Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Sociological issues with the death penalty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Sociological issues with the death penalty
The risk of executing innocent persons is a decisive objection to the institution of capital punishment in the United States. Consequentialist arguments for the death penalty are inconclusive at best; the strongest justification is a retributive one. However, this argument is seriously undercut if a significant risk of executing the innocent exists. Any criminal justice system carries the risk of punishing innocent persons, but the punishment of death is unique and requires greater precautions. Retributive justifications for the death penalty are grounded in respect for innocent victims of homicide; but accepting serious risks of mistaken executions demonstrates disrespect for innocent human life. United States Supreme Court decisions of the 1990’s (Coleman v. Thompson and Herrara v. Collins) illustrate the existence of serious risk and suggest some explanations for it.
I live in a city (Philadelphia, PA) whose District Attorney seeks the death penalty more often, and with greater success, than any other D.A. in the United States. In Philadelphia, as elsewhere in the U.S., the majority of defendants in capital trials are poor, and rely on court appointed defense lawyers paid by the local jurisdiction. It is no coincidence that a city which sends large numbers of convicted murderers to death row has "an unusually impoverished system" for representing indigent defendants. According to Tina Rosenberg, where private attorneys "routinely" charge $50,000 to defend a capital case, Philadelphia pays court-appointed lawyers a $1700 flat fee for preparation and $400 for each day in court. The executive administrator of Philadelphia's courts reckons that this averages $3519 a case.(1)
Those numbers help to explain why District Attorney Lynn Abraham's department has such a high percentage of homicide defendants sentenced to death. They also suggest that Philadelphia runs an especially great risk of sending to death row some persons who are innocent of the crime for which they were convicted. But why does Philadelphia ask for the death penalty so often—in Rosenberg's words, "virtually as often as the law will allow"? (320) D.A. Abraham says that she considers herself the representative of the victim and the victim's family, and that the death penalty is the right thing to do for them. (321) This is essentially a retributive rationale for capital punishment.
The risk of executing innocent human beings is the focus of this paper. I believe that this risk is so significant that it constitutes a decisive reason for the abolition of capital punishment in the United States.
Katrina Srigley, “‘In case you hadn’t noticed!’: Race. Ethinicity, and Women’s Wage-Earning in a Depression-Era City,” Labour/ Le Travail, Vol. 55 (Spring 2005): 69-105, accessed February 23rd, 2014, http://web.a.ebscohost.com.libproxy. uwinnipeg.ca /ehost/detail?vid=8&sid=ad10fcc5-3639-419d-a39f-90111463086e %40 sessionmgr4002&hid=4106&bdata=#db=ahl&AN=44182314
One can either be innocent or guilty. Likewise, one can choose to either condemn or empathize with the accused. These binaries prove amply important throughout Sherman Alexie's 1996 poem entitled "Capital Punishment," in which a prison cook recounts the day of an inmate's execution. Throughout the poem, the speaker parenthetically inserts on five separate occasions the phrase "I am not a witness," but near the conclusion of the poem, he contradicts his previous denials, proclaiming, "I am a witness." Readers of the poem may at first be puzzled by the speaker's repeated denial that he is a witness followed by his eventual declaration that he is, in fact, a witness; however, further examination reveals that the speaker, by progressing from condemnation
Dolph Briscoe was elected to the Texas State Legislature in 1949. He was also a strong proponent of building the state's farm-to-market roads. This was an important development for rural Texas. He left the legislature in 1957 where he devote more time to the family business. Quickly becoming one of the state's leading ranchers and president of the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association. Dolph Briscoe was active in the Democratic Party of Texas throughout the 1950s and the 1960s.
Young, Rhoria Lee, and Maggie Bracher. "Horsemastership part 2: Physical, psychological, educational and social benefits." International Journal of Therapy & Rehabilitation 12.3 (2005): 120-125. Web. 8 Mar. 2011.
