Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Death penalty compare and contrast
The effects of the death penalty
The effects of the death penalty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Death penalty compare and contrast
Last year alone, over five hundred and fifty people were murdered in Canada. The criminals were sentenced to serve twenty-five years imprisoned for the life/lives that they thieved. Imagine, waking up to discover the dread of your loved one, dead. Imagine the blow to your stomach, the pain and agony, and the hollowness of your throat. Imagine discovering that the assassin that killed your loved one was only to serve twenty-five years for taking a life. Imagine knowing your tax money went to assist the criminal in jail, instead of helping towards the park your loved one used to adore. Imagine watching more criminals commit crimes because the punishment isn't very severe. Imagine protecting yourself from your community because of are potential attackers. Without the death penalty, you won’t have to imagine. These thoughts will eventually become a reality. I think that the death penalty is an effective and compelling manner to settle murder and homicide because it threatens criminals, it provides a safer environment for communities, and the death penalty saves a lot of money for the government.
Criminals always have some sort of motivation to execute crimes. Whether it be that they are low on money or that they have a brutal relationship with someone, they know the consequence will never be as grave as a death penalty in Canada. However, what if that changed? What if the punishment of homicide lead to the death penalty? Criminals might re-consider the consequence of executing the crime and decisively disregard it due to the very dreadful amercement. The death penalty could save lives of the criminals as well as their victims. Hence, the death penalty is an adequate way to make criminals bethink their crime and it could potentially ...
... middle of paper ...
... the only countries that haven’t outlawed the death penalty. Despite the belief that the death penalty is inhumane, I strongly agree that the death penalty can form and conceive a better nation for Canada for the reason that it would decrease the amount of criminals in cities, making them more secure and protected, it would intimidate criminals to deliberate and decide that they shouldn't kill on behalf of regret or revenge, and it would reserve money for the government so that they can use it for better needs other than keeping criminals confined. The death penalty is truly the most effective way of assisting our nation if we would just take the time to elaborate. Saving money while saving lives is surely enough reason to sway a person into believing that the death penalty is absolutely better for Canada. Some will never be convinced, but every little bit helps.
Canada’s criminal justice system largely focuses on rehabilitation, but Bourque’s harsh sentence is similar to the sentencing practices of the United States (Gagnon 2015). This is troubling as Canada’s rehabilitation focused criminal justice system appears to be working. Canada has a low rate of recidivism for offenders who have been convicted of murder (Gagnon 2015). Research shows that Canada’s rehabilitation focused criminal justice system has also worked with crimes that are not as severe as murder. Between 2010/2011 and 2013/2014, there was a 12% decrease in completed adult criminal court cases. Most cases in adult criminal court involve non-violent offenses (Maxwell 2013/2014). Similarly, in 2013, the police-reported crime rate was at it lowest since 1969 (Statistics Canada). The homicide rate is also declining, as in 2013, it represented less than 1% of all violent crime (Statistics Canada). Notably, probation was the most common sentence given in adult court cases and custody sentences were less than six months (Maxwell, 2013/2014). These types of sentences showcase the rehabilitation focused thinking of the Canadian criminal justice system and reinforce the impact and possible repercussions of Justin Bourque’s
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 Canadian Justice system is run like a well-oiled machine. It is based on the fair and humane treatment of suspects who remain innocent until proven guilty. There is one big question that has been debated since July 14th, 1976 - should the death penalty have been abolished in Canada? The new younger generation of Canadians seems to agree with me that the death penalty should be resurrected in Canada.
