In “Kill Capital Punishment” by Janine Espino a Reagan High school student argues that Capital Punishment should be abolished in all fifty states, Espino’s position is vaild.
Sentencing a criminal who is mentally retarded is directly going against the Eighth Amendment, which attempts to ‘evolve standards of decency’ in our nation. The Supreme Court of the United States prohibited the execution with mental deficiencies in the Atkins v. Virginia case in 2002. The Constitution enforces a substantive limitation on the States’ abilities to take the life of a criminal who is mentally retarded. (ATKINS V. VIRGINIA, 2002) Ethnic discrimination, financial influences, and factors such as mental retardation are three huge reasons why it is morally necessary to refuse to use the death penalty as a suitable mean of punishment, for this method would time after time fall under the realm of unequal or unjust punishment. (Stevenson, B.
In Roper v. Simmons there are two issues that must be addressed, the first being the issue of moral maturity and culpability. The defense in the trial phase of this case argued that Mr. Simmons was an at an age where he was not responsible enough to fully understand the effects and consequences of his actions. The majority draws on Atkins v. Virginia to argue that this specific precedent supports their case that the death penalty should not be imposed on the mentally immature or impaired. However, an important point to be made is that the Atkins v. Virginia decision is geared towards the clinical definition of mental retardation: significant limitations that limit adaptive skills. Also, another important question to consider is the competency and premeditation of Mr. Simmons’ crime in this case. The argument that four months would be
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. There might be improstion to taking the 8th amendment out of the factor of basically killing someone for breaking the law. Yeah they might have broken the law but killing A person so brutally doesn’t seem fair. If the death penalty never existed then how much different would america even be? In supreme court they stated “The death penalty law isn’t violating the 8th amendment it is somewhat brought into decision “ . My only question is how does the death penalty not violate the 8th amendment?
Capital punishment is one of the most controversial and talked-about topics in the United States today. It is an issue that is not explicitly mentioned in our constitution, so states have been left to interpret the law. As of April 2017, 32 states in the US legally allow the death penalty. Of the 18 states that have banned it, the most recent was Maryland in 2013. The topic is so controversial that the Supreme Court has gotten involved many times, deciding on more cases that have to do with capital punishment than most other subjects. People disagree on many aspects of the death penalty for several different reasons like moral and religious differences. When considering capital punishment, people’s opinions
The first established death penalty laws go back to the Eighteenth Century B.C. Britain influenced America’s use of the death penalty more than any other country. Committing a crime such as marrying a Jew, treason, or not confessing to a crime that person was penalized with the death sentence. These sentences were carried out by crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impaling the criminal. Hanging criminals became the usual way to carry out this type of sentence, but today the use of lethal injections put the criminals to sleep. George Bush once stated “I don’t think you should support the death penalty to seek revenge. I don’t think that’s right. I think the reason to support the death penalty is because it saves other people’s lives.” The death penalty is a punishment that gets rid of the criminal and puts ease towards the victims.
The topic of capital punishment presents a test of values. The arguments in support of and opposition to the death penalty are complex. In the end, this is a question of an individual’s values and morals. The topic requires careful thought to reach a reasoned position. 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
Death Penalty is a very ominous punishment to discuss. It is probably the most controversial and feared form of punishment in the United States. Many are unaware, but 31 of the 52 states have the Death penalty passes as an acceptable punishment. In the following essay, I will agree and support Stephen Nathanson's statement that "Equality retributivism cannot justify the death penalty." In the reading, "An Eye for an Eye?", Nathanson gives objections to why equality retributivism is morally acceptable for the death penalty to be legal. The first objection is that the death penalty does not "provide a measure of moral desert" (Nathanson). For the second, Nathanson states "it does not provide an adequate criterion for determining appropriate levels of punishment." The main objection is an "eye for an eye", or Lex talionis, and I believe it fails to support equality retributivism and creates punishments that are morally unacceptable. There is no way that
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
The lethal injection executions illustrates a constitutional violation of the branch 's overreach as described by the 8th amendment due to its cases bring either successful in the execution or providing sufferable pain to death row inmates. One of the current problems in the Judicial branch is the use of lethal injection towards execution sessions. Lethal injection is an injection that is administered for the purpose of euthanasia and capital punishment. There are two methods of lethal injection today, one using a three drug protocol and the 2nd being the large dose of barbiturate. Lethal injection is used for capital punishment as it follows the 8th amendment we have today.
