Execution why it needs to be public. Executions being public because it would change the amount of crime committed on the streets, and it would strike fear into the country’s population. Public executions would also help save the taxpayers’ money. Having executions like this would also change the prison population throughout the country. Executing people publicly would bring some closure to the families that were hurt by the suspect being executed. Executions should be public because it would be a crime deterrent, it would save taxpayers’ money, and reduce population in the prison system.
Public execution would put fear into the country’s population. If public execution was legal citizens would witness the consequences of crimes they will begin to think before they act. While there is no solid evidence linking public execution to lower crime rates some professors believe that it will cause a decrease in crime. (Isay) People in this country would not want to commit crimes because people fear death and would not want to be executed. (Leighton) Some believe that the reason people do not support the death penalty is because they fear execution themselves. (Leighton) One group did a study over the decades the years where the execution rate was higher the lower the murder rate was. (Isay) If executions were public and there were executions much like the Suddam Hussein and Benito Mussolini executions people would never commit crimes ever again. (Leighton) Public execution for many crimes would prevent people from doing anything that is seen legally as some form of crime. (Leighton) The rate of crime in the country would drop severely once public execution was made legal for inmates. (Leighton) After witnessing the execution of many inma...
... middle of paper ...
...eople rethink committing crimes. The drop in the prison population would also reduce prison crime. (Reggio) Fearful people after witnessing executions would not want to go to prison and take chances like that. (Smith) With the drop of prison populations there would be less drug use, murders, and rapes on criminals by criminals in prison. Public executions would most likely prevent prisons from being needed. (Smith) With the prevention of prisons there would be more land to have houses, national parks, hunting clubs, and farmland for the hungry/starving people/children in the country. If the penal system was completely gone the economy would go up and there would be more money for the workers in the country and pay of some of the country’s debt.
Works Cited
Reggio, Michael; Isay, David; Schabner, Dean; Shemtob, Zachary B.; Lat, David; Leighton, Paul; Evans Richard
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.
Di Martino, P., Agniel, R., David, K., Templer, C., Gaillard, J., Denys, P., & Botto, H. (2006).
Rizzo, A. S., Difede, J., Rothbaum, B. O., Reger, G., Spitalnick, J., Cukor, J., & McLay, R.
Titsworth, W. L., Abram, Fullerton, J. A., Hester, J., Guin, P., Waters. M., Mocco, J. (2013).
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...
“The death penalty is popular among politicians and the public in response to the escalating fear of violence. However, capital punishment actually makes the fight against crime more difficult. Executions waste valuable resources that could be applied to more promising efforts to protect the public. Additionally, innocent people are sometimes executed and the brutalizing effect executions have on society may result in more murders. For these reasons, the death penalty should be opposed.” (Morgenthau 14)
I. Alternatives to incarceration give courts more options. For example, it’s ridiculous that the majority of the growth in our prison populations in this country is due to slamming people in jail just because they were caught using drugs. So much of the crime on the streets of our country is drug-related--crime that would largely disappear if the massive profits brought on by drug criminalization were eliminated. You can reduce drug usage more efficiently, and at a lower cost, through treatment than through law enforcement.
Zhang, Y. B., Harwood, J., Williams, A., Ylänne-McEwen, V., Wadleigh, P. M., & Thimm, C.
Skiba, R. J., Horner, R. H., Chung, C. G., Karenga-Rausch, M., May, S. L., & Tobin, T.
Timpano, K. R., Keough, M. E., Mahaffey, B., Schmidt, N. B., & Abramowitz, J. (2010).
As justification for capital punishment, deterrence is used to suggest that executing murderers will decrease the homicide rate by causing other potential murderers not to commit murder from fear of being executed themselves and obviously the murderer who is executed will not kill again. This position may seem initially correct, and indeed, in a USA Today Poll, 68% of respondents agreed that the death penalty is an effective deterrence for crimes. However, some research suggests that rather than deterring homicide, state executions actually may cause an increase in the number of homicides (Stack, 1990). This phenomenon has been called the "brutalization hypothesis" and it suggests that through proposition, modeling, or by legitimizing killing, the death penalty actually causes an increase in homicides. Thus, the brutalization hypothesis is a reason for opposing the death penalty.
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
...s of society thus inhibiting us from committing more crimes. John Lamperti said, “If executions protected innocent lives through deterrence, which would weigh in the balance against capital punishment's heavy social costs. But despite years of trying, this benefit has not been shown to exist; the only proven effects of capital punishment are its liabilities.”9
The death penalty is an economically wasteful method of punishment. It has been calculated that “if the death penalty was extinguished…we could save $11 million a year” (Locke). While this may not seem a significant sum, ...
The death penalty has been a strong controversial argument since it first got ratified into the law. It gives the power of taking an individual’s life into the hands of those around them. The peers around him may only need to state one effortless word that can sentence the person to incarceration leading to their inevitable execution that. The death penalty has inflicted a new type of concern in the minds of many Americans, in which many are not entirely sure such punishments are necessary anymore, not only through opinions but also through substantial facts that support the abolishing of such an inhumane punishment which has proven to have become less beneficial than anything else.