The government aside from compassion for those effected by the convict, supports the penalty because of “cost of death vs. life in prison” according to Robert Evnen, Nebraskan for capital punishment attorney. He claims “… ‘cost studies’…” essentially reveal most murders take a life without parole which costs the government inmate finances whereas the penalty gives the offender no room for an appeal. Capital punishment puts an end to a life that deserves ending due to the choices made of ending an innocent person. In my opinion, looking at both sides as to why and why not the death penalty should be instated or abolished, I agree that it should be a constitutional law reinforced in every state, with each state continuing to define capital punishment as it chooses. Although it violates some of the constitutions laws in different ways, it saves the government
Even before Bryan Stevenson started representing people on death row, he was opposed to capital punishment. To him, the act of killing someone who is found guilty of murder only to demonstrate that killing is wrong, does not make logical sense. He believes that the death penalty is a punishment rooted in hopelessness and anger. It’s because of his moral and religious background that he believes no one is just a crime, we are more than the worst thing we’ve ever done. According to Stevenson, capital punishment in America is a lottery.
If you are for or against the death penalty, the question is Do you believe a human being should be killed for one’s actions? Who deserves the Death Penalty? Many people will argue about this topic but in fact based on the law the people who get sent to the death penalty are cold blooded murders. The citizens that are in favor of this believe in the code of hammurabi which is “an eye for an eye”. Meaning if a person injures or kills someone they should receive the same or worst punishment for them to learn from their mistakes.
It’s absolute cruelty to let the person know when will it be their last day. I’ll never have sympathy for a criminal who has murder an innocent, but let us remember we are no better if we do the same. Life without parole is a better alternative than the death penalty. Sentencing a murder to life without parole (LWP), is much more satisfying as well know that their cruelty will never surround us ever again. Taxpayers well be paying less if we remove the death penalty, LWP will require less resources that what will be provided during the death penalty.
This article discusses individual cases and crimes and gives analysis of the arguments made against death penalty in real world. Firstly it discusses the deterrence argument while going through a number of cases. The conclusion is that it has no effect on reducing homicides but ironically it breeds violence as in some cases offenders committed a capital crime in a territory where execution still prevails while they could have easily avoided it. Second thing discussed is the cost, the research in article shows that it costs significantly more money to put a convict to death than to incarcerate him for life in a prison. Moreover it is shown that in many cases criminals are executed while there are reasonable doubts in their convictions and some have avoided execution by just a few hours before being exonerated.
The justice system in the United States of America is not fair. Michelle Alexander writes a great article “Locked Up In America” describing how people gets into the justice system and how their life is when coming out of jail. People that are convicted of any crime they are labeled as criminals and felons. Criminals does not get properly punished for their crimes if they did they wouldn’t be so many people going in and out of jail. The justice system should have different ways of punishing a person according to the crime they commit, just by putting them in jail and assuming that is going to change them is not a good way of going about that.
It weakens the faith the public has for the justice system as well as poses safety issues; when innocent people are put away, the real criminals are still out there. Luckily, it is known what causes wrongful convictions and how to fix them. Many wrongful convictions are due to mistaken eyewitnesses, jailhouse snitches, or false evidence. I think many of the wrongful convictions could be solved with harder evidence, more information. A case should not rely on a single eye witness but multiple.
That the $30,000 average per inmate to keep them incarcerated by funds from taxpayers is more than enough. It is true to an extent that criminals do not deserve to be entitled but the inhumane dangerous living conditions found in most prisons are unjust. Inmates should not have to live in animalistic barbarian conditions. Inmates suffer long sentences to be released to no community or rehabilitation back into society. However, there is discomfort and there is bordering on torture.
Many states still kept their minimum sentence laws. Opponents of minimum sentence laws argue that they lead to more people in prison, waste taxpayer money, and devastates families. Along with these reasons, the laws also continue to affect minorities negatively and they fail to reduce the drug trade. People that support the minimum sentence laws argue that they help keep criminals off the street longer, cause crime rates to decline, and deters people from committing certain crimes. (Issues &
The cost of the death penalty is ridiculous. Mainly the death penalty is against colored. The cost of the death penalty is far more expensive than the criminals that are in jail for life. Death of innocent people is caused by the death penalty, the government has mistakenly killed several people because they didn’t find enough evidence to prove innocent but after the death of the victim the government notice they had killed wrong, could you bring the dead back? Do people really deserve to die?