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 …show more content…
First, Nathanson’s argument is based in majority upon statistics and therefore I must invoke the question of whether correlation equates to causation or not. The fact that statistically more blacks or murderers of whites receive the death penalty must be observed more closely as there could be many reasons attributing to sentencing to death. Many of the statistics presented do not accurately represent the cause of the correlation. Second, I present the argument that even if there was truth behind a relationship between discrimination and death penalties, the problem lies with those who are handing out these sentences rather than the idea of a death penalty. 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
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
The author claims that the argument against capital punishment based on the possibility of executing an innocent person is intellectually and morally shallow. He also claims that abolitionists who use this argument are intellectually dishonest because they accept other social policies that lead to the death of innocent individuals. Prager claims that murderers who are not executed have already murdered innocent people, and the possibility of escape from prison means that they threaten even more innocent lives. Additionally, he claims that abolishing capital punishment does not necessarily protect innocent lives because murderers who are not executed may continue to kill. Finally, the author argues that abolitionists should acknowledge their responsibility for innocent lives lost due to murderers who were not executed and state their genuine belief that murderers should never be
for a dull respondent than for a white prosecutor in a practically identical case. A study in California found that the people who killed whites were general 3 times more slanted to be sentenced to death than the people who killed blacks and more than 4 times more likely than the people who killed Latinos. Looks at exhibit that 96% of states where there have been surveys of race and capital punishment, there was an example of either race-of-casualty or race-of-litigant separation, or both. A respondent was a few times more prone to be sentenced to death if the homicide casualty was white. A January 2003 study discharged by the University of Maryland presumed that race and geology are central point in capital punishment choices.
Joshua Marquis is neither a scholar, a jurist, or a crusader for the wrongly accused. Instead he has spent most of his time as a prosecutor. His essay is written from a personal point of view where he supports the death penalty; however, his essay is unlike the average supporter. Joshua Marquis believes capital punishment should be decided based on the following: each case on its own, within its own context, using the specific facts of the case, considering the community where the crime occurred and the background of the defendants. With that being said, Marquis believes that for certain cases the death penalty is appropriate.
Since the beginning of history, the death penalty has been utilized as a means of punishment for a crime. Capital punishment has taken on multiple forms and been used as punishment wide range of crimes; from stealing to murder. Questions and theories have risen that suggest that the penal system is racially biased when considering punishment and deciding when the death penalty is a congruent punishment to the crime committed. In David Gilboa’s report entitled, “Is the Death Penalty in America Racist?” Gilboa analyzes and studies three common conceptions on the death penalty and how it pertains to the African American race and Caucasian race.
“We Need To Talk About Injustice.”). Unfortunately, race affects the chance of execution and it happens more than it should. As a society, we have made so many improvements throughout history. The abolition of slavery and the civil rights movement has immensely improved our society but every day when we incarcerate innocent black individuals and send them to death row, we as a society are setting ourselves back sixty years. Do you want that?
Introduction and thesis: The topic chosen for this essay concerns the relationship between racial profiling and sentencing. It is relevant to the course material because it concerns the ways someone is treated depending on his or her ethnic origins, and it makes it an interesting sociological and criminological phenomena. This is the reason why I chose to write on this topic, and because I find it an important issue in our society. This essay will demonstrates that visible minorities are more likely to be subjects to harsher sentencing than the majority, and more than them. Literature review: Our society is made of a majority and minorities, and it allows diversity.
Jury Systems and Racial Injustice Juries are the way we make sure trials are fair, but when your jury is biased the result of the trial are often inequitable. Today we do our best to make sure trials have impartial jurors, but this was not always the case. In the 1930’s, and a lot of other decades too, the right for African Americans to have an unbiased jury was not fulfilled. This caused many African Americans to be sentenced to death when they otherwise would not have been.
Another issue that was discussed is the inequality of death penalty in practice. There have been serious issues with racial discrimination. For reference in cases with white victims and black defendants convictions occurred twenty two percent of the time while with black victims and white defendants with percentage dropped to a measly three
Interestingly they also found that the majority of whites surveyed expressed a high resistance to beliefs that the death penalty is racially unfair or caused by structural oppression, nor is that the system is racially biased. Instead they believe that it is because they (racialized groups— specifically Blacks), deserve it. Therefore proving that the implementation of the the death penalty is a result of public
In the essay “The Death Penalty Is a Step Back” the author, Coretta Scott King expresses her feelings about capital punishment and states reasons to back up her argument that the death penalty is both a racist and immoral practice. King believes that capital punishment is immoral and illegal, and that it by no means serves as a deterrent for other possible criminals. The author then further talks about how there have been numerous incidents where the mistakenly convicted is put down in the name of American justice. King then argues that by sentencing someone to death, one is assuming that the person convicted is not capable of rehabilitation. The
It is interesting to me that Stevenson states that capital punishment is shaped by the constraints of poverty, race, geography, and local politics. It seems as if these constraints are the very reason America debates the death penalty today. Stevenson also states that the death penalty in the United States has increasingly comes to symbolize a disturbing tolerance for error and injustice.
This report is helpful because it highlights how race is influenced on the death penalty. It will help me see if the death penalty is racially neutral. Coker, D. (2003). Addressing the real world of racial injustice in the criminal justice system. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology.
“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.
Black defendants of course get the death penalty at an astonishing rate when the victim is white where as when the tables are turned, the same can not be said. The racism that occurs in death penalty cases are clearly an unfortunate result of these three structures combining to create social injustice. (Racism Common in Jury