The Pros And Cons Of Death Penalty

There were almost whole the chiefs take stock of ranked the death penalty last among their priorities for crime fighting, that they did not accept based on murder rates that it deterred against homicides. Most rated it as the least efficient use of limited taxpayer dollars. In the article by Delcour, she states “New York abolished its death penalty in 2007. In the many years the law was on books, no death sentences were upheld by its court nor was any offender executed.” She states on that other hand, “New Mexico get rid of its death penalty in 2009.”

“‘Death sentences represent less than one-tenth of 1% of prison sentences in the United States…,’” (Von Drehle, 9). Furthermore, death row is just a small fraction of the criminal justice system and can not be based on that alone. For instance, what many don't take into account is the justice systems allows for many states, such as the populous state of New York, to ban the death penalty. (state laws, p1)

The death penalty sends a message to citizens; a message that says murder is not outrageous, unless the state is doing it as a sanction. This message helps to justify civilian killings of people believed to be deserving of death and may possibly even cause an uprise in vigilante style murders. This message also leaves an almost open air on what is wrong and provides no consistent moral ground for society to base their beliefs on. This does not mean that people will suddenly think murder is a favorable deed, but it may cause some to not realize how terrible it is. Joseph Summer wrote this in an article titled “Some Adverse Effects of the Death Penalty in History”: “…people learned 3 lessons from the government’s violent example: to use

The three most common reasons for retaining the death penalty are retribution, deterrence, and assuagement. Assuagement of course, refers to easing the pain of the victim's loved ones. Retribution is a society's need to “punish particularly egregious crimes.” Deterrence is the desire to prevent future crimes. By maintaining punishment for horrendous crimes in our

According to Hinman (5), just punishment is the one that happens to those who are proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. This is important because capital punishment is irreversible and hence only the guilty should be executed. However, there are many cases of innocent people who have been sentenced to death only to have their appeals granted at the last minute, or worse, denied and executed. It is on these grounds that Bedau (2007) argues against the death penalty because it is unjust and unfair. About unfairness, he goes on to add that racial and economic discrimination are also a factor to consider when meting out capital punishment.

However statistics around the world show that areas that are abolishing capital punishment have lower death rates. For example, statistics were provided in 2003 for the murder rates in Canada and they showed that after twenty-seven years without the death penalty the figures had dropped by 43%. Additionally in Central- Eastern Europe the murder rates have dropped by 60% since the abolishment of capital punishment. Therefore it shows that the death penalty is not a deterrent and if Australia continues to refuse capital punishment the murder rates will slowly decrease as

Deterrence theory states that people follow the law because they are scare of getting caught or being punished. In this article, “The Death Penalty Deters Crime,” David Muhlhausen, expert on criminal justice programs in the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis and a research fellow in empirical policy analysis, confirms the deterrence theory. By means of statistical data and research dating, Muhlhausen contends that the death penalty does deters murder crime which ultimately saves lives. He also believes that executions and murder rates are somehow connected to each other. Even though, some adequate emotional appeals appeared, Muhlhausen’s article failed to prove, logically, the deterrence theory.

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is a legal process in which a person is put to death as a punishment for a crime by the government of a nation. The United States is in the minority group of nations that uses the death penalty. There are thirty-three states that allow capital punishment and seventeen states that abolished it (Death Penalty Information Center). The morality of the death penalty has been debated for many years. Some people want capital punishment to be abolished due to how it can cost a lot more than life imprisonment without parole, how they think it is immoral to kill, and how innocent people can be put to death.

If the cold-blooded killing of thousands does not lower premeditated murder, there is really no point (because let 's face it, the saying “eye for an eye” is childish and socially unacceptable). This same conclusion was agreed upon in a recent poll by almost 90% of the world’s criminological societies (Facts About the Death Penalty). However in all honesty, the argument against the death penalty doesn’t just stop at its redundancy, but also its

The death penalty on the other hand would have been effective if the overall public minded to consider it a system for ending criminal acts. While a monstrous number would ensure the nonattendance of the death penalty in their real system, the wrongdoing rate continues going higher for countries that still practice the death penalty. Regardless, there is lacking accurate data to exhibit that death penalty has been convincing similarly as maintaining a strategic distance from criminal acts. It infers

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 Death Penalty, loss of life due to previous crimes and actions, is believed by some to be extremely costly, inhumane, and cruel unlike some others whom believe it is just, right, and provides closure. The Death Penalty is not a quick and easy process. Most who get sentenced to deaths row wait years for their ultimate punishment of death. Some believe that it is not right to punish and kill a human for actions they have done because, they believe that the inmate should have another chance. Then others believe that it is right to punish someone for their actions especially if their actions involve killing another or multiple humans.

Another pressing issue associated with the death penalty is the morals behind it. It teaches society that if someone has done something wrong you could just murder

Death penalty is like the ‘’tooth for a tooth – eye for an eye’’ theory. Instead of acting inhuman to our fellow beings we should find a better way to solve the mind of criminals. Making the problem vanish is not a good idea. We should do psychological researching instead! I, myself have a lot of faith in humanity.

There is a worldwide trend in the use of penal imprisonment for serious offenses as capital punishment has been renounced by an increasing number of countries. Harsh punishments include capital punishment, life imprisonment and long-term incarceration. These forms of punishments are usually used against serious crimes that are seen as unethical, such as murder, assault and robbery. Many people believe that harsher punishments are more effective as they deter would-be criminals and ensure justice is served. Opposition towards harsh punishments have argued that harsher punishments does not necessarily increase effectiveness because they do not have a deterrent effect, do not decrease recidivism rates and do not provide rehabilitation.