A contentious issue in current debate is the death penalty and its application in society. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, occurs when a individual is punished by execution as a consequence of an offence they committed (Taylor, 2014). Although Australia does not practice the death penalty, many countries continue to employ it as a means of justice and uphold its value in society. The death penalty debate is a multifaceted issue, encompassing many aspects of society including ethics and morality, the judicial system, and politics and the economy. It will be argued that the death penalty is a morally dubious and obsolete practice that is no longer relevant in modern judiciary, as it breaches the inviolable human right to life. Ethics and morality are primary arguments for both supporting and opposing the death penalty, as some individuals believe that the death penalty is a immoral practice and others consider that it can be morally justified when prolific crimes are committed. Punishment is fundamental element to any legal system as a means of justice and ensuing that the offender is unable to commit additional crimes; however, in the case of the death penalty there can be dire consequences if the legal system is wrong. Politics and the economy are also greatly influenced by the death penalty as they determine if the practice is maintained. The death penalty breaches a number of human rights laws and some individuals support that it is immoral; however, others consider it to be justifiable due to the heinous actions of the offender. Ethics and morality are the founding reasons for both supporting and opposing the death penalty, leading to the highly contentious nature of the debate. When heinous crimes are com... ... middle of paper ... ...es and Records Administration. Retrieved from http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html The California Commission on the Fair Admission of Justice. (2008). Report and Recommendations on the Administration of the Death Penalty in California. Retrieved from The California Commission on the Fair Admission of Justice website http://www.ccfaj.org/documents/reports/dp/official/FINAL%20REPORT%20DEATH%20PENALTY.pdf The Convention on the Right of the Child, 15 December 1989, UN General Assembly. Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/2ndOPCCPR.aspx The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (1948). United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T.G., Feather, N.T., & Platow, M.J. (2007). Retributive and Restorative Justice. Law and Human Behavior, 32(5), 375-389. doi:
Since the last execution in Australia in 1967 of Ronald Ryan and the abolition of capital punishment in Australia in 1973 imprisonment has been the only option as a sanction for murder. A survey conducted in 2009 demonstrated that a clear majority of Australians (64%) believed that imprisonment should be the punishment for murder as opposed to 23% stating the death penalty should be used and 13% did not wish to comment. The death penalty is not an effective punishment for all cases and there has not been any solid evidence stating that it is a more effective deterrent than imprisonment. Furthermore capital punishment possesses the risk of executing the innocent, which has happened or almost happened numerous times in the past such as Colin Ross. The death penalty is also a breach of the Universal Human Rights. Additionally although there is belief that detaining criminals actually costs taxpayers more due to court processes, the method of execution and many other factors. While imprisonment should be the highest sanction for crime, in some cases this is not effective, such as the case of Australian serial killer Peter Dupas. As a result, imprisonment is the only appropriate option for murder in majority of instances, however in some cases it is evident that capital punishment is necessary for the safety of society.
Argumentative Essay on Capital Punishment in Australia Capital punishment is barbaric and inhumane and should not be re-introduced into Australia. Although capital punishment has been abolished, the debate on this topic has never abated. When a particularly heinous crime is committed, this debate arouses strong passions on both sides. Many who advocate the abolition of capital punishment consider the death penalty to be cruel and inhuman, while those who favor of punishment by death see it as a form of just retribution for the gravest of crimes. Determining whether Queensland should re-introduce capital punishment as a sentence will be the focus of this assignment.
Opponents of capital punishment are outspoken and vehement in their arguments. They believe the death penalty does not does not deter crime. They also hold the opinion that endin...
There are over sixty offenses in the United States of America that can be punishable by receiving the death penalty (What is..., 1). However, many individuals believe that the death penalty is an inadequate source of punishment for any crime no matter how severe it is. The fact remains, however, that the death penalty is one of the most ideal forms of punishment. There are other individuals who agree with the idea that capital punishment is the best form of punishment. In fact, some of these individuals believe that this should be the only form of punishment.
Capital punishment is an age-old practice. It has been used in civilizations for millennia, and will continue to be used for millennia to come. Whether used for the right or wrong reasons, capital punishment is unmistakable in its various forms. From hangings, to firing squads, to lethal injections, capital punishment and the associated proceeding have evolved over time. There have been many arguments against capital punishment, many of which still hold true. As capital punishment has evolved over time, however, many of the most valid arguments have been proven all but null. Capital punishment still has its ethical and moral concerns, but as it has evolved over time these concerns have not necessarily become less valid, but fewer in number when specifically addressing capital punishment. The proceedings that come hand-in-hand with capital punishment, however, have become increasingly more rigorous and controversial and are the main focus of most capital punishment concerns.
Narration: When it comes to the death penalty there are Opponents and Proponents and although both aim to defend and protect society from crime their beliefs differ in how to accomplish this.
