Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Solutions to prison overcrowding
Prison overcrowding
Death penalty arguments against
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Have you ever thought about if the person next to you is a killer or a rapist? If he is, what would you want from the government if he had killed someone you know? He should receive the death penalty! Murderers and rapists should be punished for the crimes they have committed and should pay the price for their wrongdoing. Having the death penalty in our society is humane; it helps the overcrowding problem and gives relief to the families of the victims, who had to go through an event such as murder. Without the death penalty, criminals would be more inclined to commit additional violent crimes. Fear of death discourages people from committing crimes. If capital punishment were carried out more it would prove to be the crime preventative it was partly intended to be. Most criminals would think twice before committing murder if they knew their own lives were at stake. Use of the death penalty as intended by law could actually reduce the number of violent murders by eliminating some of the repeat offenders. 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. The deterrent effect of any punishment depends on how quickly the punishment is applied.
First, people should know the history of the death penalty. The death penalty has a long history dating back to the 16th Century BC. "In 16th Century BC Egypt, a death sentence was ordered for members of nobility, who were accused of magic. They were ordered to take their own life. The non-no...
... middle of paper ...
...those crimes. Now, why should anyone agree with not having the death penalty? They should not! The death penalty helps resolve many problems, such as the overcrowding problem. Without the death penalty, criminals would be more inclined to commit additional violent crimes. Fear of death discourages people from committing crimes. If capital punishment were carried out more it would prove to be the crime preventative it was partly intended to be. Most criminals would think twice before committing murder if they knew their own lives were at stake. Use of the death penalty as intended by law could actually reduce the number of violent murders by eliminating some of the repeat offenders. The death penalty has always been and continues to be a very controversial issue. In the future, many problems could be resolved keeping the death penalty and not getting rid of it.
Many people are led to believe that the death penalty doesn’t occur very often and that very few people are actually killed, but in reality, it’s quite the opposite. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1,359 people have been executed as a result of being on death row since 1977 to 2013. Even though this form of punishment is extremely controversial, due to the fact that someone’s life is at stake, it somehow still stands to this very day as our ultimate form of punishment. Although capital punishment puts murderers to death, it should be abolished because killing someone who murdered another, does not and will not make the situation any better in addition to costing tax payers millions of dollars.
There is no point in wasting thousands each year on such a practice that has no effect on criminal decision-making. In fact, according to the FBI’s “Crime Rates in the US”, the states without the death penalty actually have a lower murder rate than states with the death penalty. We should not use the death penalty to teach criminals that killing people is wrong; it’s hypocrisy. You don't teach someone that murder is wrong by murdering the one who's done it just as you wouldn't teach someone that stealing is wrong by stealing something of
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.
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)
If a person is so uncompassionate about human life and does not care what happens, is sick enough to harm someone else, they should also pay the price of their lives. Violent criminals will always exist in society and the death penalty will only decrease these numbers gradually, however every violent criminal that does not exist in society makes society a safer place. Placing these criminals in prison with a life sentence does not deter them from committing another crime. This just enables them to plan, plot and proceed with the next murder, escape or worse. The majority of people that commit heinous crimes that call for the death penalty cannot be reformed....
The death penalty is a good way to punish someone who has committed murder. The reason is because if they are willing to take a life then they should have their own taken from them as well. On the fox news website there is an article called “Death Penalty Discourages Crime.” In this article, it says “ between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer.” This statistic alone shows we should want to punish all the convicted murderers. We could save a lot of other people’s lives. The only thing that we have to do in order to save all these lives is to just follow through with capital punishment when that person is convicted of first degree murder. The death penalty can do a lot for our society and for families of the victims. We can prevent
The death penalty has been promoted for thousands of years, for countless crimes committed by humans. The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes. The death penalty was also part of the Fourteenth Century B.C.'s Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C.'s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C.'s Roman law of the Twelve Tablets. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement. Now in today’s society the most common methods of execution are; firing squad, hanging, and in recent years: lethal injection which is undeniably more humane than any other form of execution throughout history. The death penalty has been used to protect society from the iniquities that mankind has presented itself. The criminals, rapists, murderers, and sadists, who harm innocent people, should undeniably forfeit their own right to live as Margaret Thatcher has stated. The use of capital punishment is essential to the security of our nation and the justice in which those who are innocent and those who are the victims deserve.
