In the modern era, the question has again and again been raised: Although the use of capital punishment is never taken lightly, our society is moving towards a time and place where it is no longer an acceptable form of punishment. The use of the death penalty should be abolished from the justice system for three major reasons. For these reasons, the death penalty should be abolished. The United States, as one of the most developed nations in the world, should follow the trend that has been set by many other developed nations of the world and put to rest this uncivilized, childish punishment that follows the mentality of an eye for an eye.
When one takes a look at whether or not the death penalty should be permissible from a moral standpoint, the answer is clearly to abolish it. Humanity must show that it has moved past this primitive way of thinking and be willing to act in a civilized manner when it comes to criminal sentencing even if the accused is an individual that has be linked to truly hiatus crimes.
The rationale behind the death penalty does not ever fit a crime. Even if an individual is not capable of being rehabilitated, no one should have the right to sentence someone else to death.
Under the current system of justice, the state can set, as a punishment, an action that has been considered to the worst sort of crime that a person can commit. This seems to be completely illogical and contradictory. How can anyone possibly justify carrying out an action that is unanimously agreed upon being wrong? The answer is no one; therefore the death penalty does not morally seem permissible.
From a moral standpoint, the types of people that receive the death penalty are usually not physically or mentally fit to receive the punishment. One such group that has suffered from their mental disabilities are the mentally retarded. One of the reasons behind this high percentage is linked to the idea that people that are mentally retarded have a high desire to please figures of authority. Taking that into consideration, it seems that one cannot in good judgment state that individuals that are in this group can reasonably be able to receive the death penalty considering their mental states.
One of the other most controversial aspects of the death penalty comes in the form of flawed executions. However, for each method that has been used as a means to attempt to execute criminals, there have been flawed attempts that have caused severe pain and suffering for those that have had to endure the process.
The electric chair has reported several instances where multiple attempts were made to execute a criminal before the act was actually carried out such as with the execution of John Louis Evans III Haines.
Even the more modern means of execution have their flawed attempts such as with lethal injection. The execution of Stephen McCoy in May of is a prime example of this. According to witnesses, McCoy reacted violently to the drugs administered to him and was seen gagging, violently coughing, and undergoing body contortions Haines. Examples like this show that the systems that we have in place have serious flaws in them. From a moral standpoint, one cannot willing and with a clear conscious sentence an individual to an execution that may be cruel and unusual as that violates the Bill of Rights, which the judicial branch is charged with ensuring is never violated.
A second argument that is given against the use of the death penalty is that it does not actually deter anyone from committing the crimes that result in receiving the punishment. The basic argument that is made by individuals that support this form of punishment is that it makes an example out of those that commit these types of crimes and, therefore, will strike fear into the hearts of those that are thinking about attempting to commit the same sort of crime resulting in them rethinking their actions.
Unfortunately, this rational is taken with flawed logic. Those that receive the death penalty have usually committed the most gruesome, violent sorts of crimes that usually include one or more murders.
Further, those that commit these sorts of crimes are usually mentally unstable. These are the types of individuals that have no regard for the safety of themselves or that of others, and will act out their plans of actions regardless of what has happened in the past or present.
The hope of deterring these sorts of individuals by making an example out of a criminal will not really make a difference in their final actions. Empirically, one of the major rationales behind allowing the death penalty to remain is that the punishment will deter others from wanting to commit a crime.
Many believe that the perpetrators deserve maximum penalty and the highest condemnation of all. This is clearly an emotional response, but it raises the question of whether death penalty is an effective way to deter prospective criminals. This essay aims to show two sides of the issue and argue that death penalty does not necessarily deter criminals from committing future crimes. The main argument in support of death penalty is its perceived deterrent effect. In his study on deterrence in support of death penalty, van den Haag acknowledges that even though statistical results are inconclusive, capital punishment is likely to deter people from committing crimes because of fear of death, and more so if it is a death ordered by law.
He states that death penalty permanently incapacitates the offender from committing future crimes. He highlights that it is the most feared form of punishment and because of its finality, it could deter prospective murderers who are not deterred by long-term imprisonment. He also puts more weight on saving the lives of prospective victims rather than preserving the lives of convicted murderers who may re-offend. Based on their two controversial studies, they conclude that for each execution, five murders are prevented.
Conversely, one commutation results in five murders. While statistics appear to strengthen the argument in favor of death penalty, they are just numbers that do not support actual crime rates.
However, the strongest arguments are those that criticized the studies for their faulty methodologies, insufficient data and flawed assumptions Liptak, Retribution also serves justice for murder victims and their families. This lack of malice is proven in the simple definition of retribution: The death penalty puts the scales of justice back in balance after they were unfairly tipped towards the criminal.
