14th Amendment Death Penalty

2463 Words5 Pages

The death penalty also known as capital punishment is a very widely discussed argument. The term capital is derived from the Latin word capitalis “of the head” referring to execution by beheading. The death penalty to many people could be considered unconstitutional under the eighth and the fourteenth amendment's. The majority of people fear nothing more than death itself because death is life’s finality. Execution dates being carried out promptly with assigned dates after a fair trial would discourage almost anyone from committing future crimes that are worthy of execution. It is apparent that we as a society are based on the need for retribution and vengeance. Making a wrongdoer pay the price equivalent to the price the wrongdoer did. As …show more content…

The eighth amendment is against “cruel and unusual punishment”. To get on death row, you must have either committed murder or multiple murders to earn your place. Since committing murder is cruel and unusual punishment the party that dealt the death forfeits their constitutional rights. Cruel and unusual punishment were geared towards torture and excessive punishment, not executing someone for their crimes. The fourteenth amendment states that “no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law”. Each death row inmate has spent more than 100 hours in a courtroom in their first initial case and all appeals after the verdict has been given. The state in question may deny any person their life after going through the Judicial process. The judicial process is the entire court process as well as the appeals so saying you're depriving them of that is farthest from the truth. The death penalty is a punishment that is fair and just to the person that it is delivered …show more content…

Cold cases are reopened and reexamined just for the simple fact of our DNA testing advancements. In this day and age you can get blood drawn and they can tell you exactly your heritage down to the very percentage. We do not have a problem with not being able to use DNA testing as a viable piece of evidence in a case anymore. However, some mistakes can be made on the human end of it. It doesn't make it any less of a great asset to people convicting murderers all the way to rape victims. High profile death penalty cases have full use of DNA testing to either confirm or deny guilt. This single advancement that we have now will enable us a citizens to better judge someone's guilt or innocence. The use of DNA will only continue to grow and its validity will be stronger as time goes by. This strength and validity will enable high profile cases to be closed indefinitely with nothing left to question. The only hangup that can hinder DNA testing is the presence of a chimera. People that are chimera’s maintain two completely different strands of DNA in their body. A chimera could commit a murder leaving blood evidence behind and never be found. Chimera’s can go without detection due to the simple fact that most people do not know if they are. In the case of a murderous chimera leaving DNA you can have two different samples from two different locations

Open Document