Should murderers and rapist be given the death penalty? Should you kill someone because they killed another? If you’re for or against capital punishment we can all agree that, one who commits a crime should be punished. Picking a side for capital punishment is a hard one because no one case is the same as the last one. Convection someone to capital punishment would cost more than just sending them to prison “One Ohio trial judge estimates a death penalty trial will cost 3-4 times as much as life-without-parole trail.” Study also shows that death penalty costs average as much as $10 million more per year per state than life sentence costs. Some of the contributing factors about the true costs of using the death penalty are that capital cases are more complicated and require more experts than normal cases, that both sides also spend more on investigative costs of a capital case.
Using capital punishment in states would also increase the wrongly accused of being killed for something that never happened. In the state of Texas, Anthony Graves was convicted in 1994 of assisting Robert Carter in multiple murders in 1992. Having no physical evidence linking Graves to the crimes, and his conviction relied on Carter’s testimony that Graves was his accomplice, A claim that was later recanted. After the help of a “special prosecutor” to help re-examine the case media was told “we found not one piece of credible evidence that links Anthony Graves to the commission of this capital murder. He is and innocent man” Another case in Alabama where Daniel Wade Moore was found guilty for murder and sexual assault of Karen
Tipton in 2002 he was sentenced to death by judge overruling the jury’s original consensus. However was acquitted in 2009 when 256 pages of withheld evidence were finally revealed.
Having the ability as a judge to give someone the death penalty is not always justifiable, Being the fact that the case of Daniel Wade Moore was found guilty for the fact that 256 pages of evidence were not reviled at the time of his trial, Giving the option as a judge to make a false accusation that could end up being a life that did nothing wrong. Cases like Daniel Moore’s gives judges the ability and the jury to make an accusation that is based upon evidence that is not all there. Some cases that arrive on a judge’s desk do not have all the evidence needed to uphold someone to being killed for something that cannot be 100% justified in the court of law.
Dieter, Richard C. "Innocence and the Death Penalty: The Increasing Danger of Executing the Innocent." DPIC. Death Penalty Information Center, 1 July 1997. Web. 12 Dec. 2014. .
Opponents of capital punishment are outspoken and vehement in their arguments. They believe the death penalty does not does not deter crime. They also hold the opinion that endin...
Capital punishment in the United States is a highly debated topic. Arguments that want to get rid of this method of punishment usually mention the many problems that capital punishment is plagued with. The death penalty has many issues that cannot be resolved, and since these issues can’t be solved, the death penalty should be abolished. “The irrevocable nature of the death penalty renders it an unsustainable and indefensible remedy in an imperfect justice system.” (Evans 3) Even though the death penalty has been around since the 18th century, capital punishment has many issues such as wrongful convictions and high costs, proving it should be eliminated.
Thus, many groups of people are involved in a death penalty case. However, other also equally important factors are also involved, such as money and time. Each state varies in amount expended towards death penalty and life imprisonment. However, in Texas, the state with the highest capital punishment rates in the United States alone, it is stated that each individual in a death penalty case “costs taxpayers about $2.3 million. That is about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years.” This is one detail that those opposing death penalty implement in their argument to abolish said act. Another factor is time invested in these cases. Most death penalty cases range from 6 to 10 years, factoring death row and other complications. Thus, the more time invested in determining guilt or innocence, the more money of taxpayers are being consumed. However, as depleting as it is, there is a good reason for. They take so long because they are trying to avoid as many mistakes as possible, meaning they don’t wanted to convict or even worse execute an innocent person wrongly accused or framed for a
Don’t get me wrong, if a person proven guilty of murder, especially as heinous as this crime was, they deserve the death penalty but only if there was “no shadow of a doubt” hard pieces of evidence, more real proof, not circumstantial evidence, are connecting that person to the crime.
