Death Penalty
Introduction
Informed arguments against the death penalty are more persuasive than arguments in favor of it, as the negative affects of the death penalty have become widely publicized and illustrate the ineffectiveness of this cruel punishment. The death penalty is an inefficient form of punishment as innocent offenders may be executed, superior forms of restitution are available, and it fails to deter crime, all of which contribute to informed arguments against it.
Deterrence
The primary function of the death penalty is to act as deterrence, yet evidence has indicted that this cruel punishment has failed to deter crime.
• Inconsistent: Any punishment can be an effective deterrent only if it is consistently and promptly employed. The death penalty cannot be administered to meet these conditions as it is never consistent or employed correctly. Only a small proportion of first-degree murderers are sentenced to death, and even fewer are executed. The death penalty fails to deter because it is an inconsistent punishment, which permits offenders to believe that the punishment will not be applied.
• Premeditated: Persons who commit murder and other crimes of personal violence either premeditate them or they do not. If the crime is premeditated, the criminal ordinarily concentrates on escaping detection, arrest, and conviction. The threat of even the severest punishment will not deter those who expect to...
Death Penalty is an effective deterrent to crime “The eyes of a psychopath are a chilling sight. I have looked into the eyes of more than one cold blooded murderer- and wished them dead.” (Landau) The Death Penalty is used in rapists, murderers, and other high crimes. Many people say it works great to keep crime underway. The Death Penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment mostly used against the poor and minorities. “Twelve percent of americans are black. Thirty percent of them are on death row” (Prejean) The death penalty has been used against the poor and minorities for quite some time.
Based on public opinion and facts of this side, “the death penalty process consumes tremendous amounts of money and resources and fails to deter criminal activity” (Ballaro and Cushman, 2016). The people do not want to see tax money squandered on such a fruitless endeavor, instead send the person to jail for life and be done with it. The people believe this view even more so, because of the belief that putting a murderer to death is, in fact, a hypocritical act and makes a murder out of the system and all who played a role in doing so, making the prosecutors no better than the convicted. While the death penalty prevents one murderer from killing again, it created countless more proving that the capital punishment is a useless deterrent all in all. This point of view and belief is the opposing side’s view to capital punishment’s acting as a
or hundreds of years people have considered capital punishment a deterrence of crime. Seven hundred and five individuals have died since 1976, by means of capital punishment; twenty-two of these executions have already occurred this year (Death Penalty Information Center). Many U.S. citizens who strongly support the death penalty believe that capital punishment remains the best way to protect society from convicted killers. I, however, disagree; I do not feel that execution best punishes criminals for their acts. Instead, in my opinion, the administration of the death penalty should end because it does not deter crime; it risks the death of an innocent person, it costs millions of dollars, it inflicts unreasonable pain; and most importantly it violates moral principles.
Narration: Opponents of the death penalty believe it is an ineffective way to stop crime and that there are better ways to punish crime and keep society safe.
“Death penalty is a deterrent,” by George E. Pataki and “The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished,” by David B. Muhlhausen are two articles that support capital punishment as a deterrent of crime. “Legalized Murder: The Death Penalty Serves Revenge and Does Nothing to Solve Crime,” by Michael J. Ring and “The Death Penalty Should Be Abolished,” published by Amnesty International, are two articles that oppose capital punishment as a deterrent to crime by discussing the risks of the “inhumane” form of punishment. The following discussions show the contrasting point-of-views that make capital punishment one of the most controversial topics of today’s society.
In 1967, Thorsten Sellin argued that “the presence of the death penalty in law and practice has no discernible effect as a deterrent to murder.” In the mid-1970s, Isaac Ehrlich countered after looking at national homicide rates between 1930 and 1970 that each execution deterred between seven and eight homicides. Many researchers have tried to duplicate Ehrlich’s results, but most of them have been unsuccessful. (Schonebaum, 2002) According to the website Illini for Life (Deterrence Factor,) although the murder rate has stayed relatively steady since 1976, the rate of execution has skyrocketed.
The death penalty is a controversial topic in the United States today and has been for a number of years. The death penalty is currently legal in 38 states and two federal jurisdictions (Winters 97). The death penalty statutes were overturned and then reinstated in the United States during the 1970's due to questions concerning its fairness (Flanders 50). The death penalty began to be reinstated slowly, but the rate of executions has increased during the 1990's (Winters103-107). There are a number of arguments in favor of the death penalty. Many death penalty proponents feel that the death penalty reduces crime because it deters people from committing murder if they know that they will receive the death penalty if they are caught. Others in favor of the death penalty feel that even if it doesn't deter others from committing crimes, it will eliminate repeat offenders.
Death penalty might sound like the immoral thing to do; however it’s effective. When a criminal is sentence to the death sentence, it spreads fear between criminals who committed a similar crime. It also, decreases the amount of criminals that were thinking about committing that particular crime. In the article, “The Death Penalty Deters Crime and Saves Lives” Muhlhausen explains to us how death penalty sa...