The people in support of the death penalty say that if murderers are sentenced to death, future committers will think about the consequences before they actually proceed with the crime. However, most murderers don’t expect or plan to be caught and weigh their fate. Because, murders are committed when the murderer is angry or passionate, or by drug abusers and people under the influence of drugs or alcohol ("Deterrence (In Opposition to the Death Penalty)”). Therefore, it will not deter future crimes and will actually increase the amount of murders because of society. As previously stated, the death penalty isn’t proven to prevent future murders and/or crimes because it actually increases the likelihood of committing murder. It doesn’t prevent future murders because it would upset the family and friends of the person who was executed. For example, if someone was executed by the death penalty and it was someones family member, then the person who lost their loved one by the execution would most likely commit murder in anger. If that person was executed the next family member would get angry and so on. The cycle would never end and would have more murders. There is no final proof that the death penalty is a better deterrent than other options. Not having the death penalty would be better because it could save many lives. For example, United States a country that uses the death penalty has a higher murder rate than Europe or Canada which are countries that do not use the death penalty. To get a little specific, the states in the United States that do not use the death penalty have a lower murder rate than the states that do.
...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.
First, people should know the history of the death penalty. The death penalty has a long history dating back to the 16th Century BC. "In 16th Century BC Egypt, a death sentence was ordered for members of nobility, who were accused of magic. They were ordered to take their own life. The non-nobility was usually killed with an ax"(Burns). During the 18th Century BC, King Hammurabi of Babylon had a code that arranged the death penalty for 25 different crimes although murder was not one of them (Burns).
While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that capital punishment is being used for vengeance or as a deterrent. Capital punishment has been used worldwide, not only by the governments to instill fear, but to show that there are repercussions to ones actions. From the time we are born, we are taught to learn the difference between right and wrong. It is ingrained in our brains, what happens to people that do bad things? Capital punishment is renowned for being the worst thing that could be brought amongst ones life.
I will accomplish this by first providing you with a brief history of the death penalty, then I will discuss grounds for justifying the death penalty, and finally I will dispute some of the popular arguments against the death penalty. To start off, I will discuss the history of the death penalty. The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, boiling, beheading, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement. In the Tenth Century A.D., hanging became the usual method of execution in Britain.
I believe that under certain circumstances that capital punishment should be allowed because if someone is going to commit mass murder they should pay with the ultimate human right which is of their life. This topic has been widely thought of in the world with a few philosophers really encompassing my views. Those are the views of Ernest Van Den Haag and Bruce Fein. Philosophers who oppose our views are such like Justice William Brennan and Hugo Adam Bedau. I will prove my point using the ideas of deterrence and morality of the issue of capital punishment. If the government would show that if you kill someone there will be a consequence for their actions and that the consequence would be equal to what they have done. The population will see that it isn’t worth taking another humans life. If we were to kill people that are committing these mass killings of innocent people there would not be as many criminals around. Therefore the streets would be a place people wouldn’t be afraid of anymore.
Crime is everywhere. Wherever we look, we find criminals and crime. Criminals have become a part of our daily lives. Does this mean we let them be the darkness of our society? No, definitely not. Eliminating crime and criminals is our duty, and we cannot ignore it. Getting the rightly accused to a just punishment is very important. Some criminals commit a crime because they have no other option to survive, but some do it for fun. I do not advocate death penalty for everybody. A person, who stole bread from a grocery store, definitely does not deserve death penalty. However, a serial killer, who kills people for fun or for his personal gain, definitely deserves death penalty. Death penalty should continue in order to eliminate the garbage of our society. Not everybody deserves to die, but some people definitely do. I support death penalty because of several reasons. Firstly, I believe that death penalty serves as a deterrent and helps in reducing crime. Secondly, it is true that death penalty is irreversible, but it is hard to kill a wrongly convicted person due to the several chances given to the convicted to prove his innocence. Thirdly, death penalty assures safety of the society by eliminating these criminals. Finally, I believe in "lex tallionis" - a life for a life.
In our society there are many criminals that get away with no punishment for their crimes. Some of these people are walking around our cities with no remorse and waiting to strike again. When you walk down the street and you see a man walking on the opposite direction, you probably don’t think that he could be a cold blooded killer and if someone asks you right this minute if you are pro or con death penalty the answer would most likely be con. Now think about this, imagine that your brother, sister, mom, dad, or anyone you love walks down that same street and comes across this man and you never see that love one again. Some ten days later the police comes to your door telling you that they have found that loved one face down in a muddy bog, having been beaten to death, or perhaps shot or stabbed, or maybe strangle. Perhaps the person you love has been raped, mutilated, or made to suffer greatly before dying. If this were to ever happen to you or someone close to you, would you want that to happen to someone else? Would you allow a cold blooded killer to walk the streets your little brother, sister, son or daughter walks on? I certainly wouldn’t. For this and other reasons is that death penalty should be kept and enforced.