More handpicked essays just for you.
Pros and cons of the death penalty
Pros and cons of the death penalty
Controversial issue of capital punishment
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Pros and cons of the death penalty
Capital punishment should be re-introduced to Australia
Capital punishment should be re-introduced, and should only be used for crimes that are committed by people whose intention was just to kill people for entertainment, cannibalism or to spread terror. There are lots of advantages if capital punishment is carried out correctly: There is no possibility for them to commit another crime, it acts as a deterrent for others who do/may do that crime, saves us (tax-payers) lots of money as they don’t get kept in jail for their entire life, it may make the victim’s family feel better and it acts like a revenge for the victim’s family.
Lots of people argue that killing people is not nice; they should suffer for what they did so they should be kept
Majority of people would say that killing an innocent person is horrible. People say killing someone is wrong no matter what. Though it depends what the reason is for. For instance, if someone is a murderer, than they should be put in jail as soon as possible. If someone innocent is causing too much trouble, than get their families permission
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.
Capital punishment only shows how America as a nation still clings on to practices used from long ago. Now with the implementation of new forms of justice it’s seems reasonable that nefarious traditions be omitted from the itinerary. Rehabilitation is far better for the people than the use of life-ending threats that do not help to deter the committing of crimes.
Since the early settlers first stepped foot on what is now the United States of America, capital punishment has been reserved as a form of punishment for the people who have committed some of society’s most heinous crimes. Recently, support of capital punishment has begun to erode due to the advancements of DNA technology and groups, such as the Innocence Project. Capital punishment, however, remains to be an appropriate form of punishment for someone convicted of capital crimes, and may be effective in deterring such offenses.
I believe that capital punishment is necessary to ensure justice. Certain criminals commit crimes so great that they warrant death. The emotional tolls of the people around the victim can be alleviated by the death of the perpetrator. Prisons are inherently difficult to run, and capital punishment reduces the efforts that must be expended to successfully manage a prison. Capital punishment reduces crime in the way that it offers an incentive great enough to prevent offenses such as mass murder. Capital punishment holds much support in its favor, and I believe that it should remain.
Capital punishment is crime's most dreaded consequence, death. Hanging was Canada's form of capital punishment up until 1976 when it was abolished. Webster's Dictionary defines capital punishments as: "The penalty of death for the commission of a crime." (Webster's, 1994, 43). The chance of capital punishment being reinstated in Canada has been very slim up until now. Recently the Canadian Alliance Party has put forth efforts to reinstate it, which has put the controversial topic back up for debate. This has divided many Canadians concerning their beliefs. Capital punishment should never be reinstated in Canada as it is a barbaric practice that is unjust. This essay will clearly demonstrate that reinstating capital punishment would be illegal as it would violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian Bill of Rights and the United Nations Universal Deceleration of Human Rights. In addition, this paper will show that capital punishment is a cruel and barbaric punishment. Finally, this paper will examine how capital punishment does nothing to deter people from committing crimes.
Capital Punishment should NOT be abolished, because it is the only punishment that fits the
Punishment occurs to individuals who break the law. It is also used to maintain the level of crime and to protect community members in Australia. To determine that society is content with maintaining the crime rate, this essay will discuss punishment types given to offenders and how society justifies the use punishment. Additionally, providing a brief overview of the community correction and prions rates to show that communities prefer to incarcerate lawbreakers. Highlighting that crime rates are being maintained by looking at the personal crime rate for assault before concluding that Australian society feel safe enough to allow the criminal justice system to sustain the crime rate.
While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that capital punishment is being used for vengeance or as a deterrent. Capital punishment has been used worldwide, not only by the governments to instill fear, but to show that there are repercussions to ones actions. From the time we are born, we are taught to learn the difference between right and wrong. It is ingrained in our brains, what happens to people that do bad things? Capital punishment is renowned for being the worst thing that could be brought amongst ones life.
I believe that under certain circumstances that capital punishment should be allowed because if someone is going to commit mass murder they should pay with the ultimate human right which is of their life. This topic has been widely thought of in the world with a few philosophers really encompassing my views. Those are the views of Ernest Van Den Haag and Bruce Fein. Philosophers who oppose our views are such like Justice William Brennan and Hugo Adam Bedau. I will prove my point using the ideas of deterrence and morality of the issue of capital punishment. If the government would show that if you kill someone there will be a consequence for their actions and that the consequence would be equal to what they have done. The population will see that it isn’t worth taking another humans life. If we were to kill people that are committing these mass killings of innocent people there would not be as many criminals around. Therefore the streets would be a place people wouldn’t be afraid of anymore.
Firstly, I believe that it is a failure as a deterrent of crime, which can be. seen by comparing the criminal statistics of those countries where the punishment is in use, with those countries where it has been. abolished. The syll Capital punishment violates the right to live, a right everyone has. even if they are mass murderers.
All in all, capital punishment should be allowed because compared with life sentence, it is better at to the cost, safety, and symbolic representation for the victims. If people got a savage bear that killed a person, the bear will be killed by people instead of being taken to a zoo.
The death penalty is a just punishment for capital crimes, it helps to denture further crimes and it also insures there would be no parole. These are all reasons why it should not be abolished. These above and many more are reasons for keeping the death penalty. Of course in most crimes it is too harsh of a sentence, however it should not be abolished. There are still monsters among us who this punishment should be reserved for. They are the ones who lurk under our beds, they are the horrors never spoken allowed and they should be treated as such. The death penalty is the only option that should be considered for people such as these.
I strongly feel that capital punishment is essential in our legal system, as well as everyday life. Just as a toddler needs to be disciplined when he or she has a tantrum, a murderer needs to be punished for his or her actions. The death penalty solves many problems. It is a threat to any conspiring criminal-murderer. It promises the inescapable condition. It frees up jail space and cuts money spent on the inmate. The death penalty is also the closest thing to justice for the family and friends of the victim. If nothing else, capital punishment scares women and men of committing a serious crime that might put them on death row. If an individual knew he or she would definitely be put on death row, the individual might decide not to commit the crime. Although prison is made out to be a scary place, it could never repulse someone more than frying in the chair, dying of poison injection, or hanging. Why allow any vicious murderer the chance to escape prison and harm another person? People put an animal down once it has imperiled a human's life or safety. If humans are so concerned with their well being they ought to be guaranteed the same sanctuary from killers. Prisons, for the most part, are inescapable. But what if, the man that hunted you down, kidnapped you, and killed your friend, was the one of the few who successfully escaped from jail? One life was already taken; your life should not have to be lived in fear. Serial killers such as the Hillside Strangler prove that they need to kill and would do it again if given the chance. They by no means deserve to get that chance, or even a chance to dream about it. They have killed many and do not have a right to live. Killing the monsters that have already killed others gives the legal system spare money to spend on more important things. I find no logical reason why the government should spend money to feed, cloth, house, and entertain the murderers, when they could use the extra dollars to council, reprimand, and treat petty criminals to prevent more severe crimes in the future.