Capital Punishment Imagine being falsely accused of a crime and being sentenced to death. This is the reality for many people on death row and one of many reasons why the death penalty need to be abolished in the criminal justice system. The death penalty is and has always been a controversial topic. It is applicable only to capital crimes such as homicide, various forms of sexual assault, etc. The death penalty is wrong because states do not comply with the standards that have been set that keep the death penalty from being cruel and unusual. Cruel and unusual punishment is unconstitutional via the eighth amendment and states experimentation with secret new drugs has caused execution to become torturous. The second reason why the death penalty needs to be abolished is that capital punishment is a very large expenditure and wastes resources. Capital punishment is very expensive in …show more content…
Cruel and unusual punishment is unconstitutional. The constitution granted the american people basic rights and protections the eighth amendment is one of them. The eighth amendment bans all methods of punishment that may be considered cruel and unusual. The constitution is not flexible and demands zero errors. States are breaking this constitutional right by using experimental drugs that have led to botched executions. May states keep the source and the contents of their death penalty drugs a secret and this practice needs to be questioned (2). The case of Clayton Lockett is an example in which the death penalty has turned to be cruel and unusual punishment (2). Clayton Lockett was administered his drug and he failed to die after 10 minutes (2). Clayton died of a heart attack that followed 30 minutes afterward that was triggered by the experimental secret death penalty drug (2). Clayton is one of few examples where the death penalty turned cruel and
Clayton Lockett was executed using a three drug cocktail (Midazolam, Pancuronium, and Potassium Chloride) during his execution after being injected he awakened and died a horribly painful death 40 minutes later. The state of Oklahoma was investigated as to why he woke up during the process. They soon sound out that the needle that was put in his vein didn’t fully penetrate his vein. After the investigation the state of Oklahoma had a new protocol to follow.
The Supreme Court has observed that a method of execution violates the Eighth Amendment if it inherently involves “torture or a lingering death” or is “inhuman and barbarous.” This was brought into question in the case of Glossip V. Gross when Oklahoma introduced the drug midazolam as a new execution drug. The case also brings into question whether the court is required to supply a form of execution when the government cannot find one itself. In Baze v. Rees the three-drug protocol was observed for lethal injection by at least 30 states, where barbiturate, an anesthesia that causes the person to go unconscious and two other drugs which paralyzed the prisoner eventually causes them to go into cardiac arrest.
The most important issue that must be addressed in this case is the principle of the “evolving standards of decency” and the uses of a national consensus. The “evolving standards of decency” were developed by Trop v. Dulles and have been implemented in one way or another in all of the precedents dealing with “cruel and unusual” punishment. It is important to treat these principles as an important aspect of “cruel and unusual” punishment jurisprudence, therefore turning from these set of principles would be foolish and a disregard for every precedent. However, it is important to acknowledge that each case satisfies the standards by using a different method; some use the presence or lack of state legislature as a judgment of consensus while others look at foreign countries.
