The death penalty has been a part of the judicial system for many years. It is the legal process where the state court system orders execution of a person for a crime he or she committed. A death penalty crime is a horribly brutal and violent crime most people cannot even imagine. These crimes consist of acts like serial killing, mass murder, and other crimes of violent killing. However, Espionage and treason neither are brutal or violent and are considered a death penalty offense.
In this case the opponents are the persons who would like to pack up the death penalty and dump it on the side of the road along with the rest of the misfits. They believe it is the most inhumane way to do things and we would be no better than a killer ourselves. “My objection to the death penalty is based on the idea that this is a democracy, and in a democracy the government is me, and if the government kills somebody then I'm killing somebody,” as stated by Steve Earle [Goodman]. Though in some sense this may be true, we are killing them in a much more humane way than they must have killed their terrified victims. As I earlier stated they are given opportunities their prey did not sustain.
However, those convicted are given a reasonable punishment and opportunities to have their cases reassessed if need be. The death penalty provides criminals with a reasonable punishment, given their case, without exceeding constitutional provisions. Capital punishment provides reasonable punishment given the crime. According to state laws, the death
Both sides of the argument are defensible. Support for capital punishment requires valuing retribution over rehabilitation. Those who favor capital punishment value highly the closure it provides to the families of the victims, and they believe that it deters would be murderers from killing. Retribution, closure and deterrence are the main reasons in favor of the death penalty. Opponents of capital punishment generally believe that it is hypocritical and immoral for the state
States that do not use Capital Punishment usually have a lower murder rate than states that do. The South, where 80 percent of all executions take place, has a higher murder rate than the North. People wouldn't want to go to prison where anything can happen. The inmates at prison hate it because they basically have no life in prison. The death penalty makes society more dangerous by further increasing violence through the brutalization effect.
Interviews of retired employees to study the effects of capital punishment were taken and analysed qualitatively. Political and religious orientations, perceptions in racism were key variables to study the changes in time; Prison services were also closely studied. The main topic of this study was to see how capital punishment dehumanises both the prison inmates and staff. Well established theories provided an analysis that culture is a very strong factor in making people agree or disagree with the use of capital punishment, regardless of their own beliefs. Findings concluded that those who held pro-death penalty positions were raised in religious traditions that taught capital punishment consistent with the Bible, while those who were anti-death penalty were raised in such traditions which did not support this notion.
“The law may be color-blind as it is written, but not as it is enforced.” Racial bias in the death penalty can be traced back to Furman v. Georgia, where handing down the death penalty sentence, unfairly, constituted as a cruel and unusual punishment, violating the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The reinstatement of the death penalty with its new sentencing guidelines, implemented by the Supreme Court, was to ensure that the death penalty sentence was used in a constitutional way. Despite these guidelines, somehow, racial bias has found a way to thrive. It has been documented that an individual is more likely to receive the death penalty in a case where the victim is White than in cases where the victim is Black. Furthermore, it has been documented that in some jurisdictions, Black defendants are given the death penalty
The death penalty, or capital punishment, first emerged as a problem in 1794 when Dr. Benjamin Rush, one of the founding fathers of the United States, challenged the assumption that the death penalty is a deterrent. He thought crime was increased by the presence of the death penalty, while others thought the opposite. Even though the death penalty may deter prospective murderers, it should be abolished because it is inhumane, applied inconsistently,
The problem can be solved by establishing more set guidelines on who receives the death sentence by making the death penalty more like a civil law practice rather than our form of common law where precedence decides the ruling. If all cases where the death penalty was in play involved a civil law style action and reaction approach, then all question of racial bias would be irrelevant. Simply put, if one is charged with a certain type of murder, then the judge would look up the appropriate action established previously and sentence the person to death should it be deemed necessary rather than a judge getting to decide to follow precedence or not in the case of issuing capital punishment. The problem is judges, not
Since the earliest civilizations, people have been executed for an assortment of crimes. The Babylonians wrote the first ever death penalty laws over 3,700 years ago, and to this day several countries such as China and the United States continue to enforce capital punishment against those proven guilty of murder, treason, espionage and other crimes. Despite its extensive history, the implementation of the death penalty in modern societies raises an underlying question: Is the execution of criminals truly justifiable? Proponents of capital punishment claim that it dissuades criminals from committing extreme crimes. Potential murderers will be much less inclined to kill for fear of being executed, while criminals with no intent to kill would