Why Georgia Should Stop The Death Penalty

Capital Punishment, also known as the Death Penalty, has been a part of the United State’s justice system for the majority of the country’s existence. Today, 31 out of the 50 states still recognize the death penalty as a viable option when dealing with high profile crimes, most notably murder and sexual assault. While many people argue that the death penalty should be made illegal, there is also widespread support in favor of keeping the death penalty, leaving the nation divided on the issue. Both sides of the argument possess valid evidence that supports their claims, but in the end, the arguments in favor of the death penalty are noticeably stronger. The death penalty is an appropriate sentence that should continue to be allowed in the

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.

In David M. Oshinsky’s book, Capital Punishment on Trial: Furman v. Georgia and the Death Penalty in Modern America, he discussed the case of Furman v. Georgia. He explores the controversy that capital punishment holds in the United States of America. The death penalty has been in practice for many centuries. For example, “In Massachusetts, where religion had played a key role in settlement, crimes like blasphemy, witchcraft, sodomy, adultery, and incest became capital offenses, through juries sometimes hesitated to convict” (Oshinsky, 2010). For the punishment of death these offenses do not fit the crime. However, capital punishment at this time was rarely criticized. The death penalty demanded many executions including public ones. Many of these were hangings and were public events. After the American Revolution the death penalty began to be questioned. For example, Benjamin Rush stated, “Capital punishments are the offspring of monarchial governments. Kings believe that they possess their crowns by a divine right. They assume the divine power of taking away human life” (Oshinsky, 2010). By the 1840’s there were organized groups opposing the death penalty such as the Society for the Abolition of Capital Punishment. Within the coming years, the support for capital punishment fluctuated. Throughout the book, Oshinsky explores the many cases leading up to the Furman v. Georgia decision.

In this paper I shall argue that capital punishment is immoral. In Furman v. Georgia we find a landmark case in which the legality of capital punishment is exposed. Judges Stewart, White, and Douglas found the death penalty to be immoral given the arbitrary forces involved. ("Furman v. Georgia") They believed this was causing a higher number of minorities specifically blacks to be subjected to

All of the research that I have done suggests that the death penalty is not a major source of deterrence for criminals to commit severe crimes such as homicide. In a 2009 survey of America’s top criminologists, published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology and written by Professor Michael Radelet, eighty-eight percent of the expert criminologists stated that they do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent for criminals to commit homicide. Respondents to this survey were asked to base their answers on research, rather

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

Those that are for the death penalty claim that it will serve as a deterrent and is the only way for retribution against murderers. Both issues are highly debatable and have even been a subject of criticism. Punishment as a deterrence has been used for ages. This concept does work, however it should not be applied to all criminals, in my opinion. Some pro capital punishment individuals claim that it is an efficient deterrence against criminals. In an article “Death penalty is a deterrence”, the authors claim that by practicing the death penalty, violent crimes will decrease.”violent crime has declined eleven percent, with murder showing the largest decline at even more than twenty two percent. We believe that this has occurred in part because of the strong signal that the death penalty sent to violent criminals and murders.” These statistics taken from this article may be inaccurate and should be closely examined.

The death penalty has existed in different forms dating back to Eighteenth Century B.C. Burning, hanging, beating, etc. were all means to an end to achieve this retribution. In today’s society, the debate over whether the death penalty is a viable punishment is still to be determined. Many scholars suggest that it fails to act as a deterrent and should be abolished while others cling to the idea that it continues to serve as retribution to those affected by the acts of criminals. Within this paper I will study the changing attitudes towards the death penalty as well as look into Texas and California as examples as they both portray interesting cases of the death penalty. While both actively sentence criminals to death row, California rarely executes while Texas has the highest execution rates in the country. Do these states have lower crime rates because of this or will this prove that the death penalty is unnecessary and violates the eighth amendment and is out of line with current views.