Upon examination, one finds capital punishment to be economically weak and deficient. A common misconception of the death penalty is that the cost to execute a convicted criminal is cheaper than to place a convict in prison for life without parole. Due to the United States judicial system, the process of appeals, which is inevitable with cases involving death as the sentence, incurs an extreme cost and is very time consuming. The cost of a capital trial and execution can be two to six times greater than the amount of money needed to house and feed a prisoner for life. "Studies show incarceration costs roughly $20,000 per inmate per year ($800,000 if a person lives 40 years in prison). Research also shows a death-penalty ease costs roughly $2 million per execution," (Kaplan 2). Capital punishment is extremely expensive and depletes state governments of money that could be used for a wide range of programs that are beneficial. As Belolyn Wiliams-Harold, an author for the journal Black Enterprise, writes that county governments are typically responsible for the costs of prosecution and the costs of the criminal trial, including attorney's fees, and salaries for the members of the courtroom. All this money is spent at the expense of the corrections department and crime prevention programs, which are already is strapped for cash (Williams-Harlod 1). These "financial constraints," such as capital punishment, do not promote a healthy, commercial society, but actually cost and harm the public.
Training a horse to ride is hard work, it involves ground work, riding, and in both patience is very important. In the next few paragraphs I will be explaining the steps needed to train a horse.
Miller, Edward. The Tooth Book: a Guide to Healthy Teeth and Gums. Holiday House, 2009.
We live our entire life in two states, sleep and awake1. These two states are characterized by two distinct behaviors. For instance, the brain demonstrates a well-defined activity during non-REM sleep (nREM) that is different when we are awake. In the study of sleep by Huber et. al., the authors stated that sleep is in fact a global state2. It is unclear whether this statement means that sleep is a state of global behavioural inactivity or the state of the global nervous system. The notion that sleep is a global state of the nervous system served as basis for sleep researchers to search for a sleep switch. The discovery of the sleep switch, in return, provided evidence and enhanced the notion that sleep is a global state of the nervous system. The switch hypothesis developed from the fact that sleep can be initiated without fatigue and it is reversible1. It was hypothesized that there is something in the brain that has the ability to control the whole brain and initiate sleep. Studies have found a good candidate that demonstrated this ability3. They found a group of neurons in the Ventrolateral Preoptic (VLPO) nucleus. It was a good candidate because it was active during sleep, has neuronal output that can influence the wakefulness pathway, and lesion in the area followed reduce sleep3. The idea that there is something that can control the whole brain and result sleep state supports the idea that sleep is a global state of the nervous system.
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.
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
Capital punishment is a difficult subject for a lot of people because many question whether or not it is ethical to kill a convicted criminal. In order to critically analyze whether or not it is ethical, I will look at the issue using a utilitarianism approach because in order to get a good grasp of this topic we need to look at how the decision will impact us in the future. The utilitarianism approach will help us to examine this issue and see what some of the consequences are with this topic of capital punishment. For years, capital punishment has been used against criminals and continues to be used today, but lately this type of punishment has come into question because of the ethical question.
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.
America’s million dollar question is should capital punishment be allowed? Americans have been blindsided with decisions about the death penalty; in the past many have agreed with the punishment due to lack of knowledge on the issue. Today, information on capital punishment is everywhere. I agreed with most of America on the issue; it should be allowed because of its many beneficial reasons. I believe in “just desert,” that is criminals should receive the same punishment that they used against their victims. If you murder someone intentionally you should receive the death penalty. Finally, society feels relief as the capital punishment protects their own human dignity that are at risk if the accused remains alive; society dignity fails if they don’t punish the accused for they become participators of the crime. Therefore, the occurrence of anarchy is avoided with this punishment as it will serve as deterrence as well. Some philosophers such as Kant and Pojman have agreed with my view while others like Marshall and Bedau have challenged it.
Completion of at least 100 hours of continuing educations in the horse profession and equine science. To
“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.