Negating the Use of the Death Penalty
America has been deluded into believing that the death penalty is an effective deterrent for homicide. It is a hot issue, a favorite amongst politicians. But what these political pundits fail to mention is that conclusive evidence proves that not only is the death penalty an ineffective crime deterrent, it is also an expensive, unjust and undignified policy for any government to enact.
The dignity preserved by any government that lawfully practices execution is highly contested, as the death penalty is an inhumane and archaic method of punishment. Perhaps in this instance we can supplement "human dignity" with the word "justice," because preserving human dignity is certainly a matter of what is and is not just. Dr. Ernest van den Haag, a fierce proponent of the death penalty, states that "I must confess that I have never understood the assorted arguments claiming that the death penalty is inconsistent with human dignity [justice] or that, somehow, society has no right to impose it" ("For the Death Penalty" 207). The death penalty is not consistent with human dignity. There must be a standard set that will state what is and is not permissible. The value of a human life is an obvious one. "How does killing people who kill teach us not to kill" is a popular slogan used by abolitionists that sums up the irony of the death penalty. It is a mouthful, granted, but it makes a strong point. The government, by enacting the policy of death, lowers itself to the level of those whom they are punishing. There is no doubt that the world around us considers the death penalty to be morally flawed and lacking in human dignity. The UN Commission on Human Rights, an international body that se...
... middle of paper ...
...t that has not withstood the test of effectiveness. Even our law enforcement officials, when polled, put the death penalty at the bottom of the list of effective methods for deterring crime. To paraphrase Professor Conrad's statistics, the actual percentage of murders in our population is so low that it is statistically ridiculous to claim that the reason that you or I haven't murdered is because we fear the hangman's noose (202). Most of the population abstain from murder because they believe that it is morally wrong, and therefore have no real intention of committing homicide.
Retentionists' arguments have fallen one by one in the light of conclusive evidence that many choose to ignore or deem invalid. The death penalty has proven to be an outdated method of punishment. It belongs in the past; buried with other shameful things our country has engaged in.
The death penalty has always been a subject of controversy. Some say that it is a barbaric practice that should be done away with while others claim it to be necessary to ensure the safety of modern society. Either way, capital punishment has always remained a grey area in the
Based on public opinion and facts of this side, “the death penalty process consumes tremendous amounts of money and resources and fails to deter criminal activity” (Ballaro and Cushman, 2016). The people do not want to see tax money squandered on such a fruitless endeavor, instead send the person to jail for life and be done with it. The people believe this view even more so, because of the belief that putting a murderer to death is, in fact, a hypocritical act and makes a murder out of the system and all who played a role in doing so, making the prosecutors no better than the convicted. While the death penalty prevents one murderer from killing again, it created countless more proving that the capital punishment is a useless deterrent all in all. This point of view and belief is the opposing side’s view to capital punishment’s acting as a
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.
Narration: Opponents of the death penalty believe it is an ineffective way to stop crime and that there are better ways to punish crime and keep society safe.
In 1967, Thorsten Sellin argued that “the presence of the death penalty in law and practice has no discernible effect as a deterrent to murder.” In the mid-1970s, Isaac Ehrlich countered after looking at national homicide rates between 1930 and 1970 that each execution deterred between seven and eight homicides. Many researchers have tried to duplicate Ehrlich’s results, but most of them have been unsuccessful. (Schonebaum, 2002) According to the website Illini for Life (Deterrence Factor,) although the murder rate has stayed relatively steady since 1976, the rate of execution has skyrocketed.
The death penalty is a controversial topic in the United States today and has been for a number of years. The death penalty is currently legal in 38 states and two federal jurisdictions (Winters 97). The death penalty statutes were overturned and then reinstated in the United States during the 1970's due to questions concerning its fairness (Flanders 50). The death penalty began to be reinstated slowly, but the rate of executions has increased during the 1990's (Winters103-107). There are a number of arguments in favor of the death penalty. Many death penalty proponents feel that the death penalty reduces crime because it deters people from committing murder if they know that they will receive the death penalty if they are caught. Others in favor of the death penalty feel that even if it doesn't deter others from committing crimes, it will eliminate repeat offenders.
This paper will present facts that will help the reader understand the real nature of capital punishment, presenting the case against the death penalty for reasons of unconstitutionality and human rights violations.
Since the 13 colonies were first established in America, the death penalty has been the main form of capital punishment as a firmly deep-rooted institution in the United States. Today, one of the most debated issues in the criminal justice system is the issue of capital punishment. While receiving disapproving viewpoints as those who oppose the death penalty find moral fault in capital punishment, the death penalty has taken a very different course in America while continuing to further advancements in the justice system since the start of the new millennium. While eliminating overcrowding in state jails, the death penalty has managed to save tax payers dollars as well as deteriorate crime and apprehend criminals.
Since 1976 there have been 1,434 executions in the United States, and additionally of those executions since 1973, 156 of those on death row were exonerated (Facts About the Death Penalty, 2016). In 2012 the National Research Council released a report titled Deterrence and the Death Penalty, citing that studies claiming there was a correlation with the death penalty and lower homicide rates. However this is not true, the death penalty has no effect on crime especially homicide rates. Additionally it is negligent of policy makers to rely on such reasoning in determining the continued validity of the death penalty for a wide variety of capital crimes.