However, some may argue that this suffering and pain is justifiable, as they too caused immense pain and suffering and therefore it is only fair that they too experience it. Secondly many may argue that capital punishment succeeds in protecting society, it removes the bad from the world and thus ‘’in this way there will be less unhappiness’’ (Maalouf, 2008, 4). Therefore some utilitarians may argue that the death penalty does more than take the criminal out of the society, ‘’that it serves as a deterrent for would-be killers, preventing future murders, therefore protecting society in a significant way, unlike life imprisonment’’ (Tzovarras, 2002, 5). This claim, however, is difficult to support, with little evidence available to support the deterrent argument. ‘’Social science and statistical studies tend to show no correlation between capital punishment and crimes of a serious and violent nature’’ (Tzovarras, 2002, 5), with Chiricos, Waldo, 1970, 200) concluding that there is ‘’little-consisted support is found’’. Furthermore in using a utilitarian argument to argue that countries such as Australia should adopt the death penalty, two ethical objections are raised. Tzovarras, (2002, 5) argues that by using ‘’any utilitarian argument to justify
In this paper I will argue for the moral permissibility of the death penalty and I am fairly confident that when the case for capital punishment is made properly, its appeal to logic and morality is compelling. The practice of the death penalty is no longer as wide-spread as it used to be throughout the world; in fact, though the death penalty was nearly universal in past societies, only 71 countries world-wide still officially permit the death penalty (www.infoplease.com); the U.S. being among them. Since colonial times, executions have taken place in America, making them a part of its history and tradition. Given the pervasiveness of the death penalty in the past, why do so few countries use the death penalty, and why are there American states that no longer sanction its use? Is there a moral wrong involved in the taking of a criminal’s life? Of course the usual arguments will be brought up, but beyond the primary discourse most people do not go deeper than their “gut feeling” or personal convictions. When you hear about how a family was ruthlessly slaughtered by a psychopathic serial killer most minds instantly feel that this man should be punished, but to what extent? Would it be just to put this person to death?
In the Time article, “The Death of the Death Penalty”, David Von Drehle addresses the controversial issue of the death penalty. The death penalty in the United States is a declining and flawed method of punishment. The problem of the American death penalty is still an issue in this day and age. Von Drehle compresses the flaws of the death penalty into five simple reasons.
Pasquerella, Lynn. “The Death Penalty in the United States.” The Study Circle Resource Center of Topsfield Foundation. July 1991. Topsfield Foundation. 03 Feb 2011. Web.
Americans have argued over the death penalty since the early days of our country. In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes. As of year ended in 1999, in Texas, the state had executed 496 prisoners since 1930. The laws in the United States have change drastically in regards to capital punishment. An example of this would be the years from 1968 to 1977 due to the nearly 10 year moratorium. During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes.”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment. While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that is capital punishment being used for vengeance or as a deterrent.
“The Death Penalty: Pro and Con.” Wgbh.org. WGBH Educational Foundation, 2013. Web. 12 Feb. 2013.
When someone is legally convicted of a capital crime, it is possible for their punishment to be execution. The Death Penalty has been a controversial topic for many years. Some believe the act of punishing a criminal by execution is completely inhumane, while others believe it is a necessary practice needed to keep our society safe. In this annotated bibliography, there are six articles that each argue on whether or not the death penalty should be illegalized. Some authors argue that the death penalty should be illegal because it does not act as a deterrent, and it negatively effects the victim’s families. Other scholar’s state that the death penalty should stay legalized because there is an overcrowding in prisons and it saves innocent’s lives. Whether or not the death penalty should be
Capital punishment is now illegal in many countries, like the United Kingdom, France and Germany, but it is also legal in many other countries, such as China and the USA. There is a large debate on whether or not capital punishment should be illegal all over the world, as everyone has a different opinion on it. In this essay, I will state arguments for and against the death penalty, as well as my own opinion: capital punishment should be illegal everywhere. Firstly, many believe capital punishment should be reinstated in the United Kingdom because of the financial cost of prisoners. Annually, it costs about £26,978 per prisoner when they are in jail.
“An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is how the saying goes. Coined by the infamous Hammurabi’s Code around 1700 BC, this ancient expression has become the basis of a great political debate over the past several decades – the death penalty. While the conflict can be whittled down to a matter of morals, a more pragmatic approach shows defendable points that are far more evidence backed. Supporters of the death penalty advocate that it deters crime, provides closure, and is a just punishment for those who choose to take a human life. Those against the death penalty argue that execution is a betrayal of basic human rights, an ineffective crime deterrent, an economically wasteful option, and an outdated method. The debate has experienced varying levels of attention over the years, but has always kept in the eye of the public. While many still advocate for the continued use of capital punishment, the process is not the most cost effective, efficient, consistent, or up-to-date means of punishment that America could be using today.