The Pros And Cons Of Capital Punishment

This debate is going to argue if we should fully abolish the death penalty or if we should keep it, two people are going to be arguing facts with the other two people. Three rounds are going to take place and the audience is going to choose the winner. The two people who want to abolish the death penalty is Diann Rust-Tierney who is the director of the National Coalition to abolish the death penalty in which she had 30 years of experience. The other person who wishes the death penalty gone is Barry Scheck he is a professor at Cardozo School of law and the co-founder and co-director for the innocence project. Next, one of the men who are arguing to abolish the death penalty is Robert Blecker who is a New York law school professor, he spent a variety of years talking to prisoners, and visiting death row prisoners. Finally, his teammate is Kent Scheidegger he’s been a legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal foundation since 1986.

The death penalty, or capital punishment, has always been a topic of much debate in the United States. There are those who support it and those who oppose it, and each side has their fair share of points being made, backed by supportive evidence. The topics range from the morality of this punishment, including the methods of execution as well as fairness issues in regards to sex and race. The first issue that will be addressed is in regards to the death penalty working to prevent violent crimes.

The use of capital punishment in the U.S. is a growing concern for most American citizens. According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty percent are against it. These statistics show that few people are against capital punishment (“Fact” 1). With the use of the death penalty growing the controversy is becoming more heated. With only twelve states left not enforcing it the resistance is becoming futile (“Fact” 4). Many debates have been made and even clauses have been invoked, such as, the “Cruel and Unusual Clause” that was invoked by the Supreme Court in 1962 (Meltsner 179). The use of death as a punishment has been viewed as “cruel

Against the Death Penalty: An Annotated Bibliography While the Death Penalty has been historically used as a deterrent of crime, it is barbarity, is economically costly, and racially bias in the United States of America. With this research paper, I will explain how the death penalty should be abolish from our judicial system. Death Penalty Information Center. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org./ This is a website that gives lots of information about the death penalty from the history, current inmates and trials that could lead to death row.

With the process at this point, there was no way of knowing why juries were choosing death in one case, yet choosing life in others. Also, blacks were being killed at a much higher rate that any other offender. These two reasons, long with others, led the high court to claim the death penalty unconstitutional until further revamping, which was soon to come.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, eighteen states have abolished the death penalty since its implementation (Facts About the Death Penalty). But what are the reasons behind doing so? Historically, public policy concerning capital punishment has shifted dramatically, from required capital punishment to jury nullification to a rise in the abolition of the practice. Public opinion has shifted alongside policy, with more and more Americans disapproving of the death penalty and the morality behind it, citing it as an inhumane and hypocritical approach to justice and punishment. I am with the the more progressive Americans that do not believe in administering the death penalty under any circumstances. Rather, I support life imprisonment or the insanity defense for capital offenses whenever appropriate. Capital punishment is ineffective because it lowers the state down to the level of the defendant, frequently discriminates against racial minorities and those of lower socioeconomic status, and it has been abolished in nearly every other modern democratic country.

Written by a seemingly unknown author, Sean McElwee, “It’s Time to Abolish the Death Penalty,” states many reasons why the concept of the death penalty has led to judicial conflict and governmental mutiny. The article was published by the Huffington Post in mid 2013. The death penalty, as McElwee has stated over and over again, is the subject of a nationwide debate: Do we keep it or “kill” it? McElwee largely focused on the ethics surrounding the death penalty and the opinions of many believe it does not follow the basic morals of human rights. McElwee believes that the United States has overused and abused the death penalty, therefore, it should be abolished.

Jost presents the case involving Steven Hayes, it’s a triple murder trial and is used as an example to point out the different debates that come with a case involving a possible death sentence. Jost compares how opponents of the death penalty complain about the costs of capital trials, appeals and post-conviction challenges while supporters find that to be ironic because the people who are against the death penalty usually do everything they can to delay it which leads to higher costs. Jost points out that since the Revolutionary era many have tried to abolish the death penalty, and over time many states have moved to solely using the punishment for murder and some states have abolished it altogether. Jost contrasts both sides of the different debates that involve the death penalty all through his article, and he provides a background as well as the chronological order of what has taken place over the death penalties existence. I will use this article for background information and to provide an answer to the question, “What makes the death penalty right or

The American Civil Liberties Union and National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, are two special interest groups who strongly oppose the use of the death penalty in America for any crime. Both groups argue that the prosecution of the death penalty in America is applied in a bias manner, costs taxpayers a significant amount of money compared to non-capital punishment trials, and the fact that sometimes innocent people are sentenced to death. Opponents of the death penalty remain undeterred by the falling number of death sentences and legislation specifically written to ensure fair prosecution of death penalty, resume their quest to abolish the practice due to posed moral implications.

The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, has been a topic of debate since it has been introduced. The death penalty is the punishment of execution, which is given to someone who has been legally convicted of a crime. The topic has two sides, to keep and enforce or to abolish. When I came about the topic, I thought to myself this would be an effortless essay to not only argue, but to write as well. Before continuing my research on the subject, I found myself siding with keeping and enforcing capital punishment. However, after furthering my knowledge on the topic, I found myself siding with both sides, as they both hold incredibly important arguments. An advantage the death penalty provides is justice can be more accordingly served, but with this advantage comes a disadvantage of the financial cost for taxpayers. I agree with both of these strengths and weaknesses of capital punishment which is why I have declared myself undecided on whether I believe to keep and enforce or to abolish. Unfortunately, the death penalty is something that is neither black or white, it is a subject that contains many grey areas, such as

Thesis: The death penalty uses cruel and unusual brutal methods which violate the Constitution of the United States of America and; therefore, it should be abolished as society continues to embrace the relative value of life.

The debate over capital punishment is in regards to whether the death penalty contradicts the Eighth Amendment. If the death penalty does contradict the Eight Amendment, then the State should not have the power to sentence criminals to death for capital crimes. However, if capital punishment is not against the Eighth Amendment, then the State has the right to sentence criminals to death. In this essay I will first summarize Justice Brennan’s argument on why the death penalty is beyond the power of the State to inflict. Then, I will explain and discuss each of Brennan’s premises. Finally, I will analyze each of Brennan’s faulty premises. If I can successfully prove that one of his premises is false, it will prove that his argument is unsound. Although Brennan’s conclusion follows with necessity from his premises, making his argument valid, his argument is unsound because his third premise is false.

We all look at the justice system, a system that is established to control crime and appoint penalties to those who violate laws. We hope it serves us right, but how each system works, depends on the jurisdiction that is in charge, because different jurisdictions have different law agencies and how they manage. One thing they all have in common is to seek Justice. The abolishment of the death penalty is in my favor because, sometimes the legal system gets it wrong, as well, death is the cruelest act of society and its irreversible, and it is an added cost to the government and taxpayers’

The system of law over the years has changed dramatically with new technology and changing of methods and laws. One thing on the other hand has not changed and that’s the death penalty. Over the years the death penalty is now in discussion for one of the most controversial decision’s the court system can make. With all the questionable debut about what’s right and wrong the people of the United States know there are two groups of opinions. If the death penalty is still a reasonable option in today’s society, or if it is inhumane. The death penalty has many views from different people’s perspectives but everyone has their pros and cons and how it should be handled.

The death penalty is legal in thirty-two states. I shall argue that capital punishment should be abolished in our country because it is never moral to kill a human being no matter what they have done, because it often costs more money to keep someone on death row than to keep someone in prison for life, because of the men and women who are wrongly accused of a crime they did not commit, and because death is the easy way out.