Essay PreviewMore ↓
Crime is everywhere. Wherever we look, we find criminals and crime. Criminals have become a part of our daily lives. Does this mean we let them be the darkness of our society? No, definitely not. Eliminating crime and criminals is our duty, and we cannot ignore it. Getting the rightly accused to a just punishment is very important. Some criminals commit a crime because they have no other option to survive, but some do it for fun. I do not advocate death penalty for everybody. A person, who stole bread from a grocery store, definitely does not deserve death penalty. However, a serial killer, who kills people for fun or for his personal gain, definitely deserves death penalty. Death penalty should continue in order to eliminate the garbage of our society. Not everybody deserves to die, but some people definitely do. I support death penalty because of several reasons. Firstly, I believe that death penalty serves as a deterrent and helps in reducing crime. Secondly, it is true that death penalty is irreversible, but it is hard to kill a wrongly convicted person due to the several chances given to the convicted to prove his innocence. Thirdly, death penalty assures safety of the society by eliminating these criminals. Finally, I believe in "lex tallionis" - a life for a life.
Deterrence means to punish somebody as an example and to create fear in other people for the punishment. Death penalty is one of those extreme punishments that would create fear in the mind of any sane person. Ernest van den Haag, in his article "On Deterrence and the Death Penalty" mentions, "One abstains from dangerous acts because of vague, inchoate, habitual and, above all, preconscious fears" (193). Everybody fears death, even animals. Most criminals would think twice if they knew their own lives were at stake. Although there is no statistical evidence that death penalty deters crime, but we have to agree that most of us fear death. Suppose there is no death penalty in a state and life imprisonment without parole is the maximum punishment. What is stopping a prisoner who is facing a life imprisonment without parole to commit another murder in the prison? According to Paul Van Slambrouck, " Assaults in prisons all over US, both against fellow inmates and against staff, have more than doubled in the past decade, according to statistics gathered by the Criminal Justice Institute in Middletown, Connecticut" (Christian Science Monitor, Internet).
How to Cite this Page
"Capital Punishment Essay: Benefits of the Death Penalty." 123HelpMe.com. 25 Feb 2020
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- Benefits of the Death Penalty Have you ever thought about if the person next to you is a killer or a rapist. If he is, what would you want from the government if he had killed someone you know. He should receive the death penalty. Murderers and rapists should be punished for the crimes they have committed and should pay the price for their wrongdoing. Having the death penalty in our society is humane; it helps the overcrowding problem and gives relief to the families of the victims, who had to go through an event such as murder.... [tags: Argumentative Persuasive Essays]
1419 words (4.1 pages)
- The majority of the United States uses the death penalty; should we add one more to the list and have Michigan become a state that uses the death penalty. Some people think that bringing the death penalty to Michigan would a good idea. Others think that doing this is stupid and would not be just and they should just go to jail. Michigan should bring the death penalty here because it would decrease crime rate, benefit Michigan overall, and criminals who just got released from prison for murder could not go and kill another innocent person.... [tags: Capital Punishment, Death Penalty]
711 words (2 pages)
- The Benefits of Capital Punishment Justice is about enforcing consequences for one’s own actions to endorse personal responsibility and the notion of capital punishment does just that. Capital punishment is an effective and efficient method of deterring would be criminals and preventing criminals to commit more crimes. It is by far the oldest form of punishment in the world and remains in effect in many nations. Through discussing many arguments in support of capital punishment it is obvious why this method of punishment is so controversial and why it should remain in effect today, regardless of the negative criticism it garners.... [tags: Persuasive Justice System Death Penalty Essays]
1038 words (3 pages)
- The Benefits of the Death Penalty Crime is everywhere. Wherever we look, we find criminals and crime. Criminals have become a part of our daily lives. Does this mean we let them be the darkness of our society. No, definitely not. Eliminating crime and criminals is our duty, and we cannot ignore it. Getting the rightly accused to a just punishment is very important. Some criminals commit a crime because they have no other option to survive, but some do it for fun. I do not advocate death penalty for everybody.... [tags: Capital punishment, Prison, Crime, Murder]
1075 words (3.1 pages)
- Benefits of the Death Penalty There are many positive things that come out of the death penalty being used; one of these being closure for the family. Some families of the victims may take years to recover from the tragedy of a lost loved one; some may never recover. All these families are looking for is closure and with the inmate in prison they are still around. If the death penalty was used it would give the victim’s family closure and a chance to recover and move on with life. Along with families getting closure, the death penalty is a form of deterrent for those in prison and those that are not.... [tags: Capital punishment, Murder, Prison, Penology]
968 words (2.8 pages)
