The Death Penalty should be discontinued to the families, human rights, and statistics. The families of the victim and the family of the one, who committed the crime, have no closure at all. The death penalty is killing a human for being convicted of a terrible crime one family may think its right but both suffer by their lost ones. “Although true closure is never really possible for the families, studies have shown that the continual process, along with the returning to court for many years, force families to confront the gruesome details of the crime many times over, making it impossible to get on with their lives. As difficult as that is the question is weather the victims needs are met effectively by killing someone else and causing …show more content…
They both relive the last memories of their loved one and they can’t help but cry and stare at the pictures they were once happy in. The families both have sadness when its their loved ones birthday. If the victim is married or have kids, their kids suffer and the husband/wife suffer as well. Although the families will never get there loved one back they still suffer on what had happen. Both families blame one another for having to take flowers, to their dead family member or visit their family member in a cemetery because of what happen. None of them is truly happy that they lost a family member. The families miss the person who seemed so happy, and also know that they are in a better place watching over them. Although the families aren’t happy about losing them, but are relieved to know that nothing else can hurt them. As one family feels sorry for the other family, there could be the family that doesn’t care what happens but wants everyone to suffer the way they are suffering about the tragic death of one family …show more content…
A right to live their life without having the state take their life away. “The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights. It is premeditated and cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state in the name of justice. It violates the right. It is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, whatever form it takes-electrocution, hanging, gassing, beheading, stoning, shooting or lethal injection.” (Fact) Sending innocent people to the death penalty is wrong judges and lawyers make mistakes as well as regular people. Sending an innocent person to the death penalty only because they don’t have enough evidence or they have a gut feeling that they did the crime is wrong to do to a living life. There is a chance they did nothing wrong to be killed over something they haven’t done. Every person has the right to live whether its working, being free, in jail or in prison, but no one should have their life taken from them, even if they have done something wrong, that’s just giving them the easy way out of their punishment. “Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in the United States in 1976, 138 innocent men and women have been released from the death row, including some who came within minutes of execution. In Missouri, Texas and Virginia investigations have been opened to determine if those states executed innocent men. To execute an innocent person is morally reprehensible; this risk we cannot
The death penalty has been around since the beginning of time as a means of punishing criminals, undisputed until the last century or so in terms of whether or not it is an ethical practice. The proponents for the death penalty offer up its ability to deter crime as their main reason for supporting it, their view supported by a functionalist sociological view in that using the death penalty, enough fear will be generated that people will refrain from committing the types of crime that the death penalty is applicable to (Schaefer, 2009). Another reason for favoring it are of an emotional nature; if a person commits a crime of a particularly horrible nature, many may feel that they deserve the death penalty, feeling that “an eye for an eye” is befitting for such a case (Jillette, Teller, & Price, 2006). It should be asked though, is emotional response and a theory of deterrence enough to justify the use of the death penalty? In this paper, I will answer that question and others.
Opponents of this position argue that the death penalty is a necessary evil. One of the top arguments is that you must punish offenders to discourage others from committing similar offenses (Radelet 44). Many people also feel that the victim’s families deserve closure. The prisoners have to pay for their crime and deserve the punishment that they get. Using the death penalty helps deal with the overpopulation in prisons. There are not enough resources or space to house prisoners for life. This statement can be true to a certain point. However, when talking about sacrificing one person’s life for the greater good of society, no man should have the authority to end someone’s life. One of the biggest issues that opponents argue is how much the victims suffer if the killer is not put to death. A murderer not only affects the person they kill, but also the victim’s friends and family’s life. They have to live with the grief of losing a loved one. If the killer is not put to death they could get the feeling that someone is out to get them. They will not be able to rest until the killer is tried and executed. Although this side of the argumen...
From 1977 to 2009 1,188 people have been killed by death penalty. America is trying to get rid of capital punishment. Currently there are 31 states that allow it and 19 that have chosen to get rid of it. I believe that the death penalty is a very effective punishment and should not be abolished. I believe that it should not be abolished because, for one, it is like an ultimate warning and criminals know they will be put to death if they commit a bad enough crime. Also death is often the only punishment criminals fear. Next, it provides a sense of closure for the victims. Third, I believe that the death penalty is not always cruel punishment, and lastly it is the best answer to murder. K. I. V. A. J. T. V. J. I. Q. T. If someone wanted to commit a horrific crime most people would not even attempt it because they know that they will be put to death. Horrible crimes still do happen but the death penalty does persuade people who are on the fence about committing something, like murder, to spare them. If there was not a death penalty criminals would not be as
... execute should not be made lightly, and tests should be done to ensure the right person is being punished for the crime that was committed. Taking away the person’s life who is responsible for the death of another person cannot bring the victim back and does not solve anything. Various people all over the world believe that the death penalty should not be supported and that it should be abolished. Many reasons exist for the abolition of the death penalty to take place including cost issues, religious issues, whether or not it acts as a deterrent, executing innocents and the harshness of the execution. Some may say the people who committed the most heinous crimes deserve to have justice served to them. However, even murderers are humans and should be treated fairly and justly. All people, even the guilty have a right to live; regardless of the crimes they committed.
Opponents of the death penalty will site several reasons to abolish death penalty such as the usage of death penalty as a deterrent, the cost of death penalty vs life in prison, unfairness in the application of death sentencing, and possible mistakes. Opponents would much rather focus on the rights’ of criminals than the victims and their families.
