The Truth About The Death Penalty

For years the death penalty has been one of the most controversial topics in the judicial field. The death penalty has been abolished in 18 states leaving 34 states that allow it. It is argued that the death penalty goes against moral and religious beliefs along with being unconstitutional. I’m against the death penalty not because of sympathy for criminals but because it isn’t effective in reducing crime, cost more than it would to incarcerate a person for life, and worst of all it risks executions of innocent people. Capital punishment is an increasingly argued issue in today’s society. The main focus of the criminal justice system is to rehabilitate criminals and to protect society from those who are not. Ernest Van Den Haag argues that,

More than two centuries ago, the death penalty was commonplace in the United States, but today it is becoming increasingly rare. In the article “Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?”, Diann Rust-Tierney argues that it should be abolished, and Joshua Marquis argues that it should not be abolished. Although the death penalty is prone to error and discrimination, the death penalty should not be abolished because several studies show that the death penalty has a clear deterrent effect, and we need capital punishment for those certain cases in which a killer is beyond redemption.

Should the Death Penalty still be an option or only life in prison? This is the question at issue that the writer, Kyle Gibson(Heritage Foundation research fellow for the Center for Data Analysis), debates in the article, “ Death Penalty Repeal: It’s necessary to use Capital Punishment in a Free World”. On June 23, 2013 Gibson explains that Capital Punishment is a right and is important in society. He provides evidence on why Capital Punishment is important and how it is a free right of all citizens. His purpose is to show readers why the death penalty is important in order to convince readers to support and not oppose the death penalty.

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.

Costs and Consequences of the Death Penalty, written by Mark Costanzo, neatly lists reasons for opposition, and abolishment of, the death penalty. Costanzo provides a review of the history of the death penalty, a review of how the death penalty process is working today, questions on whether or not if the death penalty is inhumane and cheaper than life imprisonment. He also questions if the death penalty is fairly applied and the impact, if any, that it has on deterrence. He closely examines the public's support of the death penalty and questions the morality of the death penalty. Finally, Costanzo provides his own resolution and alternative to the death penalty. Each of these items allows the reader an easy, and once again, neat view

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

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 Discussion In today’s world terrible crimes are being committed daily. Many people believe that these criminals deserve one fate; death. Death penalty is the maximum sentence used in punishing people who kill another human being and is a very controversial method of punishment. Capital punishment is a legal infliction of death penalty and since ancient times it has bee used to punish a large variety of offences.

Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty’s approval ratings have decreased throughout the years, as a study executed by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg explains how only three states administer the death penalty these days. Capital punishment has worked for a few years to scare those who desire to commit a federal crime, but because the usage continually diminishes (despite in a few states), why would the government keep the death penalty if it costs them millions per year? Cleary, the best option remains: to eliminate this form of punishment once and for all.

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

To have a loved one taken away in such a cruel manner to have a memory that haunts you every living moment. The death penalty would not merely add up for what has happened to you or family. The death penalty should be illegal for many reasons such it is immoral, it doesn’t ensure closure for the victim or the victim’s family, and although some people think that the death penalty will deter crime it really is ineffective overall.

The demands of the 21st century contend that our justice system is in need of reform. One of the underlining reasons the death penalty has no future is due to the cost that this correctional theory imposes from start to finish. Currently thirty-one states allow capital punishment for the most heinous crimes (Wikipedia, 2017). Death penalty attitude researcher Phoebe Ellsworth says, Public support for the death penalty went down very rashly between 1950 and 1967 (from 65 percent approving to 45 percent), then reversed direction from 1967 to 1980 (when support rose to 75 percent), and since 1995 has been declining again (down to 64 percent approval in 2007) (Ellsworth, 1994).

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.

The death penalty is one of the oldest punishments in the world. It has many kinds and always appeared with blood and fright in the history. As the world developing, we got stuck in a problem, that whether we should abolish the death penalty. We have many arguments about the death penalty at present. There are more than 140 countries abolished it. Also the 58 nations with 65 percent population still used it, like China, America, Japan. Many lawyers, judges, politics and scholars also have their own opinions about the death penalty, some thinks the death penalty should be abolished because the death penalty cannot reduce the criminal rate. on the contrary, it increase the criminal rate like America. But others don’t think so. In a word, whether the death penalty should be abolished or not is a argument topic. we think the death penalty should be abolished, and there are three reasons.

The world is stimulated by conflict, debate, arguments, we gain our knowledge because people don’t always agree on everything. A topic that the American people have been tackling for years is the topic of capital punishment or the death penalty. Abolish the Death Penalty, a debate on a notion that could affect the way the America would punish its criminals. This notion was debated by four qualified individuals Diann Rust-Tierney, Barry Scheck, Robert Blecker, and Kent Scheidegger.