In this essay, I will argue for the implementation of the death penalty. I will establish a clear-cut profile for a criminal to be eligible for death row. I will put forth arguments for and against the death penalty as supported by various groups and try to defend my position. I shall also try to criticize the case against the death penalty with individual arguments. Finally, I will demonstrate that no alternative to capital punishment can be reached and try to convince you for its fairness. Despite ethical and moral concerns, the issue of capital punishment must not be dismissed without serious consideration and scrutiny.
Is our judiciary system working the way it is suppose to? Many people and countries are convinced that the judiciary system of the United States is a joke. While law may be rigid and defined, there are a number of loopholes which allow criminals to be set free into the streets. One such loophole has the death penalty in its eyes. In my opinion, criminals who commit a heinous crime should be put on death row and they should be executed as soon as possible without having the slights chance to end back up in society.
What type of criminals would meet the criteria for death row? Should every lawbreaker, from a thief to murderer, be sentenced to such a harsh punishment? Absolutely not. In fact, I propose that it is the very extreme felons that should face this penalty. Murderers are the only ones that should be sentenced to death. As a matter of fact, I believe, it is only mass murderers that should confront this penalty. While murder is inexcusable, there are a number of ways in which a guilty party might not have been in full control nor done so with a different intent. Crimes of passion, for example is one such case where one may be compelled to murder, drunk driving and other driving accidents that cause fatalities. Another example could be seen in cases of revenge, such as killing a rapist. Where as such murderers should be punished accordingly, they do not deserve a death penalty.
On the other hand, planed violence geared toward a group of induvilas rather than a single person must be penalized. Most murders that are seen today come on the mass scale. News reports are full of stories such as the “Oklahoma City Bomber”, who killed over one hundred people by bombs. One more recent story was the “Sniper” story, wher...
... middle of paper ...
...le this system is very good for a single murder and should be implemented, it falls through in the case of multiple murders. Thus so far there are no alternatives to the death penalty.
The only reasonable excuse against the death penalty is the execution of an innocent person. None the less, while in the past Techniques such as DNA testing did not exist, frequently police agencies are more precise in their accusation as well as their methods of finding the guilty party. As a society we must grant our trust into the hands of authority. While there still can be wrong imprisonment of people for petty crimes such as robbery, these would not quality for the death row. On the other hand, those people who committed mass murder, and let me reiterate mass murderers are often not wrongfully accused. These people deserve no less for themselves than what they have done to others. Even though we are compelled to remember a famous saying “An Eye For An Eye Makes The World Go Blind” we should not forget that death penalty, as I believe, should be applied to murderers of multiple victims. In this sense let’s rephrase the saying accordingly “50 eyes for an eye make’s reasonable sense.”
The death penalty, as administered by states based on their individual laws, is considered capital punishment, the purpose of which is to penalize criminals convicted of murder or other heinous crimes (Fabian). The death penalty issue has been the focus of much controversy in recent years, even though capital punishment has been a part of our country's history since the beginning. Crimes in colonial times, such as murder and theft of livestock were dealt with swiftly and decisively ("The Death Penalty..."). Criminals were hanged shortly after their trial, in public executions. This practice was then considered just punishment for those crimes. Recently though, the focus of the death penalty debate has been on moral and legal issues. The murderers of today's society can be assured of a much longer life even after conviction, with the constraints of the appeals process slowing the implementation of their death sentence. In most cases, the appeal process lasts several years, during which time criminals enjoy comfortable lives. They have television, gym facilities, and the leisure time to attend free college-level classes that most American citizens must struggle to afford. Foremost, these murderers have the luxury of time, something their victims ran out of the moment their paths crossed. It is time this country realized the only true justice for these criminals is in the form of the death penalty. The death penalty should be administered for particularly heinous crimes.
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.
Thirty-two of the fifty states of the United States of America have capital punishment and in those thirty-two sates there are over three thousand people on death row as of January 1, 2013, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The murderers of today’s society can be assured of a much longer life even after conviction because of the appeals process slowing the implementation of their death sentence. (Oberg) The imposition of the death penalty is extremely expensive because it allows for endless appeals at the expense of the taxpayers. The effectiveness of the death penalty is greatly compromised when it is not carried through. There needs to be a certainty attached to it to make it effective, and that has not happened. There needs to be one trial, one appeal, and then either acquittal, or execution. (Baltimore Sun) The states need to stop pushing for the abolition of the death penalty and start looking for a way to make it more cost-effective.