The death penalty has been around since the beginning of time and historians trace it back to the 1600’s (“Death Penalty Information”). It is considered the ultimate form of justice, an eye for an eye. While it might seem only logical that a murderer does not deserve to live any longer, the severe cost makes it a total waste. However, changing the public’s mind on an issue like this has proven to be difficult. To a family member who has lost someone to a murder, the only true form of justice they can look forward to is the execution. Telling the family the murderer will spend the rest of his life in jail with free health care and meals simply does not have the same ring to it. Nonetheless many other countries across the world have chosen to stop capital punishment, and are now enjoying the extra cash flow. In the year 2015 there are still 32 states that administer the death penalty, and only 18 states that have abolished it (“Death Penalty Information”). Capital punishment is controversial for many reasons, but the cost it puts on the tax payers is something everyone should be concerned with.
The death penalty, ever since it was established, has created a huge controversy all throughout the world. Ever since the death penalty was created, there have been people who supported the death penalty and those who wanted to destroy it. When the death penalty was first created the methods that were used were gruesome and painful, it goes against the Eighth Amendment that was put in place many years later. The methods they used were focused on torturing the people and putting them through as much pain as possible. In today’s society the death penalty is quick and painless, it follows the Eighth Amendment. Still there are many people who are against capital punishment. The line of whether to kill a man or women for murder or to let him or her spend the rest one’s life in prison forever will never be drawn in a staight.
Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished Why should the death penalty be abolished? The death penalty should be abolished for many reasons. Many people believe the saying, 'an eye for an eye'. But when will people realize that just because someone may have killed a loved one that the best thing for that person is to die also? People don't realize that they are putting the blood of another person's life on their hands.
Capital punishment is the punishment of death for a crime given by the state. It is used for a variety of crimes such as murder, drug trafficking and treason. Many countries also have the death penalty for sexual crimes such as rape, incest and adultery. The lethal injection, the electric chair, hanging and stoning are all methods of execution used throughout the world. Capital punishment has been around since ancient times; it was used in ancient Rome, and one of the most famous people to be crucified was Jesus Christ. 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.
Legal professor Ernest van den Haag believes that the death penalty is the good as in a punishment for terrible crimes that are committed. On the other hand professor of philosophy Hugo Adam Bedau thinks that the death penalty is not appropriate, do to it takes the lives of people that can not afford a good defense. I would have to agree with Ernest van den Haag. When a person commits a serious crime like murder, the only fitting penalty is death. "Maldistribution inheres no more in capital punishment than in any other punishment." (Haag 274) Fear of the death penalty can be a good deterrent. Many people also try to abolish the death penalty by talking about the suffering a convicted murderer has to go through, but what about what the victim had to go through. Further, if we get rid of the death penalty it will show that we are not willing to impose our punishments on people who brake our laws.
In our society there are many criminals that get away with no punishment for their crimes. Some of these people are walking around our cities with no remorse and waiting to strike again. When you walk down the street and you see a man walking on the opposite direction, you probably don’t think that he could be a cold blooded killer and if someone asks you right this minute if you are pro or con death penalty the answer would most likely be con. Now think about this, imagine that your brother, sister, mom, dad, or anyone you love walks down that same street and comes across this man and you never see that love one again. Some ten days later the police comes to your door telling you that they have found that loved one face down in a muddy bog, having been beaten to death, or perhaps shot or stabbed, or maybe strangle. Perhaps the person you love has been raped, mutilated, or made to suffer greatly before dying. If this were to ever happen to you or someone close to you, would you want that to happen to someone else? Would you allow a cold blooded killer to walk the streets your little brother, sister, son or daughter walks on? I certainly wouldn’t. For this and other reasons is that death penalty should be kept and enforced.
The death penalty is legal in thirty-two states. I shall argue that capital punishment should be abolished in our country because it is never moral to kill a human being no matter what they have done, because it often costs more money to keep someone on death row than to keep someone in prison for life, because of the men and women who are wrongly accused of a crime they did not commit, and because death is the easy way out.
People make bad decisions that can lead to serious consequences daily, and how they are punished by the law changes for each crime. In an article posted by The Guardian in 2011, they report that after the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, “1,264 people have been executed in America” (Rogers). This number may be alarming to some that are against capital punishment, but anticipated by others who stand by this means of retribution. There are many arguments that have been made as to why the death penalty should continue to exist and why it should be suspended. A big argument has been made about the death of innocent people who after their deaths could have been found innocent due to new evidence that would exonerate them. Then there are other arguments about the people who escape the death penalty only to commit further heinous crimes that might have been prevented. Whether it is a case of morality on both sides of the argument, there is not a shortage of debates against the death penalty. What it all comes down to is, should the death penalty be abolished?
...f punishment to the criminals. No one is allowed to take away others life, no matter how heinous the crime is made, all human life is a prices less and you can never bring it back once it is gone. In my opinion I strongly think that death penalty should never be implemented and let life imprisonment with no chance of parole be retain as a capital punishment. In that way it is more humane and reasonable form punishment
The heaviest punishment towards convicts is death penalty in law. It means to atone for an offense is dead. Of course, it will not execute for every criminal. Death penalty is only for felons. For example, a people who murdered someone would not get the death penalty. The death penalty is for murders who related to the smuggling of aliens or committed during a drug-related drive-by shooting. Sometimes, however, the felons also can avoid the death because some countries (or actually states) don’t allow death penalty. Then, what decision would the convict get? It is a life sentence, which means the prisoner should be in a prison until he or she dies. However, it is not good idea to keep felons. Death penalty should be allowed and get more active because life sentence is costly, unsafe, and insincere for a victim and the family.