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.
Many people argue that God is the only one with the right to take away our life. That he was the one that gave it to us and therefore no human should be allowed to decide over someone else’s life. Well, do they stop to think that the killers didn’t care at all that they didn’t have the right to kill the victim? Rarely a killer stops to think before striking. They kill with no mercy, not caring if the victim as a wife or children to support. It is obvious that the killer don’t think that God is the only one with the right to take away life, so let the people use that same right against them and put an end to the senseless killing.
The death penalty deters murder. The death penalty is the best way to stop a killer from killing someone else. Some say that prison is enough, but it isn’t. Death is necessary because if they are only sent to prison there is always the risk that some day the same killer that brutally killed a 5-year old or raped and strangle a college student might return to the streets.
Many people are led to believe that the death penalty doesn’t occur very often and that very few people are actually killed, but in reality, it’s quite the opposite. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1,359 people have been executed as a result of being on death row since 1977 to 2013. Even though this form of punishment is extremely controversial, due to the fact that someone’s life is at stake, it somehow still stands to this very day as our ultimate form of punishment. Although capital punishment puts murderers to death, it should be abolished because killing someone who murdered another, does not and will not make the situation any better in addition to costing tax payers millions of dollars.
deter crime? A study into the effect of Capital Punishment said, 'the presence of the death penalty in law and practice has no discernible effect as a deterrent to murder.' How does this serve as a deterrent to crime? It offers the convict an easy way out with no reflection on what they've done. They don't learn from their mistakes and although there is obviously no risk of re-offence, the criminal cannot give anything back to society.
or hundreds of years people have considered capital punishment a deterrence of crime. Seven hundred and five individuals have died since 1976, by means of capital punishment; twenty-two of these executions have already occurred this year (Death Penalty Information Center). Many U.S. citizens who strongly support the death penalty believe that capital punishment remains the best way to protect society from convicted killers. I, however, disagree; I do not feel that execution best punishes criminals for their acts. Instead, in my opinion, the administration of the death penalty should end because it does not deter crime; it risks the death of an innocent person, it costs millions of dollars, it inflicts unreasonable pain; and most importantly it violates moral principles.
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...
Last year alone, over five hundred and fifty people were murdered in Canada. The criminals were sentenced to serve twenty-five years imprisoned for the life/lives that they thieved. Imagine, waking up to discover the dread of your loved one, dead. Imagine the blow to your stomach, the pain and agony, and the hollowness of your throat. Imagine discovering that the assassin that killed your loved one was only to serve twenty-five years for taking a life. Imagine knowing your tax money went to assist the criminal in jail, instead of helping towards the park your loved one used to adore. Imagine watching more criminals commit crimes because the punishment isn't very severe. Imagine protecting yourself from your community because of are potential attackers. Without the death penalty, you won’t have to imagine. These thoughts will eventually become a reality. I think that the death penalty is an effective and compelling manner to settle murder and homicide because it threatens criminals, it provides a safer environment for communities, and the death penalty saves a lot of money for the government.
... or disobeys God’s way in committing premeditated murder or involuntary manslaughter should be put to death immediately.
The people in support of the death penalty say that if murderers are sentenced to death, future committers will think about the consequences before they actually proceed with the crime. However, most murderers don’t expect or plan to be caught and weigh their fate. Because, murders are committed when the murderer is angry or passionate, or by drug abusers and people under the influence of drugs or alcohol ("Deterrence (In Opposition to the Death Penalty)”). Therefore, it will not deter future crimes and will actually increase the amount of murders because of society. As previously stated, the death penalty isn’t proven to prevent future murders and/or crimes because it actually increases the likelihood of committing murder. It doesn’t prevent future murders because it would upset the family and friends of the person who was executed. For example, if someone was executed by the death penalty and it was someones family member, then the person who lost their loved one by the execution would most likely commit murder in anger. If that person was executed the next family member would get angry and so on. The cycle would never end and would have more murders. There is no final proof that the death penalty is a better deterrent than other options. Not having the death penalty would be better because it could save many lives. For example, United States a country that uses the death penalty has a higher murder rate than Europe or Canada which are countries that do not use the death penalty. To get a little specific, the states in the United States that do not use the death penalty have a lower murder rate than the states that do.
When a person inquires about death, they never expect that it will arrive early to meet them. A part of these innocent people never see it coming, but they are reconciled with death early as a result of another person’s malicious behavior. These people need to be punished by paying an equal price for what they stole from someone else: their life. Once a person is deemed a killer they are no longer a use to a society, they are a threat. Keeping them alive costs money that could be put to better use. Insurance is granted to them, even though they do not have a job and there are other hard working people who deserve it. They are given a decent home with accommodations that homeless people are forced to live without. There is an abundant amount of gray area in making a decision of this magnitude. The argument of being falsely accused often arises because once a mistake like this is made it obviously can not be undone. However, the Death Penalty is essential to keep the innocent citizens of the country safe.
I’m pro for death penalty because I believe that people who go out and are ready to take someone’s live, at that moment they are forfeiting their own right to live. I believe that the death penalty should be used only when the crime is very violent and heinous, but I believe that no individual should go out certain that regardless of how cruel, vicious, or hideous the murder is, they themselves will not suffer the death penalty knowing that their rights will be protected.
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 another family grief and pain as well as adding to the cycle of violence.” (Progress) As both families do not want to see each other because they all have pain and hate for one another. 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 member.
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.
Normally when one commits a crime, they are sentenced to a certain amount of time in prison. Depending on the crime, the judge will sentence that person to a number of days, weeks, months, or even a lifetime. Though, when pertaining to murder, terrorism, large-scale drug trafficking, or attempting to kill a witness, the death penalty is often considered. The United States should allow the death penalty because it is potent and ceases crime.
The death penalty has been an issue of debate for several years. Whether or not we should murder murderer’s and basically commit the same crime that they are being killed for committing. People against the death penalty say that we should not use it because of that very reason. They also make claims that innocent people who were wrongly convicted could be killed. Other claims include it not working as a deterrent, it being morally wrong, and that it discriminates. Some even claim that it is cruel and unusual punishment. I would like to shed light on the issue and inform everyone as to why we should keep the death penalty and possibly even use it more than we do now.
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.
Crime is everywhere. Wherever we look, we find criminals and crime. Criminals have become a part of our daily lives. Does this mean we let them be the darkness of our society? No, definitely not. Eliminating crime and criminals is our duty, and we cannot ignore it. Getting the rightly accused to a just punishment is very important. Some criminals commit a crime because they have no other option to survive, but some do it for fun. I do not advocate death penalty for everybody. A person, who stole bread from a grocery store, definitely does not deserve death penalty. However, a serial killer, who kills people for fun or for his personal gain, definitely deserves death penalty. Death penalty should continue in order to eliminate the garbage of our society. Not everybody deserves to die, but some people definitely do. I support death penalty because of several reasons. Firstly, I believe that death penalty serves as a deterrent and helps in reducing crime. Secondly, it is true that death penalty is irreversible, but it is hard to kill a wrongly convicted person due to the several chances given to the convicted to prove his innocence. Thirdly, death penalty assures safety of the society by eliminating these criminals. Finally, I believe in "lex tallionis" - a life for a life.