Although the death penalty in Texas costs about three times more than life in prison without parole, it is reserved as the punishment of robbing another of their rights to life, freedom, and safety (Deathpenaltyinfo). It is a valid question to wonder why we should spare the life of one, opting to provide for all of their basics needs when they without question robbed another of their rights to life, freedom, and safety through murder or another cruel action. The case of Andre Thomas raised questions of whether or not the mentally incompetent should be eligible for the death penalty. Thomas murdered two children and the wife he was separated from, maintaining that the act was dictated by God. Statements by Thomas conveyed that he knew that what he had done was wrong after he had after committing the crime. However, it is unclear that he knew this while committing the murder. This, along with self-injury that included the removal of both his eyeballs, built a case against sentencing Thomas to death on the basis that he was mentally incompetent. His attorneys argued that his execution would violate the clause of the eighth amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Prosecutors in this case would claim that his history with drugs and alcohol put him in this state, rather than a true mental illness (TX Tribune). Nevertheless, the fact still stands that he suffered from self-injury while incarcerated, and consequently he was not under the influence at that moment. In the case of Andre Thomas, I believe that he should be admitted into a mental care facility before being admitted into prison rather than being sentenced to
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
Most mentally ill people who are convicted on capital charges should not be executed, for three such reasons. Firstly, the executions would violate equal protection of the laws in any jurisdiction in which execution of children and people with mental illness of any kind that psychologically cannot fully comprehend what they are committing is barred. Secondly, many death sentences imposed on people with mental illness violate due process more so because their mental illness is treated by the aggravating factor, either directly or to create a separate aggravating circumstance. Thirdly, many mentally ill offenders, who are sentenced to death, will be so impaired to what is fully going on at the time of execution that they can not emotionally understand the significance of their punishment. Thus, they cannot be executed under the eighth amendment; Regarding this, the latter conclusion is required even if they are cured through some sort of treatment. Given the unethical and medically inappropriate role, such treatment casts mental health
Firstly, punishments given cannot be given brutal sentences and punishments. The article states, “The better-known component of the Eighth Amendment is the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.” This points out that people cannot be punished in cruel or unusual ways. Secondly, punishments have to be proportionate to the size of their crime. For example, the article notes, “Although this phrase originally was intended to outlaw certain gruesome methods of punishment—such as torture, burning at the stake, or crucifixion—it has been broadened over the years to protect against punishments that are grossly disproportionate to (meaning much too harsh for) the particular crime.” To illustrate, this shows that accused people cannot be given punishments that are larger than the size of their crime. Lastly, death sentences are allowed, but must follow certain guidelines. The article from www.annenbergclassroom.org notes, “Except for a brief period in the 1970s, the death penalty has not been considered by the U.S. Supreme Court to be cruel and unusual punishment. As a result, Eighth Amendment challenges to the death penalty have focused on the methods used to carry out executions, whether certain offenders (for example, juveniles or the mentally retarded) should be subject to the sentence and whether death sentences are decided in a fair manner and by an impartial
Served as an important criminal law, the death penalty continued to be used for a long time. It was undoubtedly believed that the death penalty had promoted the human civilization a lot. However, with time going by and the society progressing, the death penalty seemed to be too much cruel. ‘Pressed under weights; boiled to death in oil; burnt with red-hot pincers and then torn limb from limb by horses; hanged, drawn, and quartered; or drowned’, these are what still existed in European countries in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (Hood & Hoyle 11). ‘Death by a thousand cuts’ was another cold-blooded sentence to the prisoner in China (Hood & Hoyle p11). Other examples in different countries couldn’t be completely listed.