Capital Punishmentsample Essay Example
Capital Punishmentsample Essay Example

Capital Punishmentsample Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
Topics:
  • Pages: 10 (2583 words)
  • Published: July 27, 2018
  • Type: Essay
View Entire Sample
Text preview

Richard Worsnop's article "Death penalty debate centers on Retribution" explores the growing support for the death penalty in the United States and its impact on reducing crime rates. While many consider capital punishment a just form of retribution, debates surrounding it remain intricate and inconclusive. Society must strike a balance between protecting itself by removing murderers and ensuring that innocent individuals are not wrongly convicted or sentenced to death.

Advocates argue that capital punishment acts as a deterrent for potential criminals, although there has been a decline in executions compared to half a century ago, possibly due to increasing empathy within modern society. Some suggest that past societies were more accepting of capital punishment because they placed less value on human life and were generally more savage. However, today's society places greater importance on i

...

ndividual rights and due process, resulting in a decrease in the use of the death penalty.

The existence of doubts regarding innocence raises concerns about mistaken executions and calls into question the validity of capital punishment. As its usage diminishes, the death penalty becomes less effective as a crime deterrent and comes into conflict with the eighth amendment, making it legally unsustainable. Critics argue that capital punishment does not effectively deter crime since murder rates remain similar in states with or without this form of punishment.

In order for deterrence to be successful, it is important that potential criminals have specific thoughts about previous punishments for their planned offense and understand that they could face similar consequences. However, there are some individuals who engage in criminal activities without considering the repercussions of their actions. The effectiveness of deterrin

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

crime lies within each person's own moral compass and limits, which are shaped by factors such as friends, family, and life experiences. Those who were not taught restraint during childhood are unlikely to grasp these limits until they learn through personal experience. This is where a more frequent use of the death penalty may potentially be advantageous.

The death penalty serves as a deterrent against murder by instilling fear in individuals who lack self-imposed boundaries. Additionally, it prevents future killings by eliminating the opportunity for the perpetrator to strike again. Supporters argue that offenders should be punished regardless of its effectiveness as a deterrent because making examples out of them and instilling fear can discourage potential criminals. They question whether imprisoning someone for many years is also a form of vengeance while providing basic needs and comforts to someone who has taken a life may seem unfair compared to a homeless person who has harmed no one.

However, opponents argue that the death penalty is more humane than taking away someone's life. A case illustrating this perspective occurred with Gary McCorkell in February 1963Despite having his sentence commuted to life in prison, McCorkell, a convicted sex offender, later committed further crimes including kidnapping and raping a 10-year-old boy. If he had been executed earlier, the young boy would have been spared from this abuse. It is worth noting that many sex offenders themselves were victims of abuse during their own childhoods. However, while McCorkell's background provides some context, it does not excuse his actions as he repeatedly committed heinous acts including murder and assault. One of his victims was left for dead. He clearly understood the severity

of what he did. Given the devastation he has caused to four children's lives, can anything he does in life possibly make up for that? This is not a life that can be considered innocent or open to reform. According to research by Isaac Ehrlich, one execution in the U.S. can deter eight murders. Ehrlich argues that if executing a capital murderer prevents even one innocent life from being taken, then it is justified. Many supporters of the death penalty share this belief - that saving even one life justifies numerous executions of those found guilty.The argument presented is that the theory suggesting society engages in murder by executing criminals lacks evidence. However, the execution of convicted offenders is seen as a powerful statement about society's value for innocent life. Professor Stephen K. Layson conducted a study at the University of North Carolina that supports the deterrence aspect of capital punishment, although some consider it conservative. In 1966, Layson found that each execution in the U.S. deterred 18 murderers while 42% of Americans supported capital punishment and 47% opposed it. Over time, as crime rates increased, so did support for the death penalty. By 1986, 80% of Americans were in favor with only 17% against and 3% undecided; most undecided individuals leaned towards supporting it. Various studies and surveys demonstrate society's belief that capital punishment effectively deters crime by instilling fear in potential criminals who reconsider committing offenses. Additionally, seeking retribution against murderers brings satisfaction to the public and provides peace of mind by preventing them from killing again. However, there is a significant issue with this form of punishment due to its irreversibility caused

by human mortality, especially when innocent people are wrongly sentenced to death.
Our legal system encompasses several pitfalls that can result in unjust outcomes for individuals facing capital punishment. One crucial aspect involves ensuring adequate defense counsel for defendants who cannot afford an attorney; if necessary, the state must provide one. It is important to note that they are only required to offer "a" lawyer, without necessarily guaranteeing competence. However, appointing an inexperienced lawyer could potentially jeopardize the defendant's life.

Another concern within our legal system arises when judges display bias or prejudice favoring the prosecution when making rulings. Some oppose the death penalty due to the potential of an unfair trial caused by biased jurors. This lack of fairness can lead to innocent individuals being wrongly sentenced to death.

Furthermore, there are other reasons for opposing capital punishment, such as the belief that seeking revenge is not a justifiable motive for society. Society often expects victims' families to seek the most severe punishment, which frequently results in imposing the death penalty. However, this expectation creates a moral dilemma as it burdens families with responsibility and guilt for causing another person's death.

