Thoughtful Reasoning For The Ultimate Punishment

As Robert Blecker, a Professor of Economics and American University, says, “An unpleasant life in prison, a quick but painful death…can help restore a moral balance” (Blecker). Some people agree with the death penalty because of moral fairness; however, some people oppose the death penalty because of family relationship, financial costs with education, false conviction, bias and religious perspective. In the article “With the Death Penalty, Let the Punishment Fit the Crime,” the author Robert Blecker argues about which method of execution would best fit the crime and the unequal situation in prison. Although Blecker explains the reason of death penalty and discusses about choosing better method of execution, based on the research, I oppose

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?

Capital punishment is a difficult subject for a lot of people because many question whether or not it is ethical to kill a convicted criminal. In order to critically analyze whether or not it is ethical, I will look at the issue using a utilitarianism approach because in order to get a good grasp of this topic we need to look at how the decision will impact us in the future. The utilitarianism approach will help us to examine this issue and see what some of the consequences are with this topic of capital punishment. For years, capital punishment has been used against criminals and continues to be used today, but lately this type of punishment has come into question because of the ethical question.

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.

Why is the death penalty used as a means of punishment for crime? Is this just a way to solve the nations growing problem of overcrowded prisons, or is justice really being served? Why do some view the taking of a life morally correct? These questions are discussed and debated upon in every state and national legislature throughout the country. Advantages and disadvantages for the death penalty exist, and many members of the United States, and individual State governments, have differing opinions. Yet it seems that the stronger arguments, and evidence such as cost effectiveness, should lead the common citizen to the opposition of Capital Punishment.

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.

Just by looking at the surface, one would assume that it would be less expensive to execute a prisoner versus providing them with “three hots and a cot” for the rest of their life. Surprisingly, some people support the death penalty mainly because they view it as a way of cutting costs and saving taxpayer’s money. “This argument is disturbing since it reduces the moral complexity of state imposed killing to a debate over dollars and cent.” However, it has now been firmly established by research conducted in different states and with different data that a modern death penalty sentence costs several times more than an alternative sentence of life in prison without parole.

One common misconception regarding the costs of the death penalty is that it is more cost efficient to execute a criminal offender than to have them rot away in a jail cell. On the contrary, a capital case in which the prosecutor pursues the death penalty requires more time and more deliberation, and according to Dieter, capital cases do not fall directly under due process norms. “More experienced lawyers will be needed, more experts will be employed, and more questions will be asked of potential jurors, more time will be taken for the trial and appeals” (Dieter). The author insists that the inefficiency of the death penalty detracts from its legitimacy as a cost-effective punishment for criminal offenders. Dieter reiterates the large percentage of wasted resources on death penalty cases, saying that only “15% of those who have been sentenced to death have been executed.” The number of resources dedicated to the death penalty and the money spent results in a “higher cost per execution” (Dieter). Furthermore, an actual capital case that pursues the death penalty must take into account the opportunity costs, or the extra time that “pursuing the death penalty takes compared to cases … without the death penalty” (Dieter). Essentially, these opportunity costs could be directed towards more useful tasks, such as taking on

Capital punishment, commonly referred to as the death penalty, is a very controversial topic around the world. The death penalty is the execution of an offender of the law, that is sentenced to death if the court of law is convinced of a criminal offense. Throughout society, there are debates from both sides, over the ethics and legality of capital punishment, especially in the US. The existence of the death penalty leads to several questions, but the most frequent question asked is, “ Has the government established our justice system out of a desire for rehabilitation, or out of a desire for retribution.” (death penalty justice system).

The Founding Fathers had in mind that no man ought to be subject to “cruel and unusual punishment”. However, taken out of context nearly 250 years later, the notion of capital punishment may seem both cruel and unusual. The death penalty for capital crimes has stirred not only moral and religious ,but poses an economic issue as well. Opponents of the death penalty cite that Lex talionis, or the idea that one ought to retaliate for wrongs done, is an idea gone and has no place in a new civilized society. Also they does an eye an eye make the whole world blind. The death penalty is a barbaric and inefficient way of punishing criminals. In many areas of the country, the death system of appeals and trials makes up 60-80% of the total criminal

The death penalty is a legal process where the person who had committed an insane crime of murder is sentenced to death by the state, as a demonstration of punishment for what the accuser has committed. Since long before, people have been using this method not only to show the consequences of committing an insane crime, but also as a kind of notice to anyone who had the intentions of committing such crimes. With no doubt, the death penalty has been a part of combating human crime in society for many centuries, and is considered a necessary way to eradicate dangerous criminals. In other people’s views, the subject of needing the death penalty became considered as an inhumane and unjust way to control and prevent criminal activity, its purpose and forms of use have been questioned for many years and the debate on whether it is necessary or not has been circling around. The death penalty needs to be kept in place as a way to prevent insane crimes, by taking an in-depth look at how it affects society.

The death penalty is an effective yet dying way of punishing murderers in today’s society. According to the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) the most murders executed since they year 1976 was 18 years ago now, in 1999, with 98 murderers executed that year. Regardless of the human ability to change one’s life, we should be increasing the amount of executions per year. If the amount of executions per year is increased the financially, the death penalty would be a smart way to save taxpayers’ dollars.

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.

Upon examination, one finds capital punishment to be economically weak and deficient. A common misconception of the death penalty is that the cost to execute a convicted criminal is cheaper than to place a convict in prison for life without parole. Due to the United States judicial system, the process of appeals,

Some of those who support the death penalty base their argument on the fact that it is a cost-effective alternative to life imprisonment. However, it may be more costly to execute an inmate than to have that person serve a life sentence (Amnesty International, 1987). A 1982 study in New York concluded that the average capital murder trial and the first stage of appeals costs U.S. tax-payers 1.8 million dollars (Bohm, 1987). It is estimated that this is less than it would cost to incarcerate someone for one hundred years. Other sources estimate that it can cost up to 2.2 million dollars to obtain and carry out a death sentence (Johnson, 1990). The principal factor in this cost is the appeals process, which lasts an average of ten years and is deemed necessary to reduce the likelihood of the execution of an innocent person.