At 12:17 A.M. on June 18th, Ronnie Lee Gardner was pronounced dead as a result of a number of strategically placed bullets lodged into his body. As Gardner took his last breaths of life, his murderer was far removed from the crime, relaxing knowing he would never be convicted for the murder he just committed. Ronnie Lee Gardner may or may not have deserved this death, as he also was a convicted murderer, killing two with the pull of a trigger; however, this does not reserve the right for the United States government to allow him to die by firing squad. Simply, capital punishment is a barbaric, illogical way of dealing with criminals, and should be discontinued.
Many people support the idea of capital punishment for a number of reasons. First, people insist that some crimes are too drastic to ever forgive, and that life behind bars simply does not do enough justice. Secondly, others cry out that keeping a prisoner behind bars for life is costly, and killing them for the crimes they have committed will save the government and taxpayers money. Finally, some people simply believe that the individual on death row has the right to request death by capital punishment, instead of rotting behind prison bars. Although these three common ideas vary from person to person, the general consensus is that those in support of capital punishment do not view the negative aspects of the horrendous act. Further, they do not realize the actuality of capital punishment, and hold a few common misconceptions that are detrimental to an unbiased viewpoint on the subject.
Being convicted of a crime sometimes results from an every day act such as vandalizing a vacant parking lot, other times it can be stealing candy from a convenient store, yet ra...
... middle of paper ...
...why Mr. Gardner is to die, but how. To fix this problem, there is one simple step to be made: abolish the legality of the death penalty, and institute life in prison –with enhanced security and decreased comforts- as the real death penalty.
We have witnessed decades and decades of barbaric acts being committed inside of prisons. Electrical chairs, lethal injections, and firing squads have been the ultimate executioner in the modern day hangings, stonings, and burnings of our prisoners. The time has come to erase the unforgivable acts our government has thus far permitted to occur. Death by capital punishment is neither cheaper, safer, or more painful to prisoners. Life in prison is the ultimate executioner. Let the murderers and rapists of our cities rot in orange jumpsuits, and let them consider every night the real torture of dying in a tiny prison cell.
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.
Capital punishment is not an effective punishment or deterrent for murder or any crime for various reasons. To many prisoners, being detained in a prison is much more of a punishment than death as is it a constant, conscious deprivation of liberty and rights. This idea is represented though US Oklahoma bomber Timothy McVeigh who claimed after dropping his appeals against his death sentence that he would rather die than...
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.
One of the reasons that the individuals who oppose the idea are against it is because they do not fully understand what capital punishment is. Capital punishment is the “execution of
Capital punishment is an age-old practice. It has been used in civilizations for millennia, and will continue to be used for millennia to come. Whether used for the right or wrong reasons, capital punishment is unmistakable in its various forms. From hangings, to firing squads, to lethal injections, capital punishment and the associated proceeding have evolved over time. There have been many arguments against capital punishment, many of which still hold true. As capital punishment has evolved over time, however, many of the most valid arguments have been proven all but null. Capital punishment still has its ethical and moral concerns, but as it has evolved over time these concerns have not necessarily become less valid, but fewer in number when specifically addressing capital punishment. The proceedings that come hand-in-hand with capital punishment, however, have become increasingly more rigorous and controversial and are the main focus of most capital punishment concerns.
Proponents of capital punishment believe that killing criminals is a moral and ethical way of punishing them. They feel there is justification in taking the life of a certain criminal, when in fact that justification is nothing more than revenge. They also feel that the death penalty deters crime, although there have been no conclusive studies confirming that viewpoint (Bedau).
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.
It is the firm belief and position here that committing such a crime as murder is punishable by death. Americans should take a position for anyone on death row, to be executed sooner rather than later.
While one person lays with their wrists circumscribed to the worn leather of the gurney, another person holds two skin-piercing needles. The individual holding the needles is an inexperienced technician who obtains permission from the United States federal government to murder people. One needle is held as a precaution in case the pain is too visible to the viewers. Another dagger filled with a lethal dosage of chemicals is inserted into the vein that causes the person to stop breathing. When the cry of the heart rate monitor becomes monotone, the corrupt procedure is complete. Lying in the chair is a corpse when moments ago it was an individual who made one fatal mistake that will never get the chance to redeem (Ecenbarger). Although some people believe that the death
As of present prison networks across the United States have ceased being entities under the control of the government, and have gone into the hands of private, profit-seeking proprietors. Why? Put simply, overcrowding. Prisons have met carrying capacities and have exhausted their resources on individuals, many of whom, should not have been afforded the luxury of life to begin with. However, in hindsight, it is factually and numerically lowered priced to keep a death-row inmate alive rather than proceeding with the expected execution: “A death sentence costs at least twice as much, start to finish, than a sentence of life without parole, according to a Maryland study. The Bar Association study pegged the cost here of prosecution, defense and appeals at nearly $800,000 more for a death penalty. Most of that cost is borne by counties. In King County, taxpayers have spent about $10 million on two pending death-penalty cases — and neither have even gone to trial. Smaller counties have been threatened with bankruptcy by the cost of death-penalty cases. The cost of lifetime imprisonment pales in comparison, and ensures the same level of public safety. The Legislature’s fiscal staff estimated that abolishing the death penalty required adding just two prison beds” (Riley et al. 3). Whilst it may be true that keeping an inmate alive
...bate on the merits of the death penalty as a deterrent to crime but there is no debate that its a costly inefficient law. Although the amount by which the death penalty far exceeds life in prison can be debated, the fact always remains that its more costly. Furthermore, as previously shown, more than half of the death penalty sentences are overturned, resulting in a sentence of life in prison. The question then becomes, why are they separated in prison in the first place? Does a determination by a judge and jury make the convict more or less dangerous either way? Why spend the extra money separating the death row convicts from the lifers? Has it become clearly established that a death sentence is a greater punishment than life in prison? It is clear that there are too many variable and unknown factors for such a polarizing and severe punishment to be a law.
punishment is an asset to society: it is the only punishment that fits the crime, it deters potential criminals
Those that are for it may see that it is a waste of money spent on criminals that deserve death to allow them to stay alive in prison. Also, the criminal could have a chance at causing more damage in some way while in prison. On the other hand, to those that oppose the death penalty, it may seem inhumane or cruel to take a person’s life because of the bad decision they made. It also may seem like a better use of money to let them suffer a possible long life in prison ("Death
Americans have argued over the death penalty since the early days of our country. In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes. As of year ended in 1999, in Texas, the state had executed 496 prisoners since 1930. The laws in the United States have change drastically in regards to capital punishment. An example of this would be the years from 1968 to 1977 due to the nearly 10 year moratorium. During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes.”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment. While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that is capital punishment being used for vengeance or as a deterrent.
“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.