Moreover, some argue that executing the murderer will not bring back their loved ones and believe that humanity must eventually reject violence. The decision regarding whether or not to impose the death penalty should not be driven by a temporary desire for satisfaction.Although retribution may be mistaken for revenge, it is generally agreed that the punishment should align with the severity of the crime. However, there is debate over whether society can ethically justify taking someone's life solely based on their perceived deservingness. While it is the

government's duty to protect society from dangerous individuals, some argue that a murderer could still ensure societal security by receiving a life sentence without parole instead of execution. Supporters of non-capital punishment point out a misconception about cost-saving benefits associated with the death penalty. They acknowledge that executing criminals may appear to save expenses related to long-term imprisonment, but court appeals can actually prolong and become excessively costly. In 1992, the average time between sentencing and execution for death row inmates was nine and a half years, resulting in substantial costs for the criminal justice process including trial court expenses, appeals, post-conviction costs, and prison expenses for those awaiting execution on death row. Each execution incurs an additional cost of over two million dollars compared to imprisoning a first-degree murderer for twenty years which costs approximately $330 thousand dollars. Therefore, choosing life imprisonment as an alternative proves to be more financially efficient.This perspective raises important questions about the value of executing a criminal versus incarcerating them at a lower cost and with greater ease. Capital punishment remains highly controversial, with strong beliefs on both sides. It is crucial to exercise caution to prevent wrongful execution, even when there are doubts. Proper police investigations should ideally prevent future miscarriages of justice. Despite arguments against capital punishment, evidence supports its use in cases where an individual poses a threat to society. Consistent implementation of the death penalty across all states in the USA is necessary for effective deterrence of violent criminals. The death penalty has historically been used as part of justice systems to punish various crimes, although it was previously applied more strictly for offenses like

theft or accusations of witchcraft. Public executions are now rare, and modern methods of execution are less brutal compared to historical practices such as burning at the stake or being thrown to animals. When debating against government-sanctioned taking of someone's life, it is important to consider fairness and the collective benefit for the country.The sentencing of cold-blooded killers to life imprisonment may be seen as unfair since they have taken away their victims' lives. The issue in the USA is that they are not tough enough on violent criminals, resulting in repeat offenders who could have been deterred after their first crime. Statistics from 1993 indicate that parolees committed various crimes, such as murders, rapes, and robberies. These statistics clearly show that some criminals are not discouraged by the penalties imposed on them, giving them an advantage in most cases. Surprisingly, only sixty-two percent of violent crimes result in death or jail time, with murderers serving an average of just under three years behind bars. This significant difference reveals a concerning disparity that necessitates immediate action.

One effective solution would be to regularly and swiftly implement the death penalty to instill fear in criminals. If potential murderers knew they would face immediate death after killing their victims, very few individuals would commit such heinous acts unless they also sought their own demise. However, the problem lies in the lengthy process for carrying out the death penalty in the United States. Expediting this process is crucial instead of unnecessarily prolonging it. As Jesse Walter Bishop wisely stated, "Commute me or electrocute me, don't drag it out." Currently, inmates on death row spend an average of nine years

awaiting execution which imposes significant financial burdens on the state.The state incurs expenses for housing inmates in prison and handling appeals. By implementing stricter criteria and limitations for appeals, the death penalty can become a cost-effective and permanent solution. It serves as a warning, like a lighthouse guiding ships through the sea. Even without concrete evidence of how many lives it saves, we should not dismantle this protective beacon (Hyam Barshay). This quote illustrates that while we cannot quantify the deterrent effect of capital punishment on murders, it is acknowledged to have preventive power. Moreover, when considering appeals and duration of imprisonment, capital punishment is more affordable than life without parole. A life without parole inmate costs three million dollars on average, including expenses such as thirty-four thousand dollars per year for a fifty-year prison term and seventy-five thousand dollars for the trial process. In contrast, an inmate serving a death sentence costs approximately one point eight million dollars, which takes into account sixty thousand dollars per year for a six-year prison term and one point five million dollars for the trial proceedings. The death penalty is currently less expensive than life without parole, and reducing appeals would further decrease its cost.The issue of determining which crimes should result in the death penalty is significant. Murder, for example, should lead to the same fate as intentionally taking someone's life. Imposing a death sentence on drug dealers may be justified to effectively address the problem. While some view drug dealing as a risky yet profitable activity, knowing that it could cost them their lives if caught would likely make them reconsider. Certain countries like Singapore enforce

strict regulations and severe punishments to ensure safe living environments. Despite ethical objections to capital punishment, it appears to be the only just penalty for those who have taken another person's life. The concept of "an eye for an eye" supports the idea that punishment should match the committed crime. If someone against abolishing the death penalty were personally affected by the murder of a close associate, they would quickly support capital punishment in their pursuit of justice against the perpetrator. This explains why many opponents of abolishing the death penalty come from privileged backgrounds and have grown up in secure neighborhoods – they advocate for it because they haven't experienced murder or violent crimes firsthand. Capital punishment serves as retribution for both the victim and their family, ensuring fairness when a loved one's life is taken and a short prison sentence seems inadequate.Critics argue that state executions are similar to murder but differ from kidnapping as they involve premeditated punishment for criminals. While there are ethical concerns surrounding modern execution methods, it is important to acknowledge that if not properly executed, these methods can cause suffering, raising questions about fairness towards offenders. However, it is crucial to consider the fear and suffering endured by victims before their death. Although some execution methods may inflict pain, it is possible to execute criminals without subjecting them to agony. One such method is asphyxiation by nitrogen which induces unconsciousness within minutes and results in a painless death shortly after. This approach also enables organ donation, potentially saