a case. Firstly, it takes much more steps to complete a case than a case wanting a life sentence which can be an emotional strain on victims or family of victims. Then, it is morally challenging for jury members to decide the fate of someone(apostrope)s life which can cause a guilty defendant to walk free, which contradicts the common argument that the death penalty removes a criminal off the streets. Another common defense to a ban on the death penalty is that because it will reduce the amount of prisoners, it would be less costly to the state of California. This is in

As stated before, capital punishment is very costly. $90,000 per year per inmate is the difference between an inmate on death row and one sentenced to life without parole (Tempest, 2005). On average California spends $250 million on each execution, these numbers start to add up and they are most certainly more than what it would be to sentence them to life without parole. The side that is for capital punishment would say that these cost are necessary to keep our

Since 1978 the state of California has successfully executed 13 people on death row. For decades capital punishment still remains the answer to violent and heinous crimes of the convicted. The death penalty delays closure for the families and majority are often flawed and overturned. Capital punishment causes problems within itself, those such as the cost to keep the public policy running. It is committed by an individual or insisted upon by the government, killing is still cruel in any form that it is given. Even though it is a

In prop 66 the death penalty is in place, grants a speedy process of trial which can result in a mistake if the speedy trial missed valuable evidence, if evidence got overlooked or, didn’t get allowed into trail, even if it could benefit the defendant. A speedy trial could lead to mistakes and mistakenly take the life of a possible innocent accused individual. In conclusion, it all depends on the inner begin and open mindedness of people to either support one or the other. Both props are almost identical with slight differences, it is basically a question of “what kind of cancer would you prefer” rather than providing a positive beneficial solution.

Proposition 62 and 66 addressed whether the the death penalty should be abolished or reformed. The pro 62 and anti 66 side argued that hardly any executions have taken place despite the 5 billion dollars that have been poured into the program or millions every year. Combined with these specific fiscal amounts, the pro side also stated that there actually have been only thirteen actual deaths from this program. Through this tactic of giving numerical values to show to ineffectiveness on the program and the burden it is putting on taxpayers, the pro side strongly strengthened their case. Additionally, they gave their case moral backing by stating that the criminals are getting off easy and not being required to work to give back to both the families

Proposition 62 supporters believe that the death penalty is inhumane because there is a high risk of someone innocent being executed. Opponents of proposition 66 believe that if the procedures of the death penalty are changed, it will be quickly glanced through and someone innocent may end up being executed. This is untrue because the death penalty is very monitored. “The truth is there have been no innocent people executed in California, there have been no innocent people on death row” (Green). There may be a chance of this happening, but it has not happened in California. This proves that right with our current death penalty, this has not happened. There is no evidence of someone innocent being put to death as it is very monitored and people carefully watch over who gets executed. It is also mentioned that “when the state of California seeks the death penalty, it's rules are strict and strongly favor the accused” (The Tribune). It is obvious that the rules for executing someone would be strict, but favoring the accused may not be common. With proposition 66 being put into place, favoring the accused would be more common. The chance of accidentally executing the innocent will try to be avoided as much as possible, allowing lawyers and judges to have a more open mind about this. This doesn’t mean that a guilty person will be set free, the punishment all depends on the severity of the situation and how bad a crime

Murder is one of the most immoral and horrendous matters to ever be intertwined with. When a murderer kills a person, it not only affects the now deceased person but their family as well in a detrimental way. After the murderer is sent to prison where they can murder again, the families of the deceased pay for his or her food, housing, and living in general through taxes for as long as he or she lives. This wouldn’t occur if the murderer is sent to the death penalty. Instead of letting these vile people live off of the prison system, the process should be hastier. Prop 66 should be approved.

In 1987, Walter McMillian was sentenced to death for the murder of a white woman in Monroeville, Alabama. Multiple African American alibi witnesses spoke on McMillian’s behalf and the jury had declared him an innocent man but the judge had overridden their verdict and had sentenced McMillian to death row. Despite the lack of concrete evidence against him, McMillian was given the death penalty purely because he was a black man that was disgustingly abused as an easily-believable scapegoat. Evidently, it is essential to abolish the death penalty because it is not a crime deterrent and is racially biased.