Canada has been a fully abolitionist country since the 10th of December 1998, and has since continued to maintain a strong anti-death penalty attitude (Amnesty, 2015). The last death penalty sentenced under Canada’s Criminal Code was given in 1962 to two convicted felons charged with first degree murder (Amnesty 2015). After the two were hanged, it brought the total number of people executed in Canada to 710, marking the end of an era (Amnesty, 2015). The death penalty has been a fiercely debated topic spanning even before 1867, Canada’s establishment. Notably however, Canada’s Prime Ministers have long opposed the death penalty starting with John Diefenbaker (Amnesty, 2015). Only the second most recent Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, has
Capital punishment is crime's most dreaded consequence, death. Hanging was Canada's form of capital punishment up until 1976 when it was abolished. Webster's Dictionary defines capital punishments as: "The penalty of death for the commission of a crime." (Webster's, 1994, 43). The chance of capital punishment being reinstated in Canada has been very slim up until now. Recently the Canadian Alliance Party has put forth efforts to reinstate it, which has put the controversial topic back up for debate. This has divided many Canadians concerning their beliefs. Capital punishment should never be reinstated in Canada as it is a barbaric practice that is unjust. This essay will clearly demonstrate that reinstating capital punishment would be illegal as it would violate the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian Bill of Rights and the United Nations Universal Deceleration of Human Rights. In addition, this paper will show that capital punishment is a cruel and barbaric punishment. Finally, this paper will examine how capital punishment does nothing to deter people from committing crimes.
Death Penalty is an effective deterrent to crime “The eyes of a psychopath are a chilling sight. I have looked into the eyes of more than one cold blooded murderer- and wished them dead.” (Landau) The Death Penalty is used in rapists, murderers, and other high crimes. Many people say it works great to keep crime underway. The Death Penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment mostly used against the poor and minorities. “Twelve percent of americans are black. Thirty percent of them are on death row” (Prejean) The death penalty has been used against the poor and minorities for quite some time.
In conclusion, I believe that capital punishment should never be reinstated in Canada. It is a cruel and unjust punishment, where it violates the rights of life and makes amend within the world and may lead to an innocent person executed with the suspect untouched. Also, why ruin a good thing where Canada’s murder/violent crime rate is slowly decreasing within the years because of the abolishment of the death sentence? With the reasons stated above, as well with the fact that the cost of capital punishment is higher and that it is rejected and shunned upon within many religions such as Catholic and Protestant, I think that capital punishment is something that should never even be considered to be reinstated as it is unnecessary and unjust.
Edward I. Koch uses his essay “The Death Penalty: Can It Ever Be Justified?” to defend capital punishment. He believes that justice for murderous crimes is essential for the success of the nation. The possibility of error is of no concern to Koch and if would-be murderers can be deterred from committing these heinous crimes, he feels the value of human life will be boosted and murder rates will consequently plummet (475-479). Koch makes a valiant effort to express these views, yet research contradicts his claims and a real look at his idea of justice must be considered in order to create a fair nation for all.
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)
Capital punishment remains a cause for debate with people continuing to disagree. on what cruel and unusual punishment consists of. Cruel and unusual punishment being defined as torture or a deliberately degrading punishment, in no way does the death. penalty falls into this category. Having the death penalty in our society deters potential violent offenders from committing crimes, saves the government money, and guarantees that offenders will not commit these crimes again.
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.
According to Death Penalty Facts and Statistics, in 2012, 63% of people were in favor of the death penalty, 32% were not in favor, and 6% do not have a preference. I find this statistic to be very surprising because I did not know that many people still believed in giving out the death penalty sentence. On estimate, 16,000 murders take place each year in the United States, 13,000 arrests, 8,000 convictions and fewer than 120 get death sentences (Guernsey). A positive about death penalty is that it will for sure end the crime recurrence risk since the offender is not alive anymore (Death Penalty Facts). This quite horrible to think of it that way, but it is the truth, if they are given the death penalty then they will never be able to re-offend. As of 2012, thirty-two states in the United States still use the death penalty (Death Penalty Facts). If an inmate believes that they are innocent then they are legally allowed to appeal the courts decision allowing a higher court to review the case. Not all cases get overturned, but some do which helps from executing innocent people.
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.
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.
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.