Many people, including some higher educated people, tend to believe that executing someone is a lot cheaper than the alternative, which is life in prison without the possibility of parole. Indeed, this thought seems like common sense. However, extensive research has been conducted that contradicts that belief. For instance, a study conducted in Maryland, in 2008, found that the state spends roughly 1.9 million dollars more per capital case, compared to non-capital cases (Warden, 2009). But how can this be some may ask. Well, the reason capital punishment costs more than life without the possibility of parole, is because death penalty cases are longer and more expensive. Because the capital punishment is an irreversible sentence, the state, or government, is required to heighten the defendant’s due process in order to decrease the chance of the defendant being innocent (DPIC). Furthermore, not only is it more expensive for the trial phase, it is also a higher price for a state to imprison death row inmates compared to other
Capital punishment is a difficult subject for a lot of people because many question whether or not it is ethical to kill a convicted criminal. In order to critically analyze whether or not it is ethical, I will look at the issue using a utilitarianism approach because in order to get a good grasp of this topic we need to look at how the decision will impact us in the future. The utilitarianism approach will help us to examine this issue and see what some of the consequences are with this topic of capital punishment. For years, capital punishment has been used against criminals and continues to be used today, but lately this type of punishment has come into question because of the ethical question.
To this date, Seven hundred and seventy two criminals in the U.S. alone have been
Americans have argued over the death penalty since the early days of our country. In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes. As of year ended in 1999, in Texas, the state had executed 496 prisoners since 1930. The laws in the United States have change drastically in regards to capital punishment. An example of this would be the years from 1968 to 1977 due to the nearly 10 year moratorium. During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes.”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment. While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that is capital punishment being used for vengeance or as a deterrent.
When someone is legally convicted of a capital crime, it is possible for their punishment to be execution. The Death Penalty has been a controversial topic for many years. Some believe the act of punishing a criminal by execution is completely inhumane, while others believe it is a necessary practice needed to keep our society safe. In this annotated bibliography, there are six articles that each argue on whether or not the death penalty should be illegalized. Some authors argue that the death penalty should be illegal because it does not act as a deterrent, and it negatively effects the victim’s families. Other scholar’s state that the death penalty should stay legalized because there is an overcrowding in prisons and it saves innocent’s lives. Whether or not the death penalty should be
However, on the other hand, to execute death penalty is also costly. In the article, “Death Penalty Is Too Expensive for States, Study Find”, Warren Richey mentioned about the cost of death penalty. For example, in the article, he said “New York spent $170 million over nine years on capital cases before repealing the death penalty. No executions were carried out there. New Jersey spent $253 million over 25 years with no executions.” He also menti...
Capital punishment can be a difficult topic to approach because people tend to have extreme views on it. The death penalty is a benefit to society; it deters potential criminals as well as serves as retribution to criminals, and is in no way immoral. In general, the anti death penalty arguments often do not hold up when examined more thoughtfully. It is important that the nation is united on this issue, rather than having the it divided. The death penalty can be an incredibly advantageous apparatus in sentencing criminals that have committed some of the worst crimes known to society. It is crucial that we begin to pass legislation making capital punishment legal throughout the United States so that justice can be served properly.
“An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is how the saying goes. Coined by the infamous Hammurabi’s Code around 1700 BC, this ancient expression has become the basis of a great political debate over the past several decades – the death penalty. While the conflict can be whittled down to a matter of morals, a more pragmatic approach shows defendable points that are far more evidence backed. Supporters of the death penalty advocate that it deters crime, provides closure, and is a just punishment for those who choose to take a human life. Those against the death penalty argue that execution is a betrayal of basic human rights, an ineffective crime deterrent, an economically wasteful option, and an outdated method. The debate has experienced varying levels of attention over the years, but has always kept in the eye of the public. While many still advocate for the continued use of capital punishment, the process is not the most cost effective, efficient, consistent, or up-to-date means of punishment that America could be using today.
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. If one were to look at the issues behind capital punishment in an anthropological prospective than one would see that in some cases no one would assume that capital punishment here in the U.S. is bad. Now those opposed say that it is against the constitution, and is cruel and unusual punishment for humans to be put to his or her death. I believe that the death penalty is against the constitution and is cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is cruel because you cannot punish anyone worse than by killing them. It is an unusual punishment because it does not happen very often and it should not happen at all. Therefore, I think that capital punishment should be abolished, everywhere.
In March of 1985, Kirk Bloodsworth was convicted and sentenced to death for viciously killing and raping a 9 year old girl. Several eyewitnesses claimed to have all of the evidence the prosecution would need for a conviction and death sentence. However, 9 years later DNA evidence proved that Bloodsworth had not actually committed a crime at all. After being forced to waste 9 years of his life in prison, Bloodsworth was finally released. The Guardian reports that “at least 4.1% of all defendants sentenced to death in the US in the modern era are innocent” (Pilkington). This is a compelling statistic when lives are in the balance. The death penalty has posed countless problems to the United States’ judicial system that could easily be avoided