The Punishment And Capital Punishment Essay

A review was conducted from the Law and society Association, American society of criminology and the Criminal Justice sciences Academy and it revealed that a big majority concluded that capital punishment was not a deterrent to homicide. More than 80 percent of those interrogated believe that the survey doesn’t hold up the effect of deterrence for the death penalty. Other criminologists suggest that more homicides are caused due to the fact that there is death penalty. The outcome of brutalization argues that the rates of homicides will increase because of the example served by state executions.

During the past three decades capital punishment has been a very controversial issue in the United States. 1972 the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Furman v. Georgia that the death penalty was unconstitutional because it was a form of "cruel and unusual punishment." However, this decision did not last long; in July 1975 the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment did not violate any parts of the Constitution. Executions as they had before 1972 resumed again. Since then 180 prisoners have been executed. The United States Supreme Court should abolish the death penalty because it is a form of "cruel and unusual punishment."

The first argument that I shall contend with is that capital punishment does not deter crime. Opponents of capital punishment say the death penalty is not necessary. Other countries that no longer have the death penalty have not experienced an increase in the number of murders. The idea is that the death penalty does not deter crime. Countries such as Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Switzerland, and Belgium have not carried out executions since the early part of the century, yet these countries have not experienced a rise in crimr rates (Block, 1983). However, deterrence is not the question when you are looking at the retributive value of capital punishment. In short, deterrence can only work if the threat of punishment is combined with the conviction that the forbidden acts are not only illegal and therefore punishable but immoral. Without the conviction of morality, the easily frightened will not break the law, but the fearless will break the law, the irrational will break the law, and all others will break the law.

Does taking another’s life actually avenge that of another? The disciplinary act of capital punishment, punishment through death, has been a major debate in the United States for years. Those in support of capital punishment believe that it is an end to the reoccurrence of a repeat murderer. The public has, for many years, been in favor of this few and pro-death penalty. Yet as time goes on, records show a decrease in the public and the state’s support of the continuation of capital punishment. Those against capital punishment believe it is an immoral, spends taxpayers’ money improperly, and does not enforce a way to rehabilitate criminals and/or warn off future crimes.

Should one person have the right to end another human's life? It is a question most people have the answer for when it comes to capital punishment. Capital punishment is known to some people one of the cruelest punishment to humanity. Some people believe giving a person the death penalty doe's not solve anything. While other's believe it is payback to the criminal for the crime they have committed. There have been 13,000 people executed since the colonial times, among 1900 and 1985 there were 139 innocent people sentence to death only 23 were executed. In 1967 lack of support and legal challenges cut the execution rate to zero bringing the practice to a complete end by 1972. Although the supreme court authorized its resumption in 1976

South Carolina, January 15, 1993. After wounding an Orangeburg, S.C. police officer with a misfired bullet, Thomas Treshawn Ivey, an Alabama prison escapee, proceeded to fired five more shots into the police officer from a handgun at close range after the wounded police office had reached for his gun. Ivey fled the scene but was quickly apprehended. This scenario is not to different from the horrible acts of violence that lead an offender to death row where today some 3,500 people are awaiting the ultimate punishment.

When one thinks about the death penalty, they usually think of capital punishment, which is punishment by death as well as a practice by the government of killing people as punishment for serious crimes. Capital punishment has been used in the United States since 1775 when all thirteen colonies were at the outbreak of the American Revolution. It was not until 1787 that the founding fathers allowed the death penalty when writing the constitution. In 1790 United States Congress established a Federal Death Penalty, which was also called the Crimes Act of 1790, that created six capital offenses, treason, counterfeiting, three variations of piracy or felonies on the high seas, and aiding the escape of a capital prisoner, also in that same year the first person was executed under the United States Federal Death Penalty for committing “murder on the high seas”. The end of the 1700s, brought reform for the death penalty laws, like in 1793 the concept of varying degrees of murder was introduced, which softens the death penalty laws.

