Argument for Capital Punishment
If it were up to me, every murderer in this country would be put behind bars on death row and have their life taken from them just as they took the life of another. The guidelines of " an eye for an eye" go back thousands of years. Many countries still hold true to these guidelines. Although America doesn't follow the same as these countries, I believe when it comes to murder, they should.
Putting people to death for committing murder makes other potential murderers think twice about killing someone. Capital punishment deters many murders every day. If all that had to be done was spend life in jail, getting free meals, having a roof over their head, and place to sleep at night, then killing someone wouldn't seem like such a risk. If their life is on the line, and they know if they get caught their going to be put to death, then most likely they will not commit the murder. Murderers are not fearless. They are just like any other human being, if there life is put on the line, there going to think twice about their decisions. For example, when cops catch someone in the act before they commit the crime, if they point there gun at the criminal, that person is going to get down on the ground and surrender. There afraid of the threat of being killed by the officer. Everyone has fear, and capital punishment no doubt deters murders.
Many people say you can't fight violence with violence, and what's the difference in the government killing people and the murderers killing someone. Well, America didn't become the country they are today by sitting back and doing nothing. We had to fight to better our country, so in this case, violence did solve something. Our country is basically at war w...
... middle of paper ...
... More guilty people are found innocent opposed to innocent people being found guilty. In my opinion, the courts are not strict enough and let far too many people go that shouldn't be let free. Only five people have been taken off death row because they were found innocent by D.N.A. Others were said to be innocent, but who really knows?
Human life is valued more than anything else in this world. It is the most important aspect we have as people on this planet. We have to protect human life and in doing so we must execute those who do not value it. More human life can be saved this way than just letting murderers run free. Since human life is valued more than anything else, the highest penalty should be used to protect it, which is the death penalty. I stand behind the death penalty and I believe it will better our country and reduce the murders on our streets.
It is the firm belief and position here that committing such a crime as murder is punishable by death. Americans should take a position for anyone on death row, to be executed sooner rather than later.
Proponents of capital punishment believe that killing criminals is a moral and ethical way of punishing them. They feel there is justification in taking the life of a certain criminal, when in fact that justification is nothing more than revenge. They also feel that the death penalty deters crime, although there have been no conclusive studies confirming that viewpoint (Bedau).
Capital Punishment is referred to as the death penalty, is judicially ordered execution of a prisoner as a punishment for a serious crime, often called a capital offense or as a capital crime. Some jurisdictions that practice capital punishment restrict its use to small number of criminal offenses principally treason and murder. Prisoners who have been sentenced to death are usually kept segregated from other prisoners in special parts of the prison pending their execution. I believe capital punishment has ethical problems and is wrong because it decreases the value and dignity of human life. The eighth amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is a form of cruel and unusual punishment no matter what the crime an individual commits. Murder is wrong whether it is a person killing another person or a state’s decision, murder is murder, and it is all the same. Two wrongs don’t make a right. It also sends a wrong and unmoral message to the people in the community who’s trying to obey the law. The Government says death is wrong when a person kills another but murder is right when done by the government by using the death penalty. They too are committing murder.
Murderers should be killed all they do is cause problems. They should be penalized because they murdered an innocent person. They killed someone and should be punished in the worst way possible. If they aren’t put in the electric chair or hanged they should have to do hard labor for people with no pay. Murders should be
There are wide and divergent opinions on the United States’ Supreme Court decisions on capital punishment. While proponents of capital punishment allege that it can be applied as with the existence of sufficient due process, others contend that human life is irreplaceable and that “every person has the right to have their life respected” (Oppenheim, “Capital Punishment in the United States”). While capital punishment has phased in and out of the United States’ criminal justice system in the past few decades, current trends seem to fall out of favor with the death penalty. As Snell indicates, by yearend of 2011, there were 3,082 inmates held across 35 states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons under the death sentence, where 9 states executed 43 inmates in both 2011 and 2012 (“Capital Punishment, 2011 – Statistical Tables”). In order to gain a deeper understanding and enhanced projection of the death penalty development, it is prudent to first examining historical accounts of cases that have been decided in favor or against the capital punishment in the United States.
of the tooth) is adopted in the Old Testament: "An eye for an eye, and
Should any individual be killed for their crimes or mistakes? Adam Liptak, a writer for the New York Times, found that, “According to roughly a dozen recent studies, executions save lives. For each inmate put to death, the studies say, 3 to 18 murders are prevented.” Therefore, the death penalty must be upheld in the United States of America in order to protect its citizens and to properly enforce justice.
