Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ongoing debate of the death penalty
The death penalty debate
The death penalty debate
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
From the articles reviewed, there is no clear answer to the subject matter. Whereas most authors argue that capital punishment deters homicide, some scholars have also proven that this is just a mere coincidence. Since both sides, including the proponents of capital punishment and those that disagree with it, have justified their claims with statistics and proven evidence, further research needs to be carried out to know whether or not the sentence deters homicide.
Adler and Summers (2007) argue that an increase in the number of death penalties leads to a corresponding decrease in the number of murder cases. In their article, they draw arguments from data retrieved from the FBI, which clearly illustrates the correlation between executions and resultant murder trends from 1979 to 2004. Their scientific analysis unmistakably reveals that each capital punishment is equivalent to a reduction of 71 murders in the same year. This analysis suggests that capital punishment is of great value to the society since it significantly reduces homicide cases. Different scholars have written various articles that support this perspective.
For instance, Mocan and Gittings (2003) take time to investigate this theory by including the effects of commutation, prison deaths, and acquittals on the rate of crime. In addition to Adler and Summers’ (2007) findings, they assert that both commutation and acquittal of prisoners lead to additional cases of homicide in the United States. Consequently, capital punishment is regarded as a necessary procedure for saving the lives of innocent citizens. However, many people, including United States former president, George Bush, caution that capital punishment should not be used as a way of seeking revenge. Instea...
... middle of paper ...
...
Works Cited
Adler, R. D., & Summers, M. (2007). Capital punishment works. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB119397079767680173
Mocan, N. H., & Gittings, R. K. (2003). Getting off death row: Commuted sentences and the deterrent effect of capital punishment. Journal of Law and Economics, 46(2), 453-478.
Radelet, M. L. (2009). Do executions lower homicide rates: The views of leading criminologists? Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 99(2), 489-508.
Sarokin, H. L. (2011). Is it time to execute the death penalty? Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/judge-h-lee-sarokin/is-it-time-to-execute- the_b_809553.html
Van den Haag, E. (1983). For the death penalty. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/27/nyregion/e-van-den-haag-87-educator-and-backer -of-death-penalty.html
A popular belief among those who advocate Capital Punishment is that the Death Penalty deters future murderers. However, there is no statistical evidence that proves this is in fact effective. Furthermore, there is no evidence which states the death penalty is any more effective in deterring murder than life imprisonment. Deterrence is also at its most persuasive when it takes place soon after a crime. For example, a child learns not to put his or her hand on a hot stove top because it results in immediate pain and a burnt finger. Because the death penalty takes years to be put into effect deterrence is less effective.
...eter, Richard C. “Death Penalty Information Center” A Crisis of Confidence: Americans’ Doubts about the Death Penalty. 2007. 1-30 Print.
“This is not a nice man … innocent is not a word that suits him in any way,” says Brian Webster when speaking of Matthew Poncelet, the man on death row in the movie Dead Man Walking. Many people feel that the death penalty is immoral and it should not be used; however I feel completely opposite. I believe that capital punishment is a fair sentence for a murderer to receive. In the movie Dead Man Walking, the main character Matthew Poncelet, is on death row waiting for the lethal injection that will soon put him to death for good.
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.
In summary, Radelet & Borg (2000) draw three general observations from the data. First, there have been significant changes in the arguments made for and against the death penalty in the United States. While the case of cost is admittedly not as clear as the other areas, retribution has become the only real justification for capital punishment. Second, countries around the world have been, and continue to be, declining in their usage of the death penalty. Last, social science scholars are being listened to. More research is being published on key issues, and changes are being implemented, albeit seemingly slowly, in accordance with research conducted by criminologists.
Opponents of capital punishment are outspoken and vehement in their arguments. They believe the death penalty does not does not deter crime. They also hold the opinion that endin...
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.
“The case Against the Death Penalty.” aclu.org. American Civil Liberties Union, 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2013
A review of the available evidence recently led a National Research Council committee to conclude—again—that we still do not know whether the legal status or use of capital punishment has any influence on homicide (Siennick, 2012). Research methods have shown that a short-term deterrent effect holds true only for non-felony homicides. Felony homicides actually increase slightly after an execution (Siennick, 2012). According to research done in Texas, felony homicides are the only type of homicides that are eligible for the Death Penalty. This does pose a problem for determining whether or not the Death Penalty is an effective deterrent or not. Land et al. suggests that their findings point to subtypes of potential murderers who might respond differently to the threat of execution (Sien...
Since 1976 there have been 1,434 executions in the United States, and additionally of those executions since 1973, 156 of those on death row were exonerated (Facts About the Death Penalty, 2016). In 2012 the National Research Council released a report titled Deterrence and the Death Penalty, citing that studies claiming there was a correlation with the death penalty and lower homicide rates. However this is not true, the death penalty has no effect on crime especially homicide rates. Additionally it is negligent of policy makers to rely on such reasoning in determining the continued validity of the death penalty for a wide variety of capital crimes.
Jacoby believes the death penalty protects society by threatening future murders with fear. Gaes believes the death penalty is necessary because the overpopulation in prisons causes emotional and physical distress. The stronger side of the debate seems to be that the death penalty does not discourage crime at all nor does it help the victim’s family heal. It would be useful to know whether or not death-penalty states as a whole have lower rates of crime than non-death penalty states when arguing for the death penalty.
Capital punishment in the United States is among the most debated issues being discussed. Arguments are strong for both of the sides of the issue, those who want to eliminate the death penalty and those who see to expand its use. The key concepts behind American criminal justice sanctions are, retribution, incapacitation, deterrence and rehabilitation. Retribution argues that the states has the right to execute some sort of pain and punishment equal to or greater than the pain suffered by the victim, that’s why the death penalty is the perfect explanation for the punishment. An eye for an eye can commonly be referred as retribution (Goertzel, 2004).
Americans have argued over the death penalty since the early days of our country. In the United States only 38 states have capital punishment statutes. As of year ended in 1999, in Texas, the state had executed 496 prisoners since 1930. The laws in the United States have change drastically in regards to capital punishment. An example of this would be the years from 1968 to 1977 due to the nearly 10 year moratorium. During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes.”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment. While we may all want murders off the street, the problem we come to face is that is capital punishment being used for vengeance or as a deterrent.
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.
“An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is how the saying goes. Coined by the infamous Hammurabi’s Code around 1700 BC, this ancient expression has become the basis of a great political debate over the past several decades – the death penalty. While the conflict can be whittled down to a matter of morals, a more pragmatic approach shows defendable points that are far more evidence backed. Supporters of the death penalty advocate that it deters crime, provides closure, and is a just punishment for those who choose to take a human life. Those against the death penalty argue that execution is a betrayal of basic human rights, an ineffective crime deterrent, an economically wasteful option, and an outdated method. The debate has experienced varying levels of attention over the years, but has always kept in the eye of the public. While many still advocate for the continued use of capital punishment, the process is not the most cost effective, efficient, consistent, or up-to-date means of punishment that America could be using today.