The supporters claim that the death penalty will eliminate criminals and that these offenders will not be around to repeat any future crimes. Legally, criminals should be "innocent until proven guilty;” but in reality, they are often accused to be "guilty until proven innocent.” However, the abolitionists argue that innocent people have been mistakenly placed on death row and executed because of the flaws in the current criminal justice system. Amnesty International discovered that “innocent people may be sentenced to death through judicial error” ("Evidence Against Death Penalty”). As a result, tragedies are irreversible. An innocent victim by the name of “Steven Truscott was wrongly convicted of murder… It was horrible for Truscott and the victim 's family because the real culprit got away with murder” (Wheeler).
What I think about the death penalty, is only certain crimes should be allowed the death penalty. I think people who commit crimes because they wanted to should be punished. People that are for the death penalty, say that the death penalty will make other people who are thinking about committing a murder, or any other crime, not to do the act. I don't believe this because when someone wants' to commit a crime, they aren't thinking about what is going to happen to them afterwards. The person who committed a crime will probably think he will get away with the crime, so that person doesn't think he will get the death penalty.
Some maldistribution of the death penalty is unavoidable, but that does not mean we should throw out the death penalty. When the death penalty is imposed on an innocent person that is a serious miscarriage of justice. However, when people talk about the maldistribution of the death penalty they are not referring to when it is imposed on an innocent person rather when the death penalty is imposed on guilty minorities, or low income whites, who can not afford a good lawyer. Even if maldistribution occurs among people who should receive the death penalty that is irrelevant to the morality of the death penalty. It is really too bad that if you have money you can get your way out of the death penalty, but money talks in this country.
The criminal justice system offers death to the family of the victim and, in turn, destroys the defendant’s family. The families of the defendant are often ignored. Capitol punishment is a final sentence. There is no room for a mistake because once the execution is carried out there is no going back. Looking back, we see that the potential for innocent men to die exists, inmates must struggle to receive a fair trial, and that our society will suffer because of those who seek vengeance.
Many people are split on the idea of capital punishment because it involves death. I feel that capital punishment is morally and ethically acceptable because it rids society of our worst criminals. Many people argue that killing criminals who kill is just as bad as being the criminals. For one the criminals killed innocent people who had no idea what was coming, and had no way to prevent it. The criminal who commited the crime in almost all cases had to commit first degree murder, which includes some planning of the act.
So the argument that the criminal could be innocent is becoming invalid but there still is a small chance. Some people may not want to take the chance, however, the majority still votes for it. I believe that the death penalty is a humane form of punishment, reason being is that the people who commit unthinkable crimes are not the people we need to make this world. I believe people that commit murder and people who sexually assault children should definitely be executed. The reason why is because they assault people who are defenseless and abuse people just for the thrill of it.
Capital punishment is legal in 32 states. Life in prison is a worse punishment. With a death sentence the suffering is over in an instant. Even though the death penalty gives closure to the victim’s families who have suffered so much, the death penalty should not be allowed, because there is always a possibility that the inmate is not guilty, and people who commit a crime should pay for the consequences while alive in a cell. The death penalty gives closure to the victim’s families who have suffered so much.
I agree, and do not think it is fair for someone who murdered and raped innocent people should be able to have these luxuries. The death penalty isn't necessarily the answer though. Inmates shouldn’t have the privileges of watching television, and should have more of a punishment. The opposing group presented their ideas and examples that supported why the death penalty is wrong, and non-effective. One thing they mentioned was that we do not have the resources, nor the money to make 100% sure that someone is guilty of the crime they are accused of.
Jailing these people for life just doesn’t seem punishment enough. However, there is a sincere irony found within the death penalty. It brings to mind the parental saying, “Do as I say, not as I do.” The government, in essence, has granted itself rights that the individual has not. Furthermore, these i... ... middle of paper ... ...erson is murdered, it is one of the most heinous thoughts imaginable. But, to advocate execution will only leave us as hypocrites, rather than avengers of justice.
Finally, the death penalty also denies the sanctity of life; by executing people, the action does not protect their life and, therefore, denies the sanctity of a human being’s right to be alive in the world. There is a lot of tension between whether or not capital punishment is a moral thing. Capital punishment is only a good punishment to a certain extent because it takes away a criminal capable of more awful things. Many people think that capital punishment should continue to be a form of punishment and should be used throughout the country and world. If people on death row could be charged without a doubt and be executed at the time they are proven guilty, many problems could be resolved such as exoneration.