One day Timmy is asked whether he believe the death penalty stops criminals, he answers that he no because it didn’t stop thugs from murdering his parents for their money. Most people who think the death penalty is effective don’t usually know all of the facts or how much time and money are used to put someone into death row. To good arguments for and against the effects of the death penalty are presented in our reading. Ernest Van den Haag argues that we should keep using the death penalty and Hugo Adam Bedau thinks that is obsolete and we should discontinue its use. 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. For example in Hugo Bedau’s argument he states,” During the 1980s, death penalty states averaged an annual rate of 7.5 criminal homicides per 100,00 population; abolitionist states averaged a rate of 7.4”(361). These statistics show that having the death penalty doesn’t really deter criminals. When people commit a crime that they could get the death penalty for they either don’t plan on being caught or they are just not thinking about it at all. This point is also made in Bedau’s argument, I believe knowing that is enough of a reason to stop using the death penalty.
In Haag...
... middle of paper ...
...ely six times the cost of life-imprisonment sentence”(365) Some might argue that the occasional chance of one innocent person losing their life is ok since the death penalty deters plenty of people, but that isn’t the case at all.
In conclusion I strongly feel that the death penalty is wrong and should be ended as soon as possible. You can clearly see that a better argument is presented against the death penalty than the one presented for it. We now have the means to keep people in prison for life and I believe that is enough, especially when there is a chance of an innocent person getting killed through the death penalty. Since there is evidence showing the death penalty is obsolete, it should be stopped since it is only adding to the death toll. I think that the idea of giving people the power to end someone’s life is crazy because no one is perfectly pure.
...ngs Police Department. Life imprisonment with out the possibility of parole is an equally effective, cheaper, and more humane way to punish capital criminals. Not only is the cost of executing a prisoner ridiculous, but the death penalty has in no way shown that it deters criminal activity. The abolishment of the death penalty is necessary to achieve the utopian society we as a nation so desire.
The death penalty continues to be an issue of controversy and is an issue that will be debated in the United States for many years to come. According to Hugo A. Bedau, the writer of “The Death Penalty in America”, capital punishment is the lawful infliction of the death penalty. The death penalty has been used since ancient times for a variety of offenses. The Bible says that death should be done to anyone who commits murder, larceny, rapes, and burglary. It appears that public debate on the death penalty has changed over the years and is still changing, but there are still some out there who are for the death penalty and will continue to believe that it’s a good punishment. I always hear a lot of people say “an eye for an eye.” Most people feel strongly that if a criminal took the life of another, their’s should be taken away as well, and I don’t see how the death penalty could deter anyone from committing crimes if your going to do the crime then at that moment your not thinking about being on death role. I don’t think they should be put to death they should just sit in a cell for the rest of their life and think about how they destroy other families. A change in views and attitudes about the death penalty are likely attributed to results from social science research. The changes suggest a gradual movement toward the eventual abolition of capital punishment in America (Radelet and Borg, 2000).
One of the most repetitive and controversial topics discussed in the criminal justice system, is the death penalty. Capital punishment has been a part of our nation’s history since the creation of our constitution. In fact, as of January 1st, 2016, 2,943 inmates were awaiting their fate on death row (Death Penalty Information Center). Throughout my life, I have always been a strong advocate for the death penalty. During the majority of my undergraduate degree, I was a fierce supporter of capital punishment when discussing the topic in classes. However, throughout many criminal justice courses, I found myself in the minority, regarding the abolishment of the death penalty. While debating this topic, I would always find myself sympathetic to the victims and their families, as one should be, wanting those who were responsible for heinous crimes to
Many people have strong pro and con feelings on this subject, discussed and argued about only second to abortion. Putting another human being to death is a hard thing to think about until you realize the horrible things one person can do to another without drastic punishment as a determent.
One of the major arguments in favor of the death penalty is that it deters future criminals. Many individuals are led to believe that if the potential consequence of killing someone is death, other individuals are going to be less-prone to kill one another. However, there is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than long terms of imprisonment. States that endorse death penalty laws do not have lower crime rates or murder rates than states without such laws. And states that have completely abolished capital punishment show no major differences in either crime or murder rates. The death penalty has absolutely no deterrent ef...
life without parole, the death penalty is without a doubt much more expensive than life without parole. This is because capital cases go through a long and complicated judicial process. During this process, there can not be room for any mistakes. The most important focal point is to assure that innocent men and women are not executed for any crime that they did not commit. Even with a close watch on the prosecution 's it still can’t be ensured that “the risk of executing an innocent person cannot be completely eliminated.”
should be moral because, " a life for a life." Is the death penalty immoral?
The cost of the Death Penalty is highly expensive. A case to put someone in jail costs on average two million three hundred thousand dollars on average while to put an inmate in jail for forty years cost on average seven hundred and sixty thousand dollars (Friedman 11). In Texas the death penalty cost three times more money than putting an inmate in the highest security level in a jail for forty years (4). It also takes time for a death penalty case to be processed and a convict to be sentenced to the death penalty. Then it takes more time for the state to act and to administer the death penalty to people on death row. On average it takes ten to twenty years to execute a convicted criminal on death row (Friedman 11). Costs could be lowered by shortening the appeal process but this would only increase the risk of executing an innocent person.