The use of capital punishment in the U.S. is a growing concern for most American citizens. According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty percent are against it. These statistics show that few people are against capital punishment (“Fact” 1). With the use of the death penalty growing the controversy is becoming more heated. With only twelve states left not enforcing it the resistance is becoming futile (“Fact” 4). Many debates have been made and even clauses have been invoked, such as, the “Cruel and Unusual Clause” that was invoked by the Supreme Court in 1962 (Meltsner 179). The use of death as a punishment has been viewed as “cruel

Georgia helped reaffirm the constitutionality of capital punishment (Gregg v. Georgia, n.d.). This case helped bring the public more clarity within their support of the death penalty, encouraging it to continue growing and reaching its highest levels of support in the measured past at 80% (and lowest levels of opposition at 13%) by the year 1994 (Jones, 2002). While Gallup Polls show a generally high, yet wavering support for the death penalty, the Harris Poll’s results show a marked increase in support within twenty years of the Gregg v. Georgia

Capital punishment, the state imposed penalty of death, continues to be one of the most controversial issues in contemporary American public policy. Since the earliest days of its employment in the colonial era until today, citizens have struggles with the issue of when and under what circumstances the taking of a human life by the state can be morally or legally justified. For some opponents of the death penalty, the simple answer is that the taking of a human life is always morally and ethically wrong, even when conducted under the auspices of state authority as a legal punishment. In contrast, proponents of capital punishment have contended with equal fervor that the death penalty is morally justified as a form of retributive justice,

     "It is impossible to say with certainty whether capital punishment significantly reduces the incidence of heinous crimes" (President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice 143). The United States has one of the highest crime rates and we are the only western nation that still allows the death penalty (Pragmatic Arguments 1). "A 1995 Hart Research Poll of police chiefs in the United States found that the majority of the chiefs do not believe that the death penalty is an effective law enforcement tool" (Fight the Death Penalty 3). These police chiefs rated reducing drug abuse the highest at 31%, better economy at 17%, simplifying court rules at 16%, longer prison sentences at 15%, more police officers at 10%, reducing guns at 3%, and

About two thirds of the countries around the world have abolished capital punishment in law or in practice on the grounds that it really isn’t effective to crime (opposingviews.com). But a 2008 comprehensive review of capital punishment research since 1975 by Drexel University economist Bijou Yang and psychologist David Lester of Richard Stockton College of New Jersey concluded that the majority of studies that track effects over many years and across states or counties find a deterrent effect (usnews.com).

The anti-death penalty debate has waxed and waned over the course of the last forty years. Since the moratorium on capital punishment set forth by the Supreme Court decision on (Furman V. Georgia) was lifted in 1976, it became necessary to make the application and administration of the death penalty consistent within each state. The Supreme Court’s decision created a need for states to review their laws concerning the death penalty. Individual states legislative changes concerning the death penalty allowed the states to meet the requirements to continue their death penalty practices. The legislative changes where intended to bring a more balanced application of the death penalty. In reality the changes did little

The death penalty should be abolished in Georgia and life imprisonment without the possibility of parole should be the maximum penalty for the worst murder convictions in the state from now on. There are several good reasons for this, both moral and ethical, as well as practical reasons of budgetary considerations. First of all, it is much cheaper to keep someone in prison for the rest of their lives than it is to execute them. This may seem contradictory, as life in prison can be a long time, and the state has to pay the imprisoned person's expenses during that whole time. However, the cost of getting someone from conviction to execution can be millions of dollars, since there are mandatory appeals, state-paid defense lawyers, and much more that the state has to pay, in addition to keeping the person imprisoned while awaiting execution, that can cost into the millions of dollars. On the other hand, keeping a convicted murderer in prison for life may only cost in the upper hundreds of thousands of dollars, or the low millions. It is far less than the cost of actually getting someone to the stage of execution in murder cases, as these cases can draw on for decades. In some cases, the person who is convicted may spend nearly the rest of their natural lives in prison anyway, before being executed, depending on their age. In other cases, their appeals drag on so long that they die in prison