Today, one of the most debated issues in the Criminal Justice System is the issue of capital punishment or the death penalty. Having said that, crime is imminent. We could have an unexpected encounter with a criminal committing crime on a daily. Criminals have become a part of our daily lives. Does this mean we should let them prevail in our society? No, absolutely not. Eliminating crime and criminals is our duty, and we must not ignore it. Getting the rightly accused to a just punishment is very important. Some criminals commit a crime because they have no other option to survive, but some do it for fun. I do not advocate death penalty for everybody. A person, who stole a piece of clothing from a department store, definitely does not deserve the death penalty. However, a serial killer, who kills people just because or for malicious reasons, definitely deserves the death penalty. The death penalty should continue, in order to eliminate the garbage out of our society. Not everybody deserves to die, but some people definitely do. I support the death penalty for several reasons. Primarily, I believe that the death penalty serves as a deterrent and assists with reducing crime. Moreover, the death penalty assures safety to our society by eliminating these criminals.

     For many years, capital punishment has been in use, but it is not been effective. Theodore Robert Bundy in 1978, slipped into a Tallahassee sorority house and bludgeoned two sleeping women to death, then killed a 12-year-old girl in Lake City. He was sentenced to three concurrent death sentences in 1979. Nine years later, Bundy is alive and well on the Death Row (Von Drehle 1A). A prisoner sentenced to death spends an average of 10 years, nationally, on death row waiting for their execution. More than 2,100 people live on America's death Rows. At the current execution rate, it would take eighty-two years to kill them all. Death Row is going to get bigger, the wait

The most severe punishment for all crimes is being sentenced to death. Capital punishment has been the center of controversy for many years and will be a continuously debated issue here in the United States. Also referred to as the death penalty, capital punishment is the lawful infliction of death as punishment for a crime and has been used even in ancient times for a various array of offenses. Back in ancient times, executions were something done publicly in hopes that it would serve as a warning. Even long after elimination of the more gruesome forms of capital punishment, controversy still surrounded the possible value that the death penalty could hold as a deterrent. Arguments of the death penalty concerns issues of deterrent factors, excessive cruelty, and equability.

Capital punishment was a corrective measure that was widely used all over the world. It is difficult to pin point the exact date of it's origin but it is a fact that it was practiced intensely during medieval times. Crimes have occurred probably since the beginning of time and therefore there was a need for a counter attack to minimize if not eradicate it completely. Laws were created for this purpose, but like everything man creates they have proved imperfect and in some cases entirely unacceptable.

In my opinion the Retributivist approach to Capital Punishment is the more appropriate view. The Retributivist believes that evil done with a vengeance should be repaid with punishment in-kind. In order to protect society and prevent crime, the death penalty has to be the most severe form of punishment with the biggest impact on society. Persons who commit murder should suffer and be punished for their inexcusable action(s). The principles of retributivism suggest that a convicted murderer should be executed because they “deserve” and “have earned” the death sentence. The right of retaliation can only be made equal by balancing of the crime with the punishment even if it is the death penalty. Those opposed to the death penalty argue that

even consider death a punishment. Dying is a part of life, and "you can be a

Many people live by the motto, “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” but does the quote imply that every state believes this also? According to the Death Penalty Information Center only thirty-four states, the government, and the military actually carryout the death penalty sentence, and the use of the sentence has been on the decline since 1997. There is a serious opposition when it comes to society today. The crime rates are not being evaluated enough, the country is in recession, and many families are desperate for any form of income. In order to maintain a healthy and safe environment for the following generations capital punishment should be mandatory for every state.

Capital punishment is beneficial to the community. It provides the society with a sense of security. The death penalty contains a positive influence on the future. A heavily debated topic is, “Does capital punishment deter people more than a life sentence to prison?” An explanation on why will be covered later. An issues many people have with capital punishment, is when it is just or not just. This is a topic many stray away from, because it is difficult to decide. Finding the right consequence for an action is difficult. While this paper is for the use of capital punishment, it is clearly not needed for every crime, or even every murder. Overusing capital punishment, such as using it for every murder, will negatively impact the country, and not using it has the same effect.