The death penalty can in fact deter heinous crimes from being committed when it is lawful in a state. Social scientists have stated that the act of general deterrence, which is when the punishment deters potential criminals from committing crimes, keeps criminals from going through with crimes. However, it is more shown that premeditated crimes are usually the ones stopped by general deterrence, not crimes under passion. Heinous crimes have been reduced highly in the states that have a capital punishment law.
Hopefully I’ve made the point that the death penalty is useless except for delivering some sort of closure to a victims’ loved ones, through this type of closure is morally wrong, and can be achieved through life imprisonment of the murderer. And because capital punishment is not an effective deterrent, because life imprisonment is a better option, and because the innocent wouldn’t have to die; capital punishment should be abolished.
The death penalty has been a strong controversial argument since it first got ratified into the law. It gives the power of taking an individual’s life into the hands of those around them. The peers around him may only need to state one effortless word that can sentence the person to incarceration leading to their inevitable execution that. The death penalty has inflicted a new type of concern in the minds of many Americans, in which many are not entirely sure such punishments are necessary anymore, not only through opinions but also through substantial facts that support the abolishing of such an inhumane punishment which has proven to have become less beneficial than anything else.
The death penalty has always been and continues to be a very controversial issue. People on both sides of the issue argue endlessly to gain further support for their movements. While opponents of capital punishment are quick to point out that the United States remains one of the few Western countries that continue to support the death penalty, Americans are also more likely to encounter violent crime than citizens of other countries (Brownlee 31). Justice mandates that criminals receive what they deserve. The punishment must fit the crime. If a burglar deserves imprisonment, then a murderer deserves death (Winters 168). The death penalty is necessary and the only punishment suitable for those convicted of capital offenses. Seventy-five percent of Americans support the death penalty, according to Turner, because it provides a deterrent to some would-be murderers and it also provides for moral and legal justice (83). "Deterrence is a theory: It asks what the effects are of a punishment (does it reduce the crime rate?) and makes testable predictions (punishment reduces the crime rate compared to what it would be without the credible threat of punishment)", (Van Den Haag 29). The deterrent effect of any punishment depends on how quickly the punishment is applied (Workshop 16). Executions are so rare and delayed for so long in comparison th the number of capitol offenses committed that statistical correlations cannot be expected (Winters 104). The number of potential murders that are deterred by the threat of a death penalty may never be known, just as it may never be known how many lives are saved with it. However, it is known that the death penalty does definitely deter those who are executed. Life in prison without the possibility of parole is the alternative to execution presented by those that consider words to be equal to reality. Nothing prevents the people sentenced in this way from being paroled under later laws or later court rulings. Furthermore, nothing prevents them from escaping or killing again while in prison. After all, if they have already received the maximum sentence available, they have nothing to lose. For example, in 1972 the U.S. Supreme Court banished the death penalty. Like other states, Texas commuted all death sentences to life imprisonment. After being r...
The death penalty has been an ongoing debate for many years. Each side of the issue presents valid arguments to explain why someone should be either for or against the subject. One side of the argument says deterrence, the other side says there’s a likelihood of putting to death an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder itself. Crime is an unmistakable part of our society, and it is safe to say that everyone would concur that something must be done about it. The majority of people know the risk of crime to their lives, but the subject lies in the techniques and actions in which it should be dealt with. As the past tells us, capital punishment, whose meaning is “the use of death as a legally sanctioned punishment,” is a suitable and proficient means of deterring crime. Today, the death penalty resides as an effective method of punishment for murder and other atrocious crimes.
"Common sense, lately bolstered by statistics, tells us that the death penalty will deter murder... People fear nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal more than the fear of death... life in prison is less feared. Murderers clearly prefer it to execution -- otherwise, they would not try to be sentenced to life in prison instead of death... Therefore, a life sent...
Today's system of capital punishment tolerates many inequalities and injustices. The common arguments for the death penalty are filled with holes. Imposing the death penalty is expensive and time consuming. Each year billions of dollars are spent to sentence criminals to death. Perhaps the most frequently raised argument against capital punishment is that of its cost. Other thoughts on the death penalty are to turn criminals away from committing violent acts. A just argument against the death penalty would be that sentencing an individual to death prevents future crimes by other individuals. However, criminals are not afraid of the death penalty. The chance of a criminal being sentenced to death is very slim. The number of inmates actually put to death is far less than it was decades ago. This decrease in number shows that the death penalty is faulty. With that being true, many criminals feel that they can get away with a crime and go unpunished. Also, the less that the death sentence is invoked, the more conflicting it becomes when it is actually used. Alternative can be found to substitute for the death penalty. A huge misconception of the death penalty is that it saves society the costs of keeping inmates imprisoned for long periods of time. Ironically, the cost of the death penalty is far greater than the cost of housing a criminal for life. Appeals on the death penalty become a long, drawn-out and very expensive process. There are those who cry that we, the taxpayers, shouldn't have to "support" condemned people for an entire lifetime in prison-that we should simply "eliminate" them and save ourselves time and money. The truth is that the cost of state killing is up to three times the cost of lifetime imprisonment (Long 80). ...