- Capital punishment, or better known as the death penalty, began around the eighteenth century B.C. when The Code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon implemented the death penalty for 25 different crimes. In the 16th century, Henry VIII created edicts that caused about 72,000 people to be put to death by acts such as hanging and drawing and quartering. New Colonial America did not have prisons to hold criminals so the main source of punishment was the death penalty. Captain George Kendall was the first person on record, in the new colonies, to be sentenced to death.... [tags: Capital punishment, Murder, Crime, Death row]
869 words (2.5 pages)
- Capital punishment, better known as the death penalty, has been around for centuries. Like all elements of modern society, the death penalty has evolved over the course of many years. Initially, the death penalty was administered by a royal court or monarchy through brutal stoning. Since then, the guillotine, noose, electric chair, and [currently] lethal injection have all been tools created to administer the death penalty here in the United States. Before the act of actually ending the criminal’s life is performed he or she waits on death row during the course of any court proceedings.... [tags: Capital Punishment, Death Penalty]
1713 words (4.9 pages)
- Capital Punishment According to the death penalty information center, there have been 1,414 executions since 1974. The death penalty is the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime (www.oxforddictionaries.com). The first recorded execution in the new colonies was 1608 in the Jamestown colony in Virginia. Captain George Kendall was executed ("Part I: History of the Death Penalty"). Seventeen people on death row have been found not guilty and released since 2010 ("Innocence Database").... [tags: Capital punishment, Crime, Death row, Prison]
1158 words (3.3 pages)
- Fifty-nine criminals were put to death by means of the death penalty in 2004. Whether it had been by lethal injection, electrocution, gas chamber, hanging or even the firing squad was it the correct thing to do. This is a commonly asked question concerning this controversial topic. Should these criminals, murders, and rapists have be put to death. Is the death penalty a proper form of punishment. As Sellin stated, "Whenever hurt is done you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth..." (9).... [tags: Cause Effect Capital Punishment]
1105 words (3.2 pages)
- Have you ever thought about if the person next to you is a killer or a rapist. If he is, what would you want from the government if he had killed someone you know. He should receive the death penalty. Murderers and rapists should be punished for the crimes they have committed and should pay the price for their wrongdoing. Having the death penalty in our society is humane; it helps the overcrowding problem and gives relief to the families of the victims, who had to go through an event such as murder.... [tags: Pro Capital Punishment Essays]
1542 words (4.4 pages)
Anti-death penalty advocates believe that death penalty is irreversible and may become a cause of irreversible mistakes. Once a person has been sentenced to death and thus death penalty practiced, there is nothing that can be done to undo the punishment if the accused turns out to be innocent. I agree that death penalty is irreversible, but the chance of making a mistake in death penalty is extremely low. Death penalty is considered an extreme punishment and the judicial system takes a lot of care in finalizing the decision. There are several safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty. For example, "Capital punishment may be imposed only when guilt is determined by clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts", "Anyone sentenced to death shall receive the right to appeal to a court of higher jurisdiction", etc. (Capital Punishment: Life or Death, Internet). There are several other privileges provided to the convicted that assure that death penalty is given to the rightly accused person. According to Haag, "Trials are more likely to be fair when life is at stake - the death penalty is probably less often unjustly inflicted than others" (192). Statistics reveal that there is far less number of death sentences than life imprisonment sentences without parole given out every year. According to Federal Justice Statistics, in 1998, there were approximately 5000 criminals sentenced to life imprisonment as opposed to 74 criminals sentenced to death (Internet). This shows that judicial system itself is very careful with death sentences. Even if we assume that there are chances that an innocent person is executed, it is the problem with the trial, not the punishment. "It is not the penalty - whether death or prison - which is unjust when inflicted on the innocent, but its imposition on the innocent", writes Haag (192). When an innocent person is sentenced to death, it is not the fault of the punishment itself, but the trial that led to this punishment. There have been cases in which a person has been sentenced to life imprisonment without parole, and then after several years, it was revealed that the person was innocent. No court or compensation in this world can return the horrifying years spent in the prison by that innocent person. If we stop giving life imprisonment sentences to criminals on this ground, then probably most of the criminals would be walking around free on the streets within ten to fifteen years. The fear and trust that the society has in the judicial system would be lost. The judicial system has minimized the chances of mistakes. It is almost impossible to sentence a wrongly accused person. Then, why cause death of several innocent victims just on the bleak assumption that some day we might make a mistake?
