More handpicked essays just for you.
Controversial issues regarding the death penalty
Controversial issues regarding the death penalty
Controversial issues regarding the death penalty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Costs and Consequences of the Death Penalty, written by Mark Costanzo, neatly lists reasons for opposition, and abolishment of, the death penalty. Costanzo provides a review of the history of the death penalty, a review of how the death penalty process is working today, questions on whether or not if the death penalty is inhumane and cheaper than life imprisonment. He also questions if the death penalty is fairly applied and the impact, if any, that it has on deterrence. He closely examines the public's support of the death penalty and questions the morality of the death penalty. Finally, Costanzo provides his own resolution and alternative to the death penalty. Each of these items allows the reader an easy, and once again, neat view of how the death penalty can work against out society rather than for it.
Costanzo concludes there are four trends throughout the history of the death penalty. First, he believes there has been a dramatic shrinking in the number and types of crimes punishable by death. At one point in early colonial times, he argues that there were over fifty crimes fit for death, including vagrancy and petty theft. He believes there is a trend that attempts to lessen the cruelty of executions. Through the tests and reviews of past methods of killing, each one gets a little more “humane”, as the Supreme Court puts it. The third trend mentioned attempts to make the death penalty imposed fairly and rationally. Through the revised process of how it is imposed, to the choice of death in the jury’s deliberations, there have been drastic changes in how we chose the use this method of punishment. Lastly, the fourth trend is the sanitizing of executions (conducted late at night and using well-defined and specialized procedures). Although this may run side by side with the revision of the death penalty process, Costanzo explains that there is a difference between the reasons why we chose the death penalty in cases, which is the revision discussed in trend number 3, and the revision of how it is carried out, which is the fourth. The practices have come along way, but if history proves true, Costanzo argues, there will be a new way of doing it in the not so distant future, which will be called more “humane” and fit for use in our penal system.
Costanzo sites the two landmark decisions of the Supreme Court. Furman vs. Georgia (1972): ruled that capital ...
... middle of paper ...
...wn government put people to death, the more likely they will be to use death in their own world.
Also, he believes the evidence shows those who currently support the death penalty would favor other types of alternatives if given the option and explanation. Largely he believes people want justice and choose the death penalty due to a lack of any other sure way to keep the dangerous criminals off the street. Costanzo suggests workable alternatives to the death sentence; i.e., life without parole plus restitution. He believes the public would readily support this if the option was provided and explained.
In conclusion, Costanzo believes that the death penalty does not work and should be abolished. He supports his position by thoroughly explaining the history of the death penalty and gives numerous arguments that support that no legal system is able to infallibility and evenhandedly decide who should live and who should die. He points out that those who support it do so in the abstract and that when given a better alternative to ensure the public safety, alternatives that offer punishment without the taking of lives would be preferred over ones that do.
Randa, Laura E. “Society’s Final Solution: A History and Discussion of the Death Penalty.” (1997). Rpt.in History of the Death Penalty. Ed. Michael H. Reggio. University Press of America, Inc., 1997. 1-6 Print.
Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez. “Capital Punishment.” Our Duty or Our Doom. 12 May 2010. 30 May 2010 .
In the early 1950’s, the number of executions sharply declined. Opponents of the death penalty claimed that it violated the Eighth Amendment, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment. Opponents also claimed the death penalty violated the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that all citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law. In early 1972, William Furman was convicted of burglary and murder. While Furman was burglarizing a home, a resident arrived at the scene. Startled, Furman tried to flee, but tripped and fell in the process. The gun Furman was carrying discharged, killing the resident in the process. Furman did not believe he deserved the death penalty. The constitutionality of capital punishment in this circumstance was considered in the supreme co...
This paper will examine the pros and cons of the death penalty. Is it a deterrent or is that a myth. Does it give the family of the victim peace or does it cause them to suffer waiting for appeal after appeal. What are the forms of execution and any evidence of them being cruel and usual punishment. Is the death penalty fair if there are glaring, disparities in sentencing depending on geographic location and the color of the offender and victim’s skin?