The capital punishment has been cited as a reasonable sentence by those who advocate for retribution. This is essentially when it comes to justice so that people take full responsibility for their individual actions. Studies have proved that the decision to take away life of a person because they committed a certain crime serves to perpetuate the crime in question. It also serves to enhance the progress of organized and violent crime. It has been noted that various flaws in the justice system has led to the wrong conviction of innocent people. On the other hand, the guilty have also been set free, and a plethora of several cases has come up when a critical look at the capital punishment has been undertaken. Killers hardly kill their victims deliberately, but they probably act on anger, passion, or impulsively. In this regard, it is not proper to convict them exclusively without
One of the most widely debated and criticized methods of punishment in the United States is the Death Penalty. The Death Penalty is an issue that has the United States quite divided. While there are many supporters of it, there is also a large amount of opposition. Currently, there are thirty-three states in which the death penalty is legal and seventeen states that have abolished it according to the Death Penalty Information Center. There is no question that killing another person is the most atrocious criminal act that one can commit. I am not sure why, but it seems that the United States government is being hypocritical when it says that capital punishment is acceptable because a criminal did murder an innocent victim, and therefore should be killed (Philips, 2013). This is rule is known as the "eye-for-an-eye, and tooth-for-a- tooth theory." Of course, if we used this system all the time, there would be no need for laws. A second argument that some people use to support capital punishment is that the fear of being given the death penalty is going to stop criminals from murdering. How many criminals would murder in the first place, even in a state where there is no capital punishment, if they thought there was a chance of getting caught? Most murderers feel that they have a plan to get away with murder (Philips, 2013). Unfortunately, most are right. In response to this I believe that the United States Bill of Rights in the Constitution prohibits cruel an unusual punishment. There is nothing more cruel or unusual than taking someone’s life.
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.
...If anything, the death penalty is not enough. It can never bring back the loved ones to the families that have lost them. It can never bring back the innocent lives that have been taken in cold blood.
There are tens of thousands of homicides in this country every year, and only a tiny fraction of these criminals are sentenced to death. What makes a crime so unacceptable that the result is capital punishment? Well it seems that rather than based on the crime, the decision is based on politics, the jurisdiction, and the quality of the legal counsel. “The death penalty is a lethal lottery: of the 22,000 homicides committed every year approximately 100 people or less are sentenced to death” (working for an alternative to the death penalty). The statistics speak for themselves. Random or not, probably the most important factor in deciding if a defendant should get the death penalty is the
The death penalty is the only punishment in some criminal cases. Society feels as though justice is served when criminals receives what is deserved of them. Most people agree that justice is served when the punishment fits the crime.” The death penalty in the U.S is used almost exclusively for the crime of murder. Although state and federal statutes contain various capital crimes other than those involving death of a victim. Only two people were on death row for a non-murder offense, when the U.S. Supreme Court addressed this issue of 2008. No one has been executed for such a crime since it was reinstated in 1976”. No one has been executed since 1976. The death penalty is probably the best choice of some of the corrupted people out here since some of them can make it in and out of prison no problem and still commit crimes.
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.
Systems except for the guillotine that are being used in modern societies by other countries. Where was the humane treatment for the victims? The victims had no appeal process that lasted thirty years. What about the 14 year old child brutally raped and dismembered, or the elderly women murdered for her few dollars? Is life in prison without parole the answer, should we penalize society by incarcerating criminals for life? My opinion is the minute it is decided they will spend the rest of their lives in prison, we should take them out and shoot them, therefore putting society out for the business of caring for people that will never see the light of day. Why should we pay that $63000 per year to house the like of Charles Manson who will never be released? The death penalty is the only deterrent available to prevent more crimes from being committed. Police and States Attorneys use this as a bargaining chip all the time to gain information of other crimes about to be committed or to gain a confession from the accused. Capital punishment is likely to cause less people to contemplate murder or other various illegal actions because people fear death more than anything else. Hence the threat of the death
In past centuries, the problem was how to find the most painful way to execute a criminal, not whether criminals should be executed or not. Killing alone wasn’t an acceptable way of punishment (McCuen 8). Nowadays, 97.5% of crimes go unpunished in the United States, and the 2.5% who are punished are not being treated harsh enough (90). The death penalty honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a free moral actor to control his own destiny for good or for ill; it does not treat him as an animal with no moral sense (Kurtz). Criminals who murder, rape, kidnap, torture others, or commit treason should not have the same punishment as crimes of lesser value (Kurtz). This point is backed up by the bible, where it is stated in the first chapter. In Genesis 9:6 it says, “Yes, you must execute anyone who murders another person, for to kill another person is to kill a living being made in God’s image”. It is also brought up again in Exodus 21:23-24 where it states, “But if any harm results, then the offender must be punis...
Personally, I believe in the expression “An eye for an eye,” which means I am in support of the death penalty. However, I do feel that there are only certain circumstances that warrant this type of execution such as: a pre-meditated (serial in nature) crime, murder (especially of children), a person committing a terrorist act, etc. If someone has done something so bad that they are a threat to others from then on, then I simply don’t see why that person should have the expense of maintaining them covered by the law abiding community. They should be painlessly detached, eternally (given that an unconditional assurance of guilt is reputable). If someone shows a overall disregard for regulations and the community, then why should the community be concerned about them?
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.
... system is overflowing with many cases involving violent crime, but it doesn't seem rational to have a system in place where there are cases where first degree murder has occurred and the sentence doesn't match the violation. I believe that if you take a life, you deserve a life sentence in prison. Allowing criminals to get away with murder is something that will hurt all of us. If we live in a world where this continues to happen, the system will fail to do its job to protect our city's from the worst kind of criminal.