Capital punishment is a method of retributive punishment as old as civilization itself. Anti-death penalty supporters argue the death penalty is unconstitutional. Capital punishment is a barbaric remnant of an uncivilized society. It is immoral in principle, and unfair, and discriminatory in practice. It assures the execution of some innocent people. As a remedy for crime, it has no purpose and no effect. The arguments against capital punishment are many and cogent.
Capital punishment is irrevocable, and the errors of justice cannot be rectified. All possibility of reconsideration is taken away. Innocent persons have been hanged, and judge, jury, and the legal machinery involved have thereby been made a privy to the very crime they sought to punish. The only way to destroy a criminal is by reforming the man who is a criminal. To destroy a criminal is by reforming the man who is a criminal. To destroy his bodily life is nothing but a stupid blunder.
The strongest argument against using capital punishment for retributive purposes, is the argument that capital punishment is cruel and unusual punishment. The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution, condemning cruel and unusual punishment, is used to protest capital punishment. Officials often defend this punishment as not being cruel and unusual, but how can they defend this opinion in the case of John Evans, who was executed by electrocution in 1983? According to witnesses at the scene, Mr. Evans was given three charges of electrocution over a period of fourteen minutes. After the first and second charges, Mr. Evans was still conscious and smoke was coming from all over his body as a result of flesh burning. An official there even tried to stop the execution on account of it being cruel and unusual punishment, but was unsuccessful. Witnesses later called the whole incident a “barbaric ritual.” Studies show that in this century at least four-hundred innocent people have been convicted of capital crimes that they did not commit, and of those four-hundred, twenty-three were executed. The wrongful execution of an innocent person is an injustice that can never be rectified. Maybe the punishment would not be as bad if there was absolute surety that the person the jury was putting on death row was guilty, but as most...
... middle of paper ...
...nbsp; Ten Commandments radio program delivered in the early 90's.
Gross, R. and Robert Mauro. Death and Discrimination.
Northeastern University Press, 1989
Bohm, Robert M.. ed. The Death Penalty in America: Current Research.
Anderson Publishing Co., 1991
Radelet, Michael L. ed. Facing the Death Penalty.
Temple University Press, 1989
For example, Ted Bundy and terrorists like Oklahoma City bomber, Timothy McVeigh who have committed serious crimes. Furthermore, during the first decade of the 21st century there were 26 percent more executions in the U.S. than in the 20th century. For instance, during the same time period, the U.S. murder rate decreased by 24 percent (Marquis, 22). However, how would you know if someone was innocent or not? What if they had been framed by the actual killer? That’s why it would take a long and complex process to find out whether that person had not committed such crime. Therefore, innocent people could be put to death for doing no such crimes.
Murder, a common occurrence in American society, is thought of as a horrible, reprehensible atrocity. Why then, is it thought of differently when the state government arranges and executes a human being, the very definition of premeditated murder? Capital punishment has been reviewed and studied for many years, exposing several inequities and weaknesses, showing the need for the death penalty to be abolished.
Capital punishment is something no person should endure, no matter how awful the committed crime may be. It is a cruel and sick punishment, for example, someone who has killed somebody has to undergo various gruesome and awful forms of capital punishment such as electrocution where they strap you to a chair and 1000 watts of electricity flow through your body or decapitation where the person is restrained to a wooden device with a sharp blade and then the blade is released or even immurement where the person is left to starve and dehydrate to death. When they are convicted to capital punishment, they are just waiting for death, and how slow and/or painful the procedure might be.
Throughout America’s history, capital punishment, or the death penalty, has been used to punish criminals for murder and other capital crimes. In the early 20th century, numerous people would gather for public executions. The media described these events gruesome and barbaric (“Infobase Learning”). People began to wonder if the capital punishment was really constitutional.
As seen, capital punishment is a barbaric tool used for centuries to punish wrong doers. As society evolves, so does its beliefs. But many stare so long at the past they do not see the future. People must realize that society has come a long way and capital punishment is a step in the wrong direction. Capital punishment must remain in the past and not in the future.
Many positions can be defended when debating the issue of capital punishment. In Jonathan Glover's essay "Executions," he maintains that there are three views that a person may have in regard to capital punishment: the retributivist, the absolutist, and the utilitarian. Although Glover recognizes that both statistical and intuitive evidence cannot validate the benefits of capital punishment, he can be considered a utilitarian because he believes that social usefulness is the only way to justify it. Martin Perlmutter on the other hand, maintains the retributivist view of capital punishment, which states that a murderer deserves to be punished because of a conscious decision to break the law with knowledge of the consequences. He even goes as far to claim that just as a winner of a contest has a right to a prize, a murderer has a right to be executed. Despite the fact that retributivism is not a position that I maintain, I agree with Perlmutter in his claim that social utility cannot be used to settle the debate about capital punishment. At the same time, I do not believe that retributivism justifies the death penalty either.
Capital punishment is an age-old practice. It has been used in civilizations for millennia, and will continue to be used for millennia to come. Whether used for the right or wrong reasons, capital punishment is unmistakable in its various forms. From hangings, to firing squads, to lethal injections, capital punishment and the associated proceeding have evolved over time. There have been many arguments against capital punishment, many of which still hold true. As capital punishment has evolved over time, however, many of the most valid arguments have been proven all but null. Capital punishment still has its ethical and moral concerns, but as it has evolved over time these concerns have not necessarily become less valid, but fewer in number when specifically addressing capital punishment. The proceedings that come hand-in-hand with capital punishment, however, have become increasingly more rigorous and controversial and are the main focus of most capital punishment concerns.
