Why the Death Penalty is Ineffective

1552 Words6 Pages
Why the Death Penalty is Ineffective The society constantly tries to reason with an effective way to respond to violence. Differences in opinion on the use of death as punishment arise from differences in religious, ethical, cultural, and morale perspectives. The role of death as a punishment for an offence has not been solved today, and remains a dilemma for the citizenry's political, legal, social, and religious thought. This is because an answer to the question "is the death penalty effective?" is not clear or evident today, as it was in the 18th century. Many studies have tried to create a persuasive response and evidence that official state killings make citizens and law enforcement safe. Other studies prove that death does not make the society safer, as illustrated with crime reports in New York in 1977. The argument is that death penalty only increases the rate of crime, since in NY, forty-four officers were killed prior to the 1977 death penalty, and eighty officers were killed in the decade after the death penalty (Carlson, Elshtain & Owens, 2004). Given the differing and perplexing views on the death penalty, this paper uses the rogerian argument to present valid reasons for and against the death penalty. Those that make the argument, "the death penalty is an effective punishment," make it on the basis on the cost on human life. Theorists like Ernest Van Den Haag believe that the death penalty has a higher cost on human life, making fewer people choose

More about Why the Death Penalty is Ineffective

Open Document