Difficult, protracted executions constitute infringement of the eighth Amendment, which forbids savage and surprising discipline. Capital punishment disregards the privilege to life as announced in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is a definitive remorseless, cruel and corrupting
Famous American cereal killer, John Wayne Gacy, had murdered and raped 33 adolescents, many of whom were teenagers, the justice system made sure this man could never do this again. The public is turning a blind eye to the many contributions the justice system makes, we should look at not only how we can reform, but how it contributes to society The justice system creates many contributions to society, such as the safety it provides for children and their chances of exploitation, the many instances where they convict dangerous individuals therefore creating a safer environment for the present and future of society, and the fact it provides all citizens of the public and private sectors, to have the right to a fair, speedy, and public trial,
But are we in the future to be prevented from inflicting these punishments because they are cruel? If a more lenient mode of correcting vice and deterring others from the commission of it would be invented, it would be very prudent in the Legislature to adopt it; but until we have some security that this will be done, we ought not to be restrained from making necessary laws by any declaration of this kind’ “ (Bomboy). In other words, Livermore was arguing that all citizens who commit horrible crime do deserve severe punishments for the crimes that they commit, and until the government figures out a way to place restrictions and guidelines on the penalties that we believe are morally proper to give, then they cannot hold back from reprimanding those citizens. Consequently, The Founding Fathers created the Eighth Amendment to be intended for further generations to interpret the meaning of “cruel” and “unusual” over time (Donnell). The amendment was then ratified in 1791 nevertheless, the Eighth Amendment and the death penalty is still highly debated today because the differences in interpretations
In today’s day and age, a person does not get put to death for just any crime. A recurring argument against the death penalty is that sentencing a defendant to death violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition. The Eighth Amendment protects against cruel and unusual punishment. Mental illness is expressly recognized as a mitigating factor in most death penalty statutes. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion in the case of Ford vs. Wainwright that the use of cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to execute a person whose mental state renders understanding of capital punishment is impossible.
To reiterate, the death penalty is a violation of the 8th Amendment of "cruel and unusual punishments"
Now, with the shortage of common drugs used in lethal injections, the Court is not handing the task over to doctors, and scientists, but rather politicians and lawyers who are not trained in the effects of lethal drugs. In recent executions, the offender might hold on to life for as long as twenty-five minutes, to two hours. Some might argue that this violates the Eighth Amendment, as letting someone suffer for two hours is certainly cruel and unusual punishment. In my opinion, this drug needs to be tested before someone is left barely hanging on to life for two
It’s Not working out. By:Taija Jones. The 8th amendment says “Excessive bail shall not be required, Nor excessive fines imposed, Nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” . With that being said if the 8th amendment applies for cruel punishments of death penalties then why is it still happening.
Although, the term “cruel and unusual punishment” is constantly changing as society develops. For example when the amendment was first made cruel and unusual punishment at the time was being burned at the stake or being tortured. Today cruel and unusual punishment can include the death penalty and it was not until a little after the 1970s when the death penalty was considered a part of cruel and unusual punishment. The main use of the eighth amendment in court is for cruel and unusual punishment. Some cases that use the eighth amendment are the Roper v. Simmons, Hudson v. McMillian, and the Woodson v. North
People started the Capital Punishment debate in the early 1950s, and it perseveres as a very controversial topic (History of Death Penalty). Capital Punishment is a very permanent solution to problems, and it has several drawbacks- like its improper methods of execution; it is also unethical, immoral, and often discriminatory. According to the 8th amendment, the government can neither impose excessive taxes or fines on citizens nor can it sentence cruel or unusual punishments. This amendment was based on the English Bill of Rights, and it was originally created to prevent unusual punishments like branding or strangling.
The Death Penalty, loss of life due to previous crimes and actions, is believed by some to be extremely costly, inhumane, and cruel unlike some others whom believe it is just, right, and provides closure. The Death Penalty is not a quick and easy process. Most who get sentenced to deaths row wait years for their ultimate punishment of death. Some believe that it is not right to punish and kill a human for actions they have done because, they believe that the inmate should have another chance. Then others believe that it is right to punish someone for their actions especially if their actions involve killing another or multiple humans.
This Article is essential for the Americans people because it shields them from unreasonable bail or penalties from states, and federal government officials. Under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, states and federal governments are restrained from administering cruel and unusual punishments, even though the crimes might be outrageous. These expressions are adopted from the English Bill of Rights of 1689. The cruel and unusual punishments requirement is one of the important issues broadly discussed around America. The Eighth Amendment applied to the states when the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment of Due Process and Equal Protection.
Capital punishment in almost all states has been a highly disputed topic for some time now. There are many people for and against capital punishment. According to Larry J. Siegel, capital punishment is defined as, “the execution of criminal offenders; the death penalty” (7). Hundreds of people wait on death row every day and many states have opposed the death penalty.