Utilitarianism Death Penalty

     Capital punishment should be viewed as the stripping away of humanity from a person. The death penalty itself should be "executed" because of racial inequities, the concept of murder, the possibility of error, lack of deterrence, the cost, and an overwhelmed legal system. "The goal of capital punishment is revenge" (Introduction 1). Capital punishment is simply an outlet for the bloodlust of the American people (Introduction 1).

This passage presents a discussion about arguments concerning morality of the death penalty. This is an important debate to both proponents and opponents of the death penalty because of the serious implications of the punishment. The two positions argue whether or not the death penalty should be prohibited. Both viewpoints have valid claims warranting consideration. For example, evidence indicates that death sentence is both cruel and immoral. In contrast, opposing evidence suggests that is a moral punishment for certain offenders. While both sides of the issue have valid points, the claim that the death penalty should not be prohibited is the stronger position, the position supported by the preponderance of the evidence cited in the passage. The most convincing and forceful reasons in support of the position that capital punishment should still be used are that it is the only moral punishment for brutal and heinous crimes, that it is more humane than a life long prison sentence, and that it was found to be constitutional by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, these reasons and opposing viewpoint will be discussed next.

Are there special human beings who are entitled to more rights and privileges than ordinary humans? Rodia’s theory in Dostoyevsky's novel, Crime and Punishment, addresses this question. His desire to perform benevolent deeds for society converts him into a strong believer in his theory, influencing him to commit murder. Through Rodia’s experiment, the novel proves the theory false. Dostoevsky uses his characterization of Raskolnikov to express criticism of the popular theory, Utilitarianism.

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.

“Since 1973, at least 121 people have been released from death row after evidence of their innocence emerged. During the same period of time, over 982 people have been executed. Thus, for every eight people executed, we have found one person on death row who never should have been convicted. These statistics represent an intolerable risk of executing the innocent” (“Innocence”).

According to capital punishment supporters, many of these reasons of the anti-death penalty movement are false and are now wrongly accepted as fact. The argument that the death penalty does not deter crime is debatable. By executing murderers you prevent them from murdering again. If these people no longer exist then they obviously cannot commit more crimes. In addition, criminals have admitted, in thousands of fully documented cases, that the death penalty was the specific threat which deterred them from committing murder (Pro-Death Penalty, 2014). The opponents of capital punishment claim that the death penalty has caused and can cause the execution of innocent people. However, according to the supporters, no evidence indicates that innocent people have been executed. Upon reviewing 23 years of capital sentences, a Wall Street Journal study indicated that they were unable to find a single case in which an innocent person was executed (Eddlem, 2002). Furthermore, advocates note that the

Capital punishment, otherwise known as the death penalty, is a controversial subject which has been argued for decades due to the ethical decisions involved. People believe the death penalty is the right thing to do and that it is the perfect example of ‘justice’ while others believe that it is immoral and overly expensive. The death penalty is not a logical sentence for criminals, it doesn’t give them the right type of justice and it is immoral.

The death penalty has been a controversial topic among society for ages. An issue often brought up when discussing the legality of capital punishment is wrongful convictions. Advocates of the death penalty say that, while wrongful convictions are an issue, those few cases do not outweigh the need for lawful execution of felons who are, without a doubt, guilty. On the other hand, the opponents argue that the death penalty is wrong from both a legal and moral standpoint, an ineffective form of punishment, and should, ultimately, be outlawed. With both advocates and challengers constantly debating on this topic, the death penalty and wrongful convictions continue to be hot buttons issues for Americans and people throughout the world.

Supporters of the capital punishment system penalty argue that when enforced, the death penalty saves lives. The fault placed into the opposing side for using the system with new trials to postpone execution. The problem with that argument is that in Florida, a total of twenty-five death row prisoners had been released due to erroneous convictions and were able to prove innocence, not a strong argument when lives are at risk.

Another topic on the Death Penalty is that the Death Penalty puts innocent lives at risk, many people have been sentenced to death row and it wasn 't them who did the crime. Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in the United States in 1976, 138 innocent men and women have been released from death row, including some who came within minutes of execution. Over 138 innocent men and women have been released from death row. It cost to much for the death penalty system. One out of every ten who has been executed in the United States since 1977 is mentally ill. The death penalty is given at random, approximately 15000 to 17000 homicides are committed a year and only 120 people are sentenced to death, that 's less than 1%. In (“The Facts: 13 Reasons to Oppose the Death Penalty 1”). In Missouri, Texas and Virginia investigations have been opened to determine if those states executed innocent men. In (“The High Cost of the Death Penalty 1”). Mistakes will be made in any system which relies upon human testimony for

The death penalty has had and will always have the danger of judicial errors. As the executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center Richard Dieter has emphasized, “every time we have an execution, there is a risk of executing an innocent person. The risk may be small, but it’s unacceptable” (Death to the Death Penalty). According to the Death Penalty Information Center, among all 7,818 people who were sentenced to death since 1977, 1412 people have been executed and 155 people have been proved innocent. Therefore, for every nine people executed, we have found one person is innocent.

Only the most dangerous criminals in the world are faced with society’s ultimate penalty, or at least that is the theory. Capital punishment, commonly referred to as the Death Penalty has been debated for many decades regarding if such a method is ethical. While there are large amounts of supporters for the death penalty as a form of retribution, the process is avoidable financially as taxing for all parties involved. The financial expenses may be better off saved for life imprisonment with an emphasis in restorative justice for victims. Overall, there is unreasonable inefficiency with the capital punishment to justify the taking of another person’s life.

Although the death penalty is legal in some parts of the United States, it has no place in our quest for justice and needs to be abolished. In particular, the death penalty is ineffective because of the time gone to waste from the salaried guardsmen being paid overtime, to the innocents being put on row. Due to the crucial time being lost, the United States is not spending money adequately, resulting in the downfall to debt. Not only is money being lost, but racial bias exhibited during trial is inadmissible and has a huge effect on how people in the society are portrayed, as well as treated. Abolishing the capital punishment will take the United States one step closer in recovering lost money and

Although supporters of capital punishment argue that there has been no proof of an innocent person being executed in the past century, more inmates are being exonerated from the death row (SB). It is evident that the criminal justice system makes mistakes as errors have gone through the process. In “Death Penalty Debates: Is the capital punishment system working?” Kenneth Jost stated that a Texas death row inmate, Anthony Graves, spent nearly two decades in prison for a crime he did not commit, becoming the 139th former death row inmate to have been freed of his alleged crime (AP). Some death row inmates were proven innocent by DNA analysis and some were released based on a reexamination of evidence. “Most of the exonerations, like Graves’,

Convicted criminals should be limited in their appeals and there should be no stays of execution to draw out their incarceration. Executions should be carried out forthrightly, without delay and with sufficient publicity to get the message across to other criminals. To see a reduction in crime based on the death penalty, society must realize that criminals will, no matter what, be put to death if particular crimes are committed. They need to realize and that there is no hope of absolution. The same that is true for capital punishment, is true in general. Though retributive and utilitarian principles of justice are independent from one other; and though they can sometimes lead us to same conclusion on what is right and wrong. Both principles are needed because there is no assurance that the decision is the right one, without a system of checks and