It addresses the legal issues at stake in findings of criminal responsibility. The finding of this introduction explains the criminal responsibility of serial killers and how difficult it is to put them behind bars. The introduction will be used in my essay to help explain the difference between mad serial killers and mentally-ill serial killers. Biagi-Chai, Francesca. 2012. Serial Killers Psychiatry, Criminology, Responsibility.
And how will this justify the issues of male sex offenders from repeating their sex crimes. While there are many pros to chemical castration, the side effects outnumber the real issue. Chemical castration goes against a person’s human rights, it also is an option the government hands out so that the offender can avoid jail, yet they are still suffering due to their health’s side effects. Chemical castration is offered to sex offenders, sex abusers, and child molesters who are serving time in prison for committing specific crimes in exchange for shorter prison time and to those who are in the process for release as time served. The process of administering a Depo-Provera injection or pill to sex offenders is to lower their testosterone levels and decrease the sexual desires to preventing them from repeating the criminal acts.
"While I do believe being tough on crime is a good thing in general, it's the role of the judge to determine it." Mandatory minimum sentences often tie a judge's hands, robbing them of their right to tailor sentences to a specific situation. I suppose tough-on-crime laws “worked" if success is only measured by the increase of prisoner populations. However, one of the unbelievable little details of this new tough-on-crime stance is how differently the federal government views crack cocaine and powder cocaine.
Forms of punishments within the United States’ system of criminal justice can range from a simple warning all the way up to the death penalty, depending on the nature and type of crime committed. The goal of punishment in the criminal justice system is deterrence and crime prevention, however when the punishment offers no major impact on crime, is extremely costly, exhibits racial bias, and has taken the life of innocent people, (socially and physically) the death penalty is not only viewed as punishment, but as revenge and as murder. Taking a look at the death penalty from a lawyer point of view we have Michael A. Mello, author of Dead Wrong: A Death Row Lawyer Speaks Out Against Capital Punishment. He tells his story of being a professional lawyer, who “worked within the legal system to prevent the state from executing some of its citizens.”
It is also important to consider the possibility of killers in mental institutions not benefitting from treatments, which would have a great economic effect as well. Therefore, based on the social lens, serial killers should be placed be punished for their crimes and be placed in high security prisons, rather than mental
“I grew convinced that truth, sincerity, and integrity in dealings between man and man were of the utmost importance of felicity of life; […] Revelation had indeed no weight with me, as such; but I entertained an opinion that, though certain actions might not be bad because they were forbidden by it, or good because it commanded them, yet probably these actions might be forbidden because they were bad for us, or commanded because they were beneficial to us.” (Franklin 55) These feelings of solidarity formed a common identity which eventually results in the beginning of the American Revolution. Away from the Anglican Church and the English royal dynasty, people formed their own identity independently. They became a
Eliot Spitzer once said, “Our criminal justice system is fallible. We know it, even though we don't like to admit it. It is fallible despite the best efforts of most within it to do justice. And this fallibility is, at the end of the day, the most compelling, persuasive, and winning argument against a death penalty.” Many people in America are in favor of capital punishment because some crimes violate the moral codes of our society.
An argument against this view would be that Capital Punishment saves more lives than it takes. Recent studies show that for every inmate put to death, 3 to 18 murders are prevented. However if the justice system did not have the death penalty, there would be far higher death rates of innocent people than there are currently.
The main evidence here that proves my point, is “A background check did not stop this killer, but tighter background checks can keep war weapons out of the hands of those who are known to be mentally unstable.” This helps me prove my point because the killer would not have obtained a gun if stricter background checks occured. Without a gun, the killer become weak, and unable to kill people. This would make us much safer if killers don’t have access to guns. Opponents of my argument may say that many people, including unstable people can go to gun shows, illegal dealers, and out of the country to obtain guns to shoot people.
Jury selection in capital cases often takes weeks, if not months, as the “death qualified” jurors are isolated by the State. Numerous studies have shown that those who survive the death qualification process are inherently biased towards conviction. People who have no qualms about the death penalty favor the State. They would be more likely to convict in a jay-walking
So far in 2016 white criminals account for 71% of police officer killings. How is it possible that a crime that often demands the death penalty has an overwhelming percentage of White perpetrators, yet these same people are executed much less frequently? The answer is that if the system was not racist, these results would be impossible. Many supporters of the death penalty often cite the “eye for an eye argument,” meaning that if someone kills another individual, the murderer should suffer execution.
Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, and the debate about its abolition is the largest point of the essay written by Steve Earle, titled "A Death in Texas”. This form of punishment should be abolished for 3 reasons; First, It does not seem to have a direct effect on deterring murder rates, It has negative effects on society, and is inconsistent with American ideals. To begin, the death penalty is unnecessary since it is ineffective at deterring rates of murder. In fact, 88% of the country's top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, according to the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. In opposition, supporters may argue that it may indeed help to deter murder rates as they have
Ever since the outset of the American Constitution, capital punishment has existed as a crime sentence in the United States. However, in recent decades, this topic has become highly controversial, as many states have dictated against the death penalty. Although states with this position on capital punishment are increasing, some states, such as Texas, have continued to edict this practice in their provinces. In the State of Texas, the sentence to death upon a person should not be permitted due to the fact it can wrongly convict a person, its court trial is highly expensive, and it brings forth an unjust treatment.
The Eight Amendment Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel, and unusual punishments inflicted. Previously the Eight Amendment was formed very differently from what we know today. The death penalty has been one of the most discussed topics since it first became a part of society. It is a constant disagreement to prove or challenge whether or not the death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment which would then now go against the eighth amendment. The death penalty is a suitable sentence, while going through the history, and different methods.