Thesis It is more reasonable to utilize the death penalty than to abolish it. The death penalty should not be abolished because (1) it deters people from committing murder and (2) because the death penalty gives peace of mind to the victims and their families and puts an end to the crime. Arguments for the thesis (1) The death penalty should not be abolished because the fear of the highest form of punishment will keep potential victims alive. (2) The death penalty should not be abolished because the families of the victims can only begin the healing process once the murderer is put to death. Response to objections to the thesis (1) Objection: The death penalty should be abolished because even the highest form of punishment will not remove the evil from society.
I think both the arguments are convincing, but Bedau’s argument has statistics to back up his logic. I believe the death penalty would be acceptable if there was no alternative, but since we can keep convicts in jail for life there is no need for the death penalty. Ernest Haag believes that criminal punishment is has a more deterrent effect on crime than life imprisonment can. He states that,” Science, logic or statistics have often been unable to prove what common sense ells us to be true”(355). I agree that you can’t directly measure deterrent, but you can measure plenty of other factors.
The fact is that the criminal had the choice between right and wrong, and by choosing to do the wrong thing, he or she gave up the right to dictate his or her future. Death penalty cases do cost extra than a life without parole sentence; however, because there are a greater number of life without parole sentences, the costs even out. The deterrence of crime that the death penalty creates is not seen very well in statistics because of some flaws in the research. Although the statistics are not in favor nor against capital punishment, common sense is in favor of the death penalty. Ernest Van Den Haag, a supporter of the death penalty once said, “People fear nothing more than death.” This fear of death has the ability to dissuade criminals.
Capital Punishment is a controversial topic discussed in today's society. Capital punishment is often not as harsh in other countries as we may call harsh in our country. There is a heated debate on whether states should be able to kill other humans or not. But if we shall consider that other countries often have more deadly death penalties than we do. People that are in favor of the death penalty say that it saves money by not paying for housing in a maximum prison but what about our smaller countries that abide by the rule of the capital punishment.
It is more likely that the convict would be paroled instead of being executed because of the present practice of allowing unlimited appeals. Convicted criminals are not exposed to cruel punishment, but rather given a long waiting period. If the criminal is put to death, it is usually done as mercifully as possible. One problem with the death penalty, presently, is that crime is not decreasing, but rather increasing. If capital punishment is supposed to deter crimes such as murder, it is not serving its purpose.
There are chances that the system might convict an innocent citizen. There is no way to mend the mistakes we make. “‘We’re only humans, we all make mistakes,”’ (“Capital Punishment”) is a frequently used expression, but is it as true as anything can be. Therefore, the fact that there is a chance of an innocent life to be condemned to death should be enough to abolish the death penalty, but it is not enough for our government. Additionally, according to Amnesty International “‘the death penalty legitimizes an irreversible act of violence by the state and will inevitably claim innocent victims.”’(“Capital Punishment”).
The long term cost is almost the same as a life without parole sentence. Criminal who did serious crimes deserve the death penalty and do not deserve to live. The money spent on an inmate can be used to fix our roads, build schools, and enhance education programs for school. Some say that capital punishment is inhumane and barbaric, but these same morale feelings were not applied when the criminal murdered the victim. Capital punishment would not only bring closure to the family, but deter crime by knowing that they could not commit murder or harm to anyone else’s family or loved ones.
The people of this country have come to the realization that capital punishment should be removed from our state 's legislature because it is does not prevent crime, it does not bring those who died back to life, and can easily be replaced with life without parole. The death penalty, stemming from both its brutal past and ineffective present, is a controversial and complex topic that all over the United States is becoming more clear that it is not an acceptable punishment due to the brutal methods, and lack of precise rules. A large factor in the support for capital punishment is the claim that the death penalty prevents crimes from occurring, which is false. Data presented Doctor Michael Radelet, who has a PhD in sociology, in the essay “How does Detterence Work?” He stated “We expect that some of the would-be Texas murderers who think about sanctions would recognize this new law and take their friend or loved one to New Mexico to kill them, thus risking “only” LWOP. Obviously, this idea is absurd.
An execution cannot be undone. Studies have also shown that the death penalty is a biased method of punishment because disadvantaged people, such as minorities and people of lower social status are more likely to be executed. This is unfair because all people have the same rights and should receive equal and fair punishment for their crimes. An alternative punishment to the death penalty is life without parole; it is just as effective a way to prevent someone committing more crimes as executing them. Supporters of the death penalty also argue that it is cheaper to execute a criminal than it is to keep them in prison for life.
Jacoby believes the death penalty protects society by threatening future murders with fear. Gaes believes the death penalty is necessary because the overpopulation in prisons causes emotional and physical distress. The stronger side of the debate seems to be that the death penalty does not discourage crime at all nor does it help the victim’s family heal. It would be useful to know whether or not death-penalty states as a whole have lower rates of crime than non-death penalty states when arguing for the death penalty. Eaton, Judy, Tony Christensen.