The death penalty continues to be an issue of controversy and is an issue that will be debated in the United States for many years to come. According to Hugo A. Bedau, the writer of “The Death Penalty in America”, capital punishment is the lawful infliction of the death penalty. The death penalty has been used since ancient times for a variety of offenses. The Bible says that death should be done to anyone who commits murder, larceny, rapes, and burglary. It appears that public debate on the death penalty has changed over the years and is still changing, but there are still some out there who are for the death penalty and will continue to believe that it’s a good punishment. I always hear a lot of people say “an eye for an eye.” Most people feel strongly that if a criminal took the life of another, their’s should be taken away as well, and I don’t see how the death penalty could deter anyone from committing crimes if your going to do the crime then at that moment your not thinking about being on death role. I don’t think they should be put to death they should just sit in a cell for the rest of their life and think about how they destroy other families. A change in views and attitudes about the death penalty are likely attributed to results from social science research. The changes suggest a gradual movement toward the eventual abolition of capital punishment in America (Radelet and Borg, 2000).
Julian Ptachin was only 14 years old in October 1997 when a drunk driver smashed into his parents van. His Dad, a physician, had to hold Julian while he died on the side of the road. The drunk driver was a three-timed convicted, repeat offender. He was convicted of second-degree murder and was ordered to serve eight years in jail. Doesn’t something seem wrong with this picture? Repeat crime convicts are running down the streets rapid: endangering our children, our loved ones, and even us.
In addition, Capital punishment is often justified with the argument that by executing locked up murderers. Plenty of Americans citizens argue against deterrence as the statistical evidence doesn't confirm that deterrence works. Some of those executed may not have been capable of being deterred because of medical problem; a few of some capital offense are devoted in such an emotional state that the perpetrator did not think about the possible consequences. No one knows whether the death penalty deters more than life imprisonment. Deterrence is most effective when the punishment happens soon after the crime to make an analogy; when we were growing up as children we learns not to put our hands in the fire, because the consequence is instant pain. The more the legal process takes for the punishment of the crime, either in time, or certainty, the less effective a deterrent the punishment will probably be.
The death penalty can in fact deter heinous crimes from being committed when it is lawful in a state. Social scientists have stated that the act of general deterrence, which is when the punishment deters potential criminals from committing crimes, keeps criminals from going through with crimes. However, it is more shown that premeditated crimes are usually the ones stopped by general deterrence, not crimes under passion. Heinous crimes have been reduced highly in the states that have a capital punishment law.
Should the death penalty be legal throughout the United States? Is it humane or inhumane? The death penalty is only legal in thirty eight of the fifty states in the United States. Lethal injection is also the main procedure that is used. It is the most common form of capital punishment in America. Death penalty by lethal injection should be legal in the United States; the process of lethal injection is better than the electric chair and is more humane.
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, Americans are also more likely to encounter violent crime than citizens of other countries (Brownlee 31). Justice mandates that criminals receive what they deserve. The punishment must fit the crime. If a burglar deserves imprisonment, then a murderer deserves death (Winters 168). The death penalty is necessary and the only punishment suitable for those convicted of capital offenses. Seventy-five percent of Americans support the death penalty, according to Turner, because it provides a deterrent to some would-be murderers and it also provides for moral and legal justice (83). "Deterrence is a theory: It asks what the effects are of a punishment (does it reduce the crime rate?) and makes testable predictions (punishment reduces the crime rate compared to what it would be without the credible threat of punishment)", (Van Den Haag 29). The deterrent effect of any punishment depends on how quickly the punishment is applied (Workshop 16). Executions are so rare and delayed for so long in comparison th the number of capitol offenses committed that statistical correlations cannot be expected (Winters 104). The number of potential murders that are deterred by the threat of a death penalty may never be known, just as it may never be known how many lives are saved with it. However, it is known that the death penalty does definitely deter those who are executed. Life in prison without the possibility of parole is the alternative to execution presented by those that consider words to be equal to reality. Nothing prevents the people sentenced in this way from being paroled under later laws or later court rulings. Furthermore, nothing prevents them from escaping or killing again while in prison. After all, if they have already received the maximum sentence available, they have nothing to lose. For example, in 1972 the U.S. Supreme Court banished the death penalty. Like other states, Texas commuted all death sentences to life imprisonment. After being r...
The death penalty has been an ongoing debate for many years. Each side of the issue presents valid arguments to explain why someone should be either for or against the subject. One side of the argument says deterrence, the other side says there’s a likelihood of putting to death an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder itself. Crime is an unmistakable part of our society, and it is safe to say that everyone would concur that something must be done about it. The majority of people know the risk of crime to their lives, but the subject lies in the techniques and actions in which it should be dealt with. As the past tells us, capital punishment, whose meaning is “the use of death as a legally sanctioned punishment,” is a suitable and proficient means of deterring crime. Today, the death penalty resides as an effective method of punishment for murder and other atrocious crimes.