Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Effects of the death penalty on society
The effects of capital punishment on society
Supporting arguments for the death penalty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effects of the death penalty on society
The death penalty refers to a legal process where a criminal gets the punishment of execution due to committing crimes like murder, drug trafficking or rape. The proponents believe that it is a fair form of punishment and should be mandatory. Personally, I disagree that the death penalty should be mandatory for murderers as it will promote social insecurity; and is a form of an inhumane act that promotes violence against violence.
Firstly, the proponents for this argument associate the death penalty as morally right saying, when one life is taken; one life is paid in return. This is morally wrong as any form of killing is wrong and it makes us immoral by killing a killer. Former Us President Jimmy Carter stated that the process of death as
…show more content…
broken and we should seek moral substitutions (Carter, 2012). Likewise, the proponents say that death penalty plays a vital role in combating murder.
To some extent, it might be true as the killer is no longer able to commit the crime again. However, it is irrational to conclude that killing a murderer will avert the same crime from happening. According to the Death penalty fact (2013), there is no credible scientific research to show that death penalty can decrease crimes.
Thirdly, the death penalty can take away innocent lives. In normal situations, death is permanent. Therefore, if a person dies, they cannot come back to life. The proponents argue that every process may go wrong at times hence, innocent people get executed wrongly. The state has taken innocent lives over the years. A former governor of New-York City revealed that over 23 people were unlawfully executed in the 20th century (Cuomo, 2011). Therefore, the death penalty should not be mandatory.
In conclusion, I challenge that death penalty should be mandatory, as it is immoral and illogical. It cannot prevent other crimes happening and it promotes violence against violence. Finally, the death sentence can lead to the killing of innocent people who committed no crime. Using this irrefutable facts and evidences, it is unsound to allow the death penalty mandatory for
murderers.
The death penalty is a punishment of execution, administered to someone legally for committing a capital crime. There are many ways in which someone can receive the punishment, such as, lethal injections, hanging, the electric chair, firing squad, beheading, and crucifixion. Some methods are more common than others. Many people have debated whether or not there should be a death penalty for criminals. Some believe that if there is a death penalty, then there will be less murders, rapes and other horrible crimes.
Although capital punishment may seem like the perfect deterrent it does not lower the crime rate. According to FBI data, states that have abolished the death penalty have homicide rates consistent with or below the national rate.(Diehm)
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
If an error occurs in the procedure, the criminal will face a painful and cruel death. Even more horrifying, an innocent person can be placed on death row. “The reality is that there are few innocent people on death row; the vast majority of these inmates did, in fact, commit the crimes for which they were found guilty. These killers brutally took the lives of innocent victims. By not recognizing the lives of their victims as sacred, they cannot claim their own lives are sacred. In the end, the death penalty is an individual punishment for an individual crime” (Bowman and DiLascio). Although this quote tries to offer a counterpoint to the argument that the death penalty should be abolished, it still admits that there are innocent people on death row. An innocent man placed on death row results in two casualties of innocent men while the brutal murderer sleeps peacefully each night. Errors in the death penalty can destroy families, terminate friendships, and disintegrate love and companionship. Since there is no guarantee that every person on death row is guilty, it is too dangerous to risk more innocent
...ding, deterring crime, and saving tax dollars. The death penalty also ensures equal justice in America and ensures justice to those deceased in homicides. In the future, such issues can be resolved by keeping the death penalty: overcrowding in prisons will be less likely to happen, more criminals would be apprehended because of the plea bargain and crime rates will go down. This changed America by locking up more criminals in prison in these past two millenniums alone then altogether in America before while deterring crime due to convicts facing the chance of execution and being placed on death row. The death penalty also ensures the innocent who have suffered as a victim in a homicide have received their justice. With this being said, the death penalty works as a solution to the overcrowded prisons and overwhelming crime rates in the United States.
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
During the spring semester I read Evangelium Vitae: The Gospel of Life. Paragraphs 27 and 56 of this encyclical prompted a discussion of the death penalty with other students. Their first reaction was that the Pope was against it and that he was saying that the penalty has no justification. There was general resistance to the suggestion that while the Pope's attitude toward the death penalty is, to put it mildly, unfavorable, he did not flat out say that it was immoral, wrong, without justification.
Second, the death penalty does in fact deter crime. New York, 1990, the murder rate was up to about 2,650 people, every year it has dropped, in 2009 there were only 778 murders.
The death penalty is mainly known by capital punishment. It is a legal process whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. The judicial degree that someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence. The actual process of killing someone is an execution. Capital punishment has in the past been practiced by most societies. Currently fifty eight nations actively practice it and ninety seven countries have abolished it. Capital punishment is a matter of active controversy in various countries and states. Positions can vary within single political ideology or cultural region. I am for the death penalty. With the death penalty it allows there to be equal punishment among criminals, and it brings about peace of mind to everyone.
The death penalty honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a moral able to control his/her own destiny for good or bad behavior. I believe it is an asset to society. The death penalty should not be abolished because it will reduce crime rate, it will save us and the government money, and It helps our society.
The death penalty has been a source of controversy for many years. Clearly, the death penalty is cruel, costly, and inhumane. Murderers could be on death row for a long period of time, never knowing when their life will come to an end. A death should not be answered with another death. Bryan Stevenson (2014) says, “each of us is more than the worst thing we’ve ever done.”
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 deters murder. The death penalty is the best way to stop a killer from killing someone else. Some say that prison is enough, but it isn’t. Death is necessary because if they are only sent to prison there is always the risk that some day the same killer that brutally killed a 5-year old or raped and strangle a college student might return to the streets.
...at innocent people could wrongfully be executed. Since 1976 when the death penalty was reintroduced there have been no credible evidence of this happening. activists overestimate this when it actually it happens very rarely. That being said no justice system is 100% accurate, and in a system that relies on human testimony for proof mistakes are made. Striving for higher standards in death penalty cases should always be a priority no matter how efficient it becomes. However, the chance of mistakes are small, and there is no credible evidence that suggests any innocent people have been sentenced to death since the reintroduction of capital punishment. This does not mean that capital punishment should be abolished since there is still a chance of executing the wrong person, if society outlaws anything that has a potential of being harmful it would be a great handicap.
Why are people so quick to agree on ending a human being’s life? Have people ever thought of that could have been them being sentenced to death? Death penalty is a death sentence that a person receives when convicted of a capital crime and is punished with execution. Some who have been found guilty and received the death penalty but insist on their innocence are denied their legal rights. They are not allowed to give the person a statement at their trial, they are even denied victim services because they are “pro-defendant,” and they are removed from the courtroom during trials. The death penalty has brought so much controversy and misery people are going back and forth arguing whether or not the death penalty should be abolished,