Of the eight possible topics in which I was presented to choose from, I have chosen to consider the topic that states: The death penalty is immoral, and no one who has been successfully taken into custody and imprisoned should ever then be executed. The reason I chose this topic is because I am neutral on the subject and have no bias towards either side. However, the fact that I am neutral on the subject will help me represent both sides equally and give a fair and honest argument from each angle. The reason I chose this topic over the other options would be because I have never really invested much time or thought into how ethical/unethical the death penalty actually is. This presents an opportunity for me to think critically about this topic, and therefore, form my own opinion on whether or not I agree/disagree with the statement provided.
The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 87(1), 1. doi:10.2307/1143970 This article was written by Michael L. Radelet and Ronald L. Akers. They both consulted experts on criminology and criminal behaviour to evaluate the effectiveness of the Death Penalty. They used the Gullup and Ellsworth/Ross Surveys to gather the public opinion on death penalty. Their research showed that majority
Nathanson uses his essay, Does It Matter If the Death Penalty Is Arbitrarily Administered, to combat the notion that capital punishment is an effective outcome for criminals. It is my goal to propose that capital punishment in itself is as fair outcome, and point out that it should remain established as long as the ones sentencing criminals to this fate are held to higher, more fair standards. The driving force behind Nathanson’s argument against capital punishment is statistics. While no one comes forth to outright say that race plays an important role in the decision on who receives capital punishment, there are statistical findings put forth by Bowers and Pierce state that killers of whites have the highest chance of being executed
I have a difficult time understanding the hypocritical mindset of the death penalty, the idea of taking a criminal 's life because they may have taken someone else 's. Why kill people that killed people to display that killing is wrong. I believe giving the death penalty to the criminal is giving them the easy way out of their actions. Having the criminal spend life in jail
I believe the death penalty should be continued because it deters crime, and serves proper justice for the victims, as well as their families. The mentality of the people who support the death penalty is, “If you take a life, you give your life in order to rightfully repent for the crime you have committed”. The article, “Why The Death Penalty is Still Necessary” by Edward Feser and Joseph M. Bessette explains that religion can play a factor in this belief due to the Catholic Church teachings saying the death penalty was a legitimate punishment for heinous crimes by saying, “Thus, punishment is fundamentally retributive, inflicting on the offender a penalty commensurate with the gravity of his crime, though it may serve other purposes as well, such as incapacitating the
Fellow people of this great nation, I encourage each of you to listen to me, and to do so carefully. Today I stand before you to let you know, that Capital Punishment, MUST, be Abolished! Over the course of time, there has been numerous evidence that have been brought to the forefront, and these evidence have suggested, that the death penalty has lost its power, in the deterrence of making mankind losing their willingness in the committing of heinous crimes. These very crimes are the ones that has been spoken against, with the assurance of what punishment is to be expected. Nonetheless, it is a barbaric and callous form of punishment, which at times have been unleashed upon the innocent, whereby, giving them a sentence of death, with it later
The issue of the death penalty is becoming excessively actual nowadays, especially due to the idea of humanization. Both the supporters as well as the opponents of the death penalty are claiming that their position is the correct one. While some of them speak about the justice, the commensurate with the criminal act deterrent, or the lack of possibility to perform a criminal act once more, their opponents argue these claims with substantial proves. The opponents of the capital punishment in the criminal justice system claim that the costs for death penalty overcome the costs for keeping a person in prison. Moreover, they point at the lack of justice and fairness in the process of capital punishment determination and the possibility for an innocent
Proponents argue the financial savings, deterrent effects, and retribution aspects of the death penalty. Both arguments are well supported, educated and offer very important and valid explanations as to why their side is correct. The United States legislation on the issue differs in every state. “The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy:
Although supporters of the death penalty often suggest arguments that cite retribution for violent crimes as being instrumental in justice, several studies and research have revealed that taking the life of another human being through capital punishment only perpetuates a cycle of violence. Therefore, it is necessary to abolish the capital
One reason to use capital punishment, is that it deters crime. For example, the most common argument for the death penalty is its use as deterrent and in “Capital Punishment”, the author states that many Americans agree with, "claims that the death penalty deters serious crime"(1). This illustrates that capital punishment would deter crime. By being the most severe punishment possible, it makes potential killers think about committing a murder. By killing a few criminals, we save many civilian lives.