More handpicked essays just for you.
Death penalty should be retained
History of unjust death penalties
History of the death penalty in the usa essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Thesis
It is more reasonable to utilize the death penalty than to abolish it. The death penalty should not be abolished because (1) it deters people from committing murder and (2) because the death penalty gives peace of mind to the victims and their families and puts an end to the crime.
Arguments for the thesis
(1) The death penalty should not be abolished because the fear of the highest form of punishment will keep potential victims alive.
(2) The death penalty should not be abolished because the families of the victims can only begin the healing process once the murderer is put to death.
Response to objections to the thesis
(1) Objection: The death penalty should be abolished because even the highest form of punishment will not remove the evil from society.
Response: If the death penalty was abolished, the convicted murderer has the potential to escape and kill again. This will spread more evil and give the option to kill again to the murderer.
(2) Objection: The execution of a convicted murderer will never bring the victims back to life. Therefore it serves no purpose other than to kill.
Response: Resurrection has never been the purpose of the death penalty. The family members just want to start healing and they can’t while the perpetrator is still alive.
Bibliography
Van der Haag, Ernest and John P. Conrad, The Death Penalty: A Debate (New York: Plenum Press, 1983).
Arlen Specter, “Congress must make Death Sentences Meaningful Again” (Human Events, July 1994).
Hugo, Adam Bedau, Ed., The Death penalty in America: Current Controversies (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997)
Blumstein, Cohen, Nagin, Deterrence and Incapacitation (National Academy Press January 1978)
It is more reasonable to utilize the death penalty than to abolish it. The death penalty should not be abolished because (1) it deters people from committing murder and (2) because the death penalty gives peace of mind to the victims and their families and puts an end to the crime.
The death penalty deters some people from committing heinous crimes and thereby also saves human lives. Not everyone will be deterred from committing heinous crimes because of the death penalty. However, since the death penalty is the highest penalty for crimes it will obviously evoke the most fear in a human being. This fear will save...
... middle of paper ...
...rt the healing process. If a state governed by law is to be able to show warmth, compassion and peace of mind to victims and their families, then the death penalty is the most effective way to bring this about.
The argument to the above is that the death penalty does not bring back any victim to life, therefore, unnecessary. Just because someone has taken a life, it doesn’t mean that the convict’s life should also be taken. Is it fair to take a bad situation and make it worse?
The death penalty will never sweep away the emotions and feelings of grief that the relatives and friends feel. Murdering the convicted murder would only cause more grief for his family, therefore, over time, grieving would become commonplace.
Resurrection has never been the purpose of the death penalty. It is understood that the death penalty will not totally take away the emotions and feelings of the relatives, however the death penalty will ease those pains. The grief and despair would be considerably heavier to carry if the relatives knew that the perpetrator was only sentenced to prison and would be released after a period of time. Therefore, I feel that the death penalty will never become unnecessary.
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.
To abolish capital punishment on this basis would be way off base. You would also have to get rid of prisons because they do not keep people from committing crimes. Texas A&M University collected data and the results are horrifying. In 1960 there were 56 executions and 9,140 murders in the past. In 1964 there were 15 executions and 9, 250 murders.
The death penalty is the ultimate warning toward would-be criminals.[4] If a potential criminal knows that the punishment for their actions is going to be death, then fewer criminals will commit the crimes.
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.
“The Death Penalty in America: A Cultural and Historical Analysis.” Supreme Court Debates (2004): pp. 259-288.
25 Hugo Adams Bedau, The Death Penalty in America: Current Controversies (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997) 250.
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.
In conclusion, our justice system is full of flaws and proves to show why the death penalty should be abolished. The reasons for it to be abolished include: financials cost, long drawn out process, more effective sentencing styles, the conviction and execution of an innocent person and the violation of the “cruel and unusual” punishment clause in the Bill of Rights. While the death penalty may seem like the right thing to do under the philosophy of “Eye for Eye”, it only encourages the ongoing process of criminal behavior. Our criminal justice system is blurred and sometimes ineffective when it comes to certain cases. Moreover, justice can be bought rather served.
Capital Punishment should NOT be abolished, because it is the only punishment that fits the
The death penalty is legal in thirty-two states. I shall argue that capital punishment should be abolished in our country because it is never moral to kill a human being no matter what they have done, because it often costs more money to keep someone on death row than to keep someone in prison for life, because of the men and women who are wrongly accused of a crime they did not commit, and because death is the easy way out.
Pasquerella, Lynn. “The Death Penalty in the United States.” The Study Circle Resource Center of Topsfield Foundation. July 1991. Topsfield Foundation. 03 Feb 2011. Web.
The Death Penalty should be discontinued to the families, human rights, and statistics. The families of the victim and the family of the one, who committed the crime, have no closure at all. The death penalty is killing a human for being convicted of a terrible crime one family may think its right but both suffer by their lost ones. “Although true closure is never really possible for the families, studies have shown that the continual process, along with the returning to court for many years, force families to confront the gruesome details of the crime many times over, making it impossible to get on with their lives.
On the other side of the debate, there are those that believe that the death penalty is a deterrent. For most criminals, they are aware of the fact that if they get caught, they will be sent to prison. However, other than being sent to prison, there are not really any other repercussions for committing a crime. They argue that if a person were to be presented with the possibility of the death penalty, they would more than likely think twice about their actions and realize that there are more risks than just im...
"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...