Pros And Cons Of The Death Penalty

1296 Words3 Pages
When a cold blooded murderer terminates the life of another human, his life also becomes valueless. Murderers have no right to live since they chose to kill someone, which means that the government can also end their lives. Opponents of the death penalty said that it is too cruel, but it is not, since the punishment is similar to the murderers’ actions. The death penalty should continue to be imposed, because it protects innocent lives, it is constitutional, and with new DNA technology there will be solid evidence to back up an execution. It is horrifying to think that somewhere in the lurking darkness a murderer quietly waits for his next victim. New killers can’t be prevented, but ones that are already arrested can be put to death to…show more content…
Death penalty will be cruel if it is given to someone who committed a minor crime, ones that do not involve the death of another person. For criminals that committed murder, then the death penalty will not be cruel since they are not getting any punishment greater than what they did to another innocent person. Although in 1972 the Supreme Court ruled in Furman vs Georgia that the death penalty is unconstitutional (ProQuest Staff). It did not take long for the Supreme Court to reverse their ruling in Furman vs Georgia. In the 1976 court case Gregg vs Georgia, the Supreme Court declared that the death penalty is constitutional (ProQuest Staff). Public polls also show that the majority of the people support the death penalty (Muhlhausen). New public survey shows that 56% of the public are still in favor of the death penalty, while 38% oppose it (“Less Support for Death Penalty”). Even Edward Koch the mayor of New York from 1978-1989, a state that does not have the death penalty, supports the death penalty. With the constitutionality of the death penalty and public support, the death penalty remains as one of the punishments that courts can use to bring justice among horrendous
Open Document