The capital punishment has been cited as a reasonable sentence by those who advocate for retribution. This is essentially when it comes to justice so that people take full responsibility for their individual actions. Studies have proved that the decision to take away life of a person because they committed a certain crime serves to perpetuate the crime in question. It also serves to enhance the progress of organized and violent crime. It has been noted that various flaws in the justice system has led to the wrong conviction of innocent people. On the other hand, the guilty have also been set free, and a plethora of several cases has come up when a critical look at the capital punishment has been undertaken. Killers hardly kill their victims deliberately, but they probably act on anger, passion, or impulsively. In this regard, it is not proper to convict them exclusively without
Old Sparky and Gruesome Gertie (affectionate names for the electric chair) have taken the lives of many, even the innocent (Finnerty 18). They are prejudiced and lack compassion. However, many Americans believe that they represent justice. Capital punishment does not represent justice, but vengeance and hate. Among the 7,000 people estimated to have been killed in the United States between 1900 and 1985, at least 23 were innocent (Finnerty 18). In at least 8 of 261 executions performed since 1976, something went wrong; for example, the executioner couldn't find a good vein, or the first jolt of electricity failed to do the trick (Finnerty 18). An innocent person, let alone 23 that were wrongfully executed might seem insignificant to one. Just for a moment think if that one person was your brother or father, and they were innocent! Would you then see that the American judicial system is imperfect, and that capital punishment should be abolished? Capital punishment is wrong and should be abolished because of its imperfections, high cost, and immoral existence.
For the time being, capital punishment is the method used to punish criminals for crimes they commit. For instance, capital punishment is used as a punishment to treat a murder case or some other serious crime. By issuing capital punishment against criminals, law enforcements are letting criminals know the consequences for their actions. People are hopeful criminals will change their minds regarding committing serious crimes when they know what may happen to them. With this in mind, there are multiple perspectives concerning capital punishment.
The death penalty dates back to the eighteenth century. Criminals received many punishments throughout the centuries such as hangings, quartering, and burning at the stake. The death penalty consists of lethal injections today. The death penalty is a controversial topic because some people are for the death penalty and some people are against the death penalty. There is no one consensus for or against the death penalty. Although there have been many studies on the immorality of the death penalty and whether or not to limit the death penalty in some ways or just completely abolish it all together. It appears that more people are leading towards getting rid of the death penalty, but the courts want to keep it because the courts argue that that it is a successful fear tactic and may prevent future crimes. The death penalty is inhumane, biased, arbitrary, and an unsuccessful fear tactic so it should be abolished.
In 1972, capital punishment (in any form) was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. The decision was reversed in 1976, when new methods of execution were introduced. These new methods included death by lethal injection. Does this mean that it is okay to kill as long as we use a method that is not considered cruel or unusual by society? The death penalty is considered the harshest form of punishment enforced today. Once a jury has convicted a criminal, they go to the second part of the trial, the punishment phase. If the jury recommends the death penalty and the judge agrees that this punishment is deserving of the crime, the criminal will face some form of execution. Contrary to popular belief, the electric chair is not the most common way of executing somebody. Death by lethal injection accounts for the majority of the executions toda...
The debate over capital punishment has been going on for years, and continues to be an extremely indecisive and complicated issue. The death penalty is a very touchy issue within society. There are many pro's and con's on this issue. On one hand, there are people who claim that capital punishment is a form of vengeance on a killer. One the other hand, there are people who believe that locking someone behind bars for life is vengeance enough. But is it "humane" that an individual who takes the life of another should receive heating, clothing, indoor plumbing and 3 square meals a day? While a homeless person who has harmed no one receives nothing?
Capital punishment is the most severe sentence imposed in the United States and is legal in thirty-eight states. The death penalty is a controversial subject, especially because the U.S. is the only western democracy to retain this consequence (Scheb, 518). I personally believe that the death penalty is a valid sentence for those who deserve it. Some believe it is not constitutional, but those who face this penalty are clearly suspect of a savage offense and therefore should be at a loss of certain rights. The arguments don’t end there once one considers that “the controversy over capital punishment becomes more heated when special circumstances arise” (Sternberg, 2). This issue brings up more arguments against the death penalty because of the constitutionally protected ban on cruel and unusual punishment which is protected by the Eighth Amendment. There have been nearly 15,000 executions that have taken place in America, the first in 1608 with the death of Captain George Kendall (Siegel, 410). Most of these were sentenced to death because of their own action of killing others. However, more and more crimes are now able to be punishable by death. This is the result of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which “dramatically increased the number of federal crimes eligible for this sentence” (Scheb, 520). Even so, the federal government has yet to put someone on death row for a non-homicidal case. The arguments for and against capital punishment are lengthy and strictly opinionated, but are also important to see the evolution of our society as the majority view changes and new influences come about.
The death penalty has been around for centuries. It dates back to when Hammurabi had his laws codified; it was “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”. Capital punishment in America started when spies were caught, put on trial and hung. In the past and still today people argue that, the death penalty is cruel, unusual punishment and should be illegal. Yet many people argue that it is in fact justifiable and it is not cruel and unusual. Capital punishment is not cruel and unusual; the death penalty is fair and there is evidence that the death penalty deters crime.