In this paper I will argue for the moral permissibility of the death penalty and I am fairly confident that when the case for capital punishment is made properly, its appeal to logic and morality is compelling. The practice of the death penalty is no longer as wide-spread as it used to be throughout the world; in fact, though the death penalty was nearly universal in past societies, only 71 countries world-wide still officially permit the death penalty (www.infoplease.com); the U.S. being among them. Since colonial times, executions have taken place in America, making them a part of its history and tradition. Given the pervasiveness of the death penalty in the past, why do so few countries use the death penalty, and why are there American states that no longer sanction its use? Is there a moral wrong involved in the taking of a criminal’s life? Of course the usual arguments will be brought up, but beyond the primary discourse most people do not go deeper than their “gut feeling” or personal convictions. When you hear about how a family was ruthlessly slaughtered by a psychopathic serial killer most minds instantly feel that this man should be punished, but to what extent? Would it be just to put this person to death?
Opponents of the death penalty will site several reasons to abolish death penalty such as the usage of death penalty as a deterrent, the cost of death penalty vs life in prison, unfairness in the application of death sentencing, and possible mistakes. Opponents would much rather focus on the rights’ of criminals than the victims and their families.
Guernsey, J. B. (2010). Death penalty: fair solution or moral failure. Minneapolis, MN: Lerner Publishing Group, Inc. Retrieved February 8, 2011 from http://books.google.com/books?id=38slHSsFFrgC&pg=PA125&dq=death+penalty+in+other+countries&hl=en&ei=F6dQTZHLBsm_tgfD7rHBCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBDgU#v=onepage&q=death%20penalty%20in%20other%20countries&f=false
This essay will discuss the various views regarding the death penalty and its current status in the United States. It can be said that almost all of us are familiar with the saying “An eye for an eye” and for most people that is how the death penalty is viewed. In most people’s eyes, if a person is convicted without a doubt of murdering someone, it is believed that he/she should pay for that crime with their own life. However, there are some people who believe that enforcing the death penalty makes society look just as guilty as the convicted. Still, the death penalty diminishes the possibility of a convicted murderer to achieve the freedom needed to commit a crime again; it can also be seen as a violation of the convicted person’s rights going against the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Capital Punishment Essays - For the Common Good. Putting to death people judged to have committed certain extreme Terrible crimes are a practice of ancient standing, but in the United States. in the second half of the twentieth century, it has become a very controversial issue. Changing views on this difficult issue led the Supreme Court to abolish capital punishment in 1972 but later upheld it in 1977. The 'Standard' of the 'Standard' Although capital punishment is what the people want, there are many.
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
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.
Special attention will be given to the topics of deterrence, the families of the victims, and the increased population that has been occurring within our prisons. Any possible objections will also be assessed, including criticism regarding the monetary value of the use of the death penalty and opposition to this practice due to its characteristics, which some identify as hypocritical and inhumane. My goal in arguing for the moral justifiability of capital punishment is not to use this practice extensively, but rather to reduce the use to a minimum and use it only when necessary. Above all else, capital punishment should be morally justified in extreme situations because it has a deterrent effect. Many criminals seem to be threatened more by the thought of death rather than a long-term prison sentence.
“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.
Capital punishment has been a controversial topic in association to any person condemned to a serious committed crime. Capital punishment has been a historical punishment for any cruel crime. Issues associated to things such as the different methods used for execution in most states, waste of taxpayers’ money by performing execution, and how it does not serve as any form of justice have been a big argument that raise many eyebrows. Capital punishment is still an active form of deterrence in the United States. The history of the death penalty explains the different statistics about capital punishment and provides credible information as to why the form of punishment should be abolished by every state. It is believed
"Common sense, lately bolstered by statistics, tells us that the death penalty will deter murder... People fear nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal more than the fear of death... life in prison is less feared. Murderers clearly prefer it to execution -- otherwise, they would not try to be sentenced to life in prison instead of death... Therefore, a life sent...