It has become a social issue in the society with some people in support while others are against it. The purpose of a punishment to a criminal is to change them or to teach them a lesson, yet capital punishment teaches the criminals nothing because they are killed. Therefore, this type of punishment should be scrapped because, it does not deter crimes, nor teach them since their lives are put to an end. There are other ways of punishing criminal and deterring crimes other that capital punishment and it better to imprison the criminals, other than killing them. Death penalty should be eliminated and other ways of punishment and deterrence instituted in its place because innocent lives are being lost at the same time people being denied their right to life.
One argument from death penalty supporters is that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to prevent other people from committing murders. It is the belief that people will think out the consequences of their actions before murdering, and consider the death penalty not a reasonable consequence and thus not commit the crime. This, however, is intrinsically flawed. Most murderers or potential murderers do not usually take into account life in prison or the death penalty. There are many reasons for people to not consider the death penalty before committing the crime.
Public shaming at times is not even a punishment for some, if someone does a crime they should also do the time. Public shaming can comes with serious consequences if given to the wrong person and if given to others it is just a slap on the wrist. Crimes should be taken seriously and so should the punishments. People should go to jail or do community service based on what they have done, they should not be let go so easily. The court system seems to think that by using public shaming a criminal will not do the crime again.
. . I am sure I am going to get in trouble for saying it, for $65 you can bring that lawsuit" (Carter, 2013, pp.4). The stop and frisk law is one reason I do not believe in law enforcement profiling. Even though some law enforcement officers allow personal feelings and power to allow them to not follow policy, some policies are not followed morally because I do not feel that officers should be allowed to frisk someone who is innocent and has not committed a crime because it takes the focus off real criminals and onto innocent people; it causes emotional stress.
One could say that it is understandable where the families of victims are coming form on this issue and others should not judge them for that because the families are acting out of anger, but people have no right to decide if another person lives or dies. For example, no one has the right to judge another person but God. An average person should not put themselves at a higher power. In the World Medical Jour... ... middle of paper ... ...lks about how the death penalty may stop some criminals from committing erroneous acts but not the majority of them. In conclusion, the death penalty is inhumane because it goes against the constitution and violates the eight amendment by showing cruel and unusual punishment towards people who have been put on death row.
Does this mean that we should throw out the death penalty because people, who did not really deserve to die, were killed? No, we have changed the laws, and no one gets the death penalty unless they deserve to die. Capital punishment should stay around. Yes, there are some maldistributions on the way it is opposed on a person, but those maldistributions are imposed on guilty people. Capital punishment is feared by potential murderers because once it is ordered on them they are not coming back.
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.
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.
Just because someone has killed does not mean it is okay to take their life; that just means more murder and more murderers. We might as well call ourselves the murderers. No matter the reason or how bad the crime, taking a life should never be the conclusion, nor a decision even worth considering. Capital Punishment is a cruel and unnecessary punishment; it should be illegal in the United States for multiple reasons. Capital Punishment is awful and inhumane.
Also, in this article the author mentions that the Stand Your Ground Laws need repealed because they give the suspect protection from civil suits. In other words, if the state does not hand out a... ... middle of paper ... ...ect acted in self-defense when the victim is dead which I agree with. I feel we should have the right to protect ourselves if the circumstance should arise, but the law needs to be written better. There needs to be a way to hold those who are just killing to kill accountable instead of letting them get away with it because they are claiming “self-defense.” In conclusion, the Stand Your Ground Laws are always going to be a highly debated topic. There are many people who strongly feel that we have the right to protect ourselves, while on the other hand many feel this law is just a licesence to kill.