The death penalty is inhumane. One could say that the death penalty is inhumane because it takes a person’s life away in the form of revenge. For example, families of victims tend to be upset toward the suspect and want the ultimate revenge which is the death penalty. People have no right to want a murderer to be put to death because it is inhumane to decide another person’s fate and it lowers us to the suspect’s level. One could say that it is understandable where the families of victims are coming form on this issue and others should not judge them for that because the families are acting out of anger, but people have no right to decide if another person lives or dies. For example, no one has the right to judge another person but God. An average person should not put themselves at a higher power. In the World Medical Jour...
Advocating the Death Penalty Thousands of people will attack the death penalty. They will give emotional speeches about the one innocent man or woman who might accidentally get an execution sentence. However, all of these people are forgetting one crucial element. They are forgetting the thousands of victims who die every year by the hands of heartless murderers. There are more murderers out there than people who are wrongly convicted, and that is what we must remember. I, as well as many others, have total confidence in the death penalty. It is a very beneficial component of our justice system. The death penalty saves lives. It saves lives because it stops those who murder from ever murdering again. It also deters potential murderers from ever committing the crime. Unfortunately, the death penalty is currently used so rarely that it isn’t nearly as effective as it could be. In order for it to work, we must put it into practice more often. In recent years, crime in America has been on the rise, in particular, violent crime. This has led not only to an overcrowding of prisons in our country, but also to an increase in the number of death sentences handed down by the courts. Despite the fact that the number of inmates on death row is climbing, the number of death sentences actually carried out in any given year lags far behind. People simply aren’t fearful of the death penalty when it isn’t used the way it should be (Stewart 50).
The death penalty has always been and continues to be a very controversial issue. People on both sides of the issue argue endlessly to gain further support for their movements. While opponents of capital punishment are quick to point out that the United States remains one of the few Western countries that continue to support the death penalty, Americans are also more likely to encounter violent crime than citizens of other countries (Brownlee 31). Justice mandates that criminals receive what they deserve. The punishment must fit the crime. If a burglar deserves imprisonment, then a murderer deserves death (Winters 168). The death penalty is necessary and the only punishment suitable for those convicted of capital offenses. Seventy-five percent of Americans support the death penalty, according to Turner, because it provides a deterrent to some would-be murderers and it also provides for moral and legal justice (83). "Deterrence is a theory: It asks what the effects are of a punishment (does it reduce the crime rate?) and makes testable predictions (punishment reduces the crime rate compared to what it would be without the credible threat of punishment)", (Van Den Haag 29). The deterrent effect of any punishment depends on how quickly the punishment is applied (Workshop 16). Executions are so rare and delayed for so long in comparison th the number of capitol offenses committed that statistical correlations cannot be expected (Winters 104). The number of potential murders that are deterred by the threat of a death penalty may never be known, just as it may never be known how many lives are saved with it. However, it is known that the death penalty does definitely deter those who are executed. Life in prison without the possibility of parole is the alternative to execution presented by those that consider words to be equal to reality. Nothing prevents the people sentenced in this way from being paroled under later laws or later court rulings. Furthermore, nothing prevents them from escaping or killing again while in prison. After all, if they have already received the maximum sentence available, they have nothing to lose. For example, in 1972 the U.S. Supreme Court banished the death penalty. Like other states, Texas commuted all death sentences to life imprisonment. After being r...
The death penalty has been an ongoing debate for many years. Each side of the issue presents valid arguments to explain why someone should be either for or against the subject. One side of the argument says deterrence, the other side says there’s a likelihood of putting to death an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder itself. Crime is an unmistakable part of our society, and it is safe to say that everyone would concur that something must be done about it. The majority of people know the risk of crime to their lives, but the subject lies in the techniques and actions in which it should be dealt with. As the past tells us, capital punishment, whose meaning is “the use of death as a legally sanctioned punishment,” is a suitable and proficient means of deterring crime. Today, the death penalty resides as an effective method of punishment for murder and other atrocious crimes.
Today's system of capital punishment tolerates many inequalities and injustices. The common arguments for the death penalty are filled with holes. Imposing the death penalty is expensive and time consuming. Each year billions of dollars are spent to sentence criminals to death. Perhaps the most frequently raised argument against capital punishment is that of its cost. Other thoughts on the death penalty are to turn criminals away from committing violent acts. A just argument against the death penalty would be that sentencing an individual to death prevents future crimes by other individuals. However, criminals are not afraid of the death penalty. The chance of a criminal being sentenced to death is very slim. The number of inmates actually put to death is far less than it was decades ago. This decrease in number shows that the death penalty is faulty. With that being true, many criminals feel that they can get away with a crime and go unpunished. Also, the less that the death sentence is invoked, the more conflicting it becomes when it is actually used. Alternative can be found to substitute for the death penalty. A huge misconception of the death penalty is that it saves society the costs of keeping inmates imprisoned for long periods of time. Ironically, the cost of the death penalty is far greater than the cost of housing a criminal for life. Appeals on the death penalty become a long, drawn-out and very expensive process. There are those who cry that we, the taxpayers, shouldn't have to "support" condemned people for an entire lifetime in prison-that we should simply "eliminate" them and save ourselves time and money. The truth is that the cost of state killing is up to three times the cost of lifetime imprisonment (Long 80). ...
“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.