Since 2013, there has been an increase in death sentences in over 57 countries. Debates over capital punishments have existed for centuries. Each of these debates are solely focused on moral and philosophical concerns about the fate of other human beings. The inability of human beings to reach a consensus over capital punishment involving moral standing has left capital punishment to exist. But perhaps there is a way to punish criminals without taking their lives.
In 1992, a retrial found she was not guilty. In this case Sabrina was able to escape her execution. Another case involving the death penalty took place in 1992; Rodger Keith Coleman was executed in Virginia, even though all evidence pointed to another person as the murderer. The real murderer got away with this crime while an innocent man had to die for a crime he did not commit. In Canada, if we had the death penalty many innocent people here too, would face the death penalty for a crime they did not commit.
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
Lastly, If someone commits a crime such as a small robbery, they get 6 months of jail, that is not enough to get it in their heads that they shouldn 't do this again. If you change the 8th amendment then they can be charged with 2 years for a small robbery. That will get it in their heads that they should not do this again. That is the last reason I have for my case. In conclusion, The 8th amendment is something that needs changed.
On the other hand, people in disagreement argue that no execution can be deemed “humane”. A main argument for the opposition of the death penalty claim that there are alternatives which can offer the same punishment without an inhumane “execution” such as life in prison. However, supporters of the death penalty see life in prison as an extremely unfair punishment related to the acts brought forth by these criminals. Why should a serial killer who has been found guilty on 6 accounts of first degree murder be allowed to “live” the rest of his life, regardless of it behind bars? He shouldn’t, is the answer.
As well as, a person can’t be a double jeopardy which means if someone commits a crime and the police didn’t find any evidence against them so they can free to go. It indicates that if the court didn’t have any evidence against a criminal and the court let him go and later, police find evidence against criminals so they can’t arrest that person again. It shows to us that the seventh amendment is very important and helpful. The 8th Amendment is important to all people that live in the United States. First, the 8th Amendment helps the courts to take a decision.
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.
Venezuela was the first country that abolish the death penalty for all crime in 1863. In some countries people can be executed for the most serious crimes such as murder or genocide which against individual or a society, drug producer in some countries, and sexual crimes. During 2005, at least 2148 people were executed in 22 countries, and at least 5186 people were
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?
But not everyone has. Prime examples of nations that still have the death penalty as a form of judgment are the U.S.A. (some states in the Union), China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Japan and another 30 nations. There are also some nations that, even though it is not outlawed, it has not been used for over 10 years. Capital Punishment has been the topic for a heated debate around the globe by governments and N.G.O.s that present valid arguments on both
Using the taxpayer’s money to keep a prisoner in a special system is not good for anyone. The death penalty is not good at deterring criminals, unlike having life in prison. California should change their death penalty system to cut the billions of dollars going to keep prisoners on death row. Works Cited “End the death penalty in California.” New York Times 5 Nov. 2012: A28(L). Opposing Viewpoints in Context.
That also means there are 8,000 people who are guilty of those crimes free among society. However, there is no way to gather the exact percent of individuals that have been wrongfully convicted. DNA evidence has certainly decreased the number of wrongfully convicted, unfortunately, there