Is the Death Penalty Ethical? The use of the death penalty is not an ethical way to make justice for crimes. The government should not have the right take away another life. The government should protect life to insure that innocent men and women are not wrongly executed. Nearly every religion is against the death penalty so it is morally wrong as well. There are better alternatives to be used rather than the death penalty. Extremely high costs come along with the use of the death penalty.
When innocent lives are put at risk, how can the death penalty be considered to be ethical? One hundred thirty-eight innocent men and women have been released from death row since 1976. Some of those innocent men and women were released within minutes of being executed. Imagine how many innocent lives have been lost through the death penalty.There are ongoing investigations on
…show more content…
I would rather see a convicted murderer get life without parole rather than be executed by capital punishment. Some prisoners with life sentences would rather be executed than serve their term. Seven people have been found innocent while serving life without parole sentences since 1977. The death penalty does not lower crime rates. No one in North Carolina has been executed since 2006. Since then, the murder rate in North Carolina has dropped. When innocent lives are put at risk, costs are increased, and when there is a much more ethical alternative, why should the death penalty be in place? The death penalty does not decline murder rates, so why should it even be considered. Banning the death penalty would also cut costs of the government. The government should not be able execute some and not others because of the financial state of the defendant or of unfair trials. No matter the case, the death penalty risks the loss of innocent lives! It is a no brainer, the death penalty is an unethical answer for the justice of terrible
...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 is legal in thirty-one states and illegal in nineteen states. There are at least forty-one federal capital crimes in the United States that can be considered or guaranteed with the death penalty. The death penalty should be abolished because it is unlawful to society, humanity, and civilization as a whole. It costs far more to execute a person rather than to keep them in prison for the rest of his or her life. Logically speaking, the death penalty is an illicit and wrongful punishment no matter what the crime. The emotion and anger toward the criminals that commit horrible crimes can overcome what is actually right for society. There are many more opposing factors towards the death penalty than there are supporting ones. Capital punishment is nefarious to say the least and there are other consequences and actions that can be substituted rather than directly executing a person for their actions.
The Death Penalty practice has always been a topic of major debate and ethical concern among citizens in society. The death penalty can be defined as the authorization to legally kill a person as punishment for committing a crime, this practice is also known as Capital Punishment. The purpose of creating a harsher punishment for criminals was to deter other people from committing atrocious crimes and it was also intended to serve as a way of incapacitation and retribution. In fact, deterrence, incapacitation, and retribution are some of the basic concepts in the justice system, which explain the intentions of creating punishments as a consequence for illegal conduct. In the United States, the Congress approved the federal death penalty on June 25, 1790 and according to the Death Penalty Focus (DPF, 2011) organization website “there have been 343 executions, two of which were women”.
Edward I. Koch uses his essay “The Death Penalty: Can It Ever Be Justified?” to defend capital punishment. He believes that justice for murderous crimes is essential for the success of the nation. The possibility of error is of no concern to Koch and if would-be murderers can be deterred from committing these heinous crimes, he feels the value of human life will be boosted and murder rates will consequently plummet (475-479). Koch makes a valiant effort to express these views, yet research contradicts his claims and a real look at his idea of justice must be considered in order to create a fair nation for all.
The United States should use the death penalty because it is economical and continues to be a deterrent for potential offenders. Take into consideration that the Constitution states that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can not be taken away without due process. The offenders committing the brutal, heinous crimes have not applied this right to the victims of their crimes. Why should the government take their rights into consideration when the victims rights mean so little to them? People always put forth the idea that killing is wrong in any sense, yet they don’t want to punish the people that commit the crimes.
The death penalty is something that many people do not have a clear decision on. Many people support the death penalty, while others wish for the death penalty to be abolished, and there are some that support the death penalty, but only in certain cases. My personal opinion on the death penalty is it should be administered only in cases of particularly
This essay will discuss the various views regarding the death penalty and its current status in the United States. It can be said that almost all of us are familiar with the saying “An eye for an eye” and for most people that is how the death penalty is viewed. In most people’s eyes, if a person is convicted without a doubt of murdering someone, it is believed that he/she should pay for that crime with their own life. However, there are some people who believe that enforcing the death penalty makes society look just as guilty as the convicted. Still, the death penalty diminishes the possibility of a convicted murderer to achieve the freedom needed to commit a crime again; it can also be seen as a violation of the convicted person’s rights going against the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
I believe that there is a standard when it comes to morality. The basics of that standard includes knowing that murder, rape, torture, treason, kidnapping, larceny, and perjury are wrong. What does it mean for something to be wrong? It means that the majority of human beings can argue that those crimes hurt rather than benefit individuals or a society as a whole. The death penalty can be implemented for any of the crimes listed above when a judge believes that the crime is serious enough. However, the death penalty uses one of the crimes itself; murder. If the government uses the death penalty as a punishment in order to show that murder is wrong, how can they murder and assume it is right? Opponents of this statement could argue that the government has a judicial system in order to uphold the moral code within our society, and that the death penalty honors human dignity by allowing the defendant to control his own destiny. However, I argue that the death penalty objectifies and takes away the humanity of the defendant.
The death penalty is immoral and should be removed from every justice system across America because it puts the lives of innocent people at risk. If someone is wrongfully convicted of murder and sentenced to death, there is a chance that they could be executed. Now an innocent victim and an innocent accused killer have died while the real killer is still free. Approximately 156 prisoners on death row have been exonerated, and it is impossible to tell how many more prisoners were innocent and still were executed (DPIC). An example of an innocent person being executed is the case of Cameron Willingham. Willingham was convicted of murdering three children in 1991 in a house fire. He was executed in 2004. A
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.
Many who disagree with the death penalty believe it is immoral, discriminates, is very expensive, increases crime, and is only a way to carry out revenge. This, however, is not true. Capital punishment should be legal because it is moral, by not allowing criminals to roam the streets once again. It does not discriminate against those of color or the poor, and is actually less expensive than life imprisonment. The most important reason why the death penalty should be legal is because it deters crime.
Some even claim that it is cruel and unusual punishment. I would like to shed light on the issue and inform everyone as to why we should keep the death penalty and possibly even use it more than we do now. First of all, it is hard for anyone to argue that we already use the death penalty too much because facts say that we hardly use it at all. Since 1967, there has been one execution for every 1,600 murders. There have been approximately 560,000 murders and 358 executions between 1967 and 1996(UCR and BJS).
One of the most highly controversial topic in regards to ethics, is the application of the death penalty. Numerous groups have protested against it, as they claim it falls under “cruel and unusual punishment”, which citizens are protected against. However, other groups declare just the opposite, stating that unspeakable crimes need to be paid with retribution. Many of these groups consist of general public members, simply everyday people who strive to have a large impact on this topic. With regards to politics in America and an array of other countries, the public plays a large role in shaping political and criminal laws. For that reason, any policymaking needs to take in the public’s view and analyzation of public view is essential.
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.
Though the death penalty is considered barbaric, it is not. With those who have ones that have died viciously to the ones who died young there is such a thing as karma. The death penalty allows those people who committed the crime to be punished equally. Therefore, I agree with the reason for having the death penalty. It is only fair that the criminal be punished for his wrong doings. The bible does say, “An eye for an eye.” When there is equal punishment and safety it makes people worry less. It allows them to live out their lives in peace, and to not look back on something bad that has happened to them.