Incapacitating a person is "depriving s/he of the physical or intellectual power of natural il/legal qualifications" (Webster, 574). Death penalty is not advocated for all criminals. Those criminals, who commit murders during self-defense or during times of passion, do not deserve death penalty. However, those people who just do not seem to learn the lesson the first time, or those who kill for fun, definitely deserve death penalty. Defendants (murderers) are allowed to shield themselves from justice by pleading insanity. Insanity means a failure to respond to the usual sort of incentives in the usual ways. If insane people are completely unresponsive to incentives, then their profits serve no social purpose, thus leading to another beneficial factor of the death penalty. People who have no social purpose do not benefit society, culture of mankind, or the basic rules of humanity. For example: This drug related brain-damaged killer barely knew his own identity when he murdered a mother and her daughter in front of a 3 year old boy. When he was finished raping the females and performed their deaths, he move on to sexually molest the boy in which he then left him to die. The retarded man then pled insanity, got to stay in jail for 22 years, eating three square meals a day, sleeping on a mattress with a blanket in air conditioned comfort and having a roof over his head (Shapiro, 61). Where do we draw the line between mentally incapable and criminally insane? When are they going to learn to resume the responsibility for their actions? I am not saying that all mentally disabled people should be subject to death penalty because they are no good to the society. However, some people pose a great fatal danger to the society in such a cruel way as seen in the above example. In such cases, death penalty becomes crucial for the benefit of the society. I believe every criminal, no matter how cruel he is, should be given at least one chance to change himself/herself. Thus, I do not advocate death penalty for people who have performed only one murder. However, there have been cases in which people have committed several murders (e.g., serial killers), or have committed crime even after imprisonment. For such people, I advocate death penalty. There needs to be a limit to which society should put up to. If somebody does not understand that going around killing people is wrong, then I believe, that letting such people live is not only a great threat to the society, but also a great burden. Advocate of anti-death penalty, Adam Bedau, wrote, "Prevention by means of incapacitation occurs only if the executed criminal would have committed other crimes if he or she had not been executed and had been punished only in some less incapacitative way (e.g., by imprisonment)" (Capital Punishment and Social Defense, 301). If people commit a crime while facing an imprisonment sentence, then their sentence should be changed to death sentence, since it is evident that they are just habitual to committing crimes and are a constant threat to the society, including the other inmates.
Some people might think that death penalty is inhuman and barbarous, but ask those people who have lost their beloved or whose lives have been tied to a hospital bed because of some barbarous person. I am sure they would be very unhappy to see the person who ruined their lives just getting a few years of imprisonment or mere rehabilitation. Consider the example of the rapist and killer given above. Now, suppose the woman raped was your wife, sister, or daughter. How would you feel knowing that the person who ruined your family is calmly enjoying the benefits of an asylum and an air-conditioned room? Anti-death penalty supporters believe that death penalty is barbarous. Well! So is murder. Death penalty is not revenge. Rather, it is a matter of putting an end to a life that has no value for other human lives. Sentencing a murderer to death is in fact a favor to the society. Despite the moral argument concerning the inhumane treatment of the criminal, we return to the "nature" of the crime committed. Can society place an unequal weight on the tragically lost lives of murder victims and the criminal? This is not an exam question in a college philosophy course but a moral conundrum at the core of perhaps the most intriguing issue facing the U. S. Supreme Court today. Punishment is meted out because of the nature of the crime, devoid of any reference to the social identity of the victim. In "The Death Penalty in America", Adam Bedau wrote, "even in the tragedy of human death there are degrees, and that it is much more tragic for the innocent to lose his life than for the State to take the life of a criminal convicted of a capital offense" (308). I believe that if one cannot value the life of another human being, then one's own life has no value.
Death penalty is good and serves a definite purpose of reducing crime as well as bringing justice to the criminals and innocent. In order to serve its purpose, it must be adjusted and made more effective and efficient. The justice system has changed dramatically in the past thirty years in order to make sure that the rightly accused is brought to justice. I believe that death penalty should not be abolished, as it ensures the safety of the society, brings justice to those who have suffered and most importantly helps in reducing crime and criminals in our society. Death penalty is important to keep the brightness of justice and public safety shining brightly on our society.
Budau, Hugo Adam. "Capital Punishment and Social Defense." Reserved reading for Philosophy 203.
Bedau, Hugo Adam. " The Death Penalty in America." New York: Oxford University Press, 1982.
Browning, Tonya. "Capital Punishment: Life or Death." Computer Writing and Research Lab, University of Texas. Online. Internet. 27 April 2000.
Haag, Ernest van den. "On Deterrence and the Death Penalty." Reserved reading for Philosophy 203.
Shapiro, Walter. "What say should victims have?" AskJeeves.com. Online. Internet. 29 April 2000.
Slambrouck, Paul Van. "US Prisons - Under Pressure - Show Increase in Violence." The Christian Science Monitor Online. 6 August 1998. Internet.
"Incapacitation." "Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary." 1981.