From the pre-historic clans to the modern-day countries, the majority of social units have carried the notion of justice, and therefore systems of punishment are almost innate to human nature. As legal mechanisms evolved to be more sophisticated and elaborate, the suitability of a punishment developed to be matter worthy of intricate analysis. In order to achieve an impartial system of punishment, modern nations have come up with a commonly agreed set of criteria consisting of six theories. “These theories are deterrence, retribution, just deserts, rehabilitation, incapacitation, and more recently, restorative justice.” (Banks, 103) While each of the aforementioned criteria could be analyzed single-handedly or in a cumulative manner, the present essay focuses on consequential outcomes of Death Penalty execution or lack thereof through retribution theory in the notorious case of the Clutter family killings and robbery of November 15, 1959. In spite of writer Truman Capote’s sympathetic stance towards the murderers Richard "Dick" Hickock and Perry Edward Smith in his non-fiction novel In Cold Blood, revolving around the Clutter massacre and its aftermath, the incident itself is concrete proof that Death Penalty should be actively practiced.
Though there are countless reasons to support the death penalty, it’s best to start off with the two simplest ones; free will and closure. Free will might sound awfully ridiculous, but it is strangely and undeniably relevant. No one is compelled or forced to commit murder or rape, so by doing so the criminal gives up any excuse they may have. A famous example of this is the night that Gregory Thompson committed pre-meditated murder and later claimed the insanity plea. This man knew exactly what he had done and no one had forced him to commit such heinous acts, ones which he now deserves to pay the price for. Not only can the death penalty keep criminals contained for the short remainders of their lives, but it can severely decrease probability of prisoner parole. Prisoner parole can give a criminal another chance to kill or rape, regardless of their state of mental health. Another very well-known case, “The Black Dahlia Murder”, involved a twenty-three year old young woman named Elizabeth Short. Now, there is no way to even remotely try to understand what had gone through the killer’s mind. Perhaps they had been truly insane, or maybe just an average person. Whatever the case may have been, they would’ve been given the death penalty if caught, and should have died immediately after receiving the death penalty. No one wants one of these people roaming the streets or taking up the space in federal prisons, w...
In past centuries, the problem was how to find the most painful way to execute a criminal, not whether criminals should be executed or not. Killing alone wasn’t an acceptable way of punishment (McCuen 8). Nowadays, 97.5% of crimes go unpunished in the United States, and the 2.5% who are punished are not being treated harsh enough (90). The death penalty honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a free moral actor to control his own destiny for good or for ill; it does not treat him as an animal with no moral sense (Kurtz). Criminals who murder, rape, kidnap, torture others, or commit treason should not have the same punishment as crimes of lesser value (Kurtz). This point is backed up by the bible, where it is stated in the first chapter. In Genesis 9:6 it says, “Yes, you must execute anyone who murders another person, for to kill another person is to kill a living being made in God’s image”. It is also brought up again in Exodus 21:23-24 where it states, “But if any harm results, then the offender must be punis...
Each year in America, senseless acts of violence are being committed. In most cases more recently in our past, criminals have been convicted of their crimes and been arrested for those crimes. That is not where their journey ends. In all cases the criminals stand before a judge and a jury to determine the crime committed, and then comes sentencing. If a murder has taken place, and there is evidence that a more heinous crime has occurred, the convicted person will most likely incur the death penalty. In our modern society it has become necessary to deal out death and judgment to ensure the safety of many. The line is drawn in the sand but in some cases we step over that line to look at each case with strict detail.
“An eye for an eye will make the whole world go blind” (Mohanda Ghandi). The death penalty should be abolished in the U.S. It is inhumane and harsh. The idea of putting another human to death is hard to imagine. A decent society does not punish in such a gruesome way. If you act in the same manner as a killer, then what is the difference? You want to show that killing is wrong by killing? It is a contradiction that society must kill in order to teach against killing. The death penalty does not deter crime and costs more than life imprisonment.
The death penalty deters murder and puts the fear of death into would be killers. A person is less likely to kill, if he fears a possible sentence for his action. Another way the death penalty may help deter murder is the fact that if the killer is death, he or she will not be able to kill again. There are two different opinions on the death penalty. There are those who think that murders deserve to live and serve a life sentence in jail, and those who are supporters of the death penalty as a form of revenge. Both groups want to make examples out of offenders so that the threat of death will be enough to deter from capitol offenses.
...at innocent people could wrongfully be executed. Since 1976 when the death penalty was reintroduced there have been no credible evidence of this happening. activists overestimate this when it actually it happens very rarely. That being said no justice system is 100% accurate, and in a system that relies on human testimony for proof mistakes are made. Striving for higher standards in death penalty cases should always be a priority no matter how efficient it becomes. However, the chance of mistakes are small, and there is no credible evidence that suggests any innocent people have been sentenced to death since the reintroduction of capital punishment. This does not mean that capital punishment should be abolished since there is still a chance of executing the wrong person, if society outlaws anything that has a potential of being harmful it would be a great handicap.
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. Without the death penalty, criminals would be more inclined to commit additional violent crimes. Fear of death discourages people from committing crimes. If capital punishment were carried out more it would prove to be the crime preventative it was partly intended to be. Most criminals would think twice before committing murder if they knew their own lives were at stake. Use of the death penalty as intended by law could actually reduce the number of violent murders by eliminating some of the repeat offenders. 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. The deterrent effect of any punishment depends on how quickly the punishment is applied.