The morality of the death penalty has been hotly debated for many years. Those opposed to the death penalty say that it is immoral for the government to take the life of a citizen under any circumstance.
It is immoral to not properly punish a person who has committed such a horrendous crime. The criminal is also executed humanely; in no way is he subjected to torture or any form of cruelty.
All states that use the death penalty use lethal injection; the days of subjecting a prisoner to hanging or the electric chair are long gone in the US. Inmates are first given a large dose of an anesthetic so they do not feel any pain Bosner ; this proves that the process is made as humane as possible so the inmates do not physically suffer.
Although the issue of morality is very personal for many people, it is important to see the facts and realize that capital punishment does take morality into account and therefore is carried out in the best way possible.
The eighth amendment to the United States Constitution prevents cruel and unusual punishment. Many opponents of capital punishment say that execution is cruel and unusual punishment and therefore violates the Constitution. As was stated earlier, the recipient of the death penalty is treated humanely and is not tortured in any way, shape, or form.
After the anesthetic is administered the person feels no pain; the only part of the process that could be considered painful is when the IV is inserted, but that is done in hospitals on a daily basis and no one is calling it unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the death penalty as constitutional in cases they have presided over. In the case of Furman v. The Supreme Court has not found capital punishment to be unconstitutional, and therefore this argument for abolition is invalid. Another argument put forth by death penalty abolitionists is the possibility of executing an innocent person. Many people that argue this overestimate how often this happens, it is an extremely rare occurrence and has not happened since the death penalty was reintroduced in Mistakes will be made in any system which relies upon human testimony for proof.
We should be vigilant to uncover and avoid such mistakes. Our system of justice rightfully demands a higher standard for death penalty cases. Stewart points out that death penalty cases are held to a much higher standard. Due process in these cases takes much longer so that the court can be absolutely sure that the person is guilty before sentencing him to execution.
This helps to eliminate any errors that could lead to executing the wrong person. He also points out that although there is a small possibility for mistakes to be made, this does not mean capital punishment should be abolished. If everything that had the potential for harmful mistakes were outlawed, society would be extremely crippled.
It is true that there is disproportionality when it comes to the races and classes that most frequently receive the death penalty. It has been proven that minorities and those with lower income levels are overrepresented on death row.
This is not due to discrimination; this is due to the higher rate at which these groups commit crime ProCon. It has been argued that poverty breeds criminality; if this is true then it makes sense that those at a lower income level would more frequently be sentenced to execution than those at higher income levels ProCon. It has also been proven that minorities are disproportionately poor, and therefore they would also be more likely to receive the death penalty.
Ernest van den Haag said it best:. The only relevant question is: Whether or not others deserved the same punishment, whatever the economic or racial group, have avoided execution is irrelevant. It does not matter what race or economic status a person is, if he is guilty he must receive the appropriate punishment, which in some cases may be the death penalty. Capital punishment can be a difficult topic to approach because people tend to have extreme views on it. The death penalty is an asset to society; it deters potential criminals as well as serves retribution to criminals, and is in no way immoral.
The arguments against the death penalty often do not hold up when examined more closely. It is important that the nation is united on this issue, rather than having some states use capital punishment while others do not.
The death penalty can be an extremely useful tool in sentencing criminals that have committed some of the worst crimes known to society. It is imperative that we begin to pass legislation making capital punishment legal throughout the United States so that justice can be served properly.
An argumentative essay about death penalty. The death penalty is the ultimate punishment. There is no harsher punishment than death itself.
Death penalty is capital punishment wherein a criminal proven guilty of a major crime is sentenced to death by the government. I am against the death penalty and can prove in my essay that abolishing it would be a better choice.
This assignment instructed students to write a persuasive essay which argues for a specific viewpoint or a specific action to be taken on a societal issue. I argued for a specific stance to be taken on the issue of the death penalty. The audience for this essay is the opinion section of the. The title is Arguments against the Death Penalty yet the author spent the whole time counterclaiming any arguments brought up rather than explaining the logistics behind the arguments. No side was taken in this essay however the title clearly states that the essay should be on arguments against.
Death Penalty Essay. Is the Death Penalty a Deterrent to Future Crimes? The most heinous of crimes are subject to the highest form of punishment – death penalty. Capital punishment has its share of supporters who believe in the merits of death penalty in fighting crime. On the other side of the coin are those who view the punishment as. The Death Penalty - Is the death penalty really a rational and effective way to respond to the crimes of certain prisoners. Thirty one percent of society believes we should not keep the death penalty, while others believe that the death penalty .