The Punishment Permutation in the Philippines

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?

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.

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 cannot be overstated and hence it should not be abolished. In this text, I examine the arguments for and against the death penalty.

In 1972, at the time of Supreme Court’s Furman, the majority of public tends to agree with the death penalty. The major reason for support of the death penalty was the serious violent offenders need to be executed in the interest of public safety. However, according to a Gallup poll, supporter for the death penalty dropped from 76 to 53, public started to against the death penalty. Since then, the world has the trend toward of abolishing the death penalty.

Correspondingly, in the published book “Deterrence and the Death Penalty”, the committee on deterrence and the death penalty presents research organized on the effects of homicide rates due to the death penalty. The author's research specifies that capital punishment neither increases, deters or has any effect on the numeral rates of homicide. This is important due to the fact that even 30 years

The Death Penalty, or capital punishment is nothing new in the world. SInce the dawn of civilization people were sentenced to death for sometimes even the most minor of crimes, such a theft. As the world has changed in the last few thousand years, so have attitudes toward the Death Penalty,yet it is still a punishment that is carried out throughout the world today. In the United States, as of July of 2015, 31 states in the Union actively carry out the death penalty. Only 19 states have abolished the death penalty and replaced it with life in prison without the possibility of parole as the maximum sentence. However, with the declining popularity of the death penalty in the United States and throughout the world, the question that needs to be

In recent years, the death penalty is still existing in everywhere although there is less number of convicted offenders than the old time. Some people think that death penalty is the way to constrain people to do not offend or violate the legislation while some have an argument that this punishment should be abolished. In this essay, I will compare two articles. “Why Japanese support the death penalty? “ by Shanhe Jiang, Rebecca Pilot, and Toyoji Saito (2010)(article 1) and “ Does it matter if the Death Penalty is Arbitrarily Administered ? ” by Stephen Nathanson (2009)(article2).

Thus the author’s account of his experience may be viewed as subjective and open to objection. In the letter, we see that the author does attempt to offer statistical evidence of an L.A.P.D study conducted in 1975 besides his own personal account. Yet still statistically speaking, the numbers of subjects are unrepresentative as the sample population is too small. Nonetheless, author’s view that the justification of the implementation of death penalty is undisputable does have some grounding in theory. Once a person has initiated force against another person, he has in fact deprived himself of individual rights and declared himself as irrational being. Thus it is an act of justice on the State’s part to totally eradicate that irrational being. This is the backward-looking position epitomized in Aquinas and Kant [Pojman]. Yet, if the punishment is imposed on the wrong persons, as exemplified by Carlos Deluna’s case of 1989, and then the death penalty is not justified. In this case, the prosecutors reportedly withheld crucial exculpatory evidence that led to Deluna’s conviction and eventual death. The prosecutor used a tactic that was widespread and went

First of all, this article has more than one purpose. The first purpose is to inform the reader of what the death penalty is and how it should be used. The author then uses the information provided to attempt to persuade the reader that the death penalty is the most effective way to deter murder. He uses various claims and counterclaims to do this. In the previous article, the author’s purpose was also to inform and persuade,

“The message has to be sent that if you commit a crime there has to be punishment” said Beningno Aquino III. A lot of people in the United States including other countries commit crimes, but never see what is ahead. When they see suffering confronting them, their hearts are filled of sorrow but the damages are already done. Compare to the U.S and other countries the punishments are not the same. Some governments treat their criminals harsher than other. When a crime is committed the criminal should be punish at the same rate.

Criminal law is imposed by almost every nation in the world to reduce crime rate and maintain law and order of the society. An individual who found guilty of a crime will have to face corresponding punishments. Among all penalties, capital punishment is considered to be the most severe and cruelest one which takes away criminal’s most valuable right in the world, that is, right to live. It is a heated debate for centuries whether capital punishment should be completely abolished world widely. The world seems to have mixed opinion regarding this issue. According to Amnesty International (2010), currently, 97 countries in the world have already abolished capital punishment while only 58 nations still actively adopt death penalty.

In society there many things that are debated among the people based on their beliefs, morals, and values. For this paper chose the death penalty because it is one of the highly debated topics in not only today’s society but also in the past. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, it used as a procedure of retaliation against those who commit violent crimes such as murder and other capital crimes. There are many forms of this punishment, for instance, the electric chair, lethal injections, and the firing squad. There are many feelings and arguments in relation to capital punishment. Some people believe that the death penalty is moral because they deserve it and it provides protection to the society. However, in this paper I will argue that capital punishment is totally immoral because it is not fair, is it unnecessary, and unethical.

The death penalty is something few people love. Death penalty involves a myriad of bureaucratic processes given that the judiciary must use long and complicated sessions to ensure no citizen is wrongly executed for the crimes they have not done. However, there are cases where even the innocent persons are not protected from mischievous executions and end up being executed for crimes they did not commit. Most people argue that death penalty is cruel while life imprisonment is inhumane but less cruel. There is also the possibility of parole in case of a life sentence. Apparently, life imprisonment is a better than death penalty given that it costs less, and the money saved can be channeled to some other important programs that improve the life of the citizens. The detention also reduces the possibility of the accused to reverse the mistake. Millions of dollars saved are advantageous in improving schools, infrastructure, police forces, strengthening public programs, improving mental health services, enabling drug treatment, and preventing child abuse. This piece of writing will argue why life imprisonment is better than death penalty.

Death penalty is one of the oldest punishments in the world, it means end of criminal’s life by law. Nowadays, the issue of whether the death penalty should be abolished in China is still a controversial topic. Many people think death penalty is a bad way to punishment criminals because this method violates humanitarianism and it’s also a bit cruel. Besides, two of third countries in the world have abolished it. So many people say our country should do the same thing. However, in China, the death penalty is essential.The penalty has reason for its existence on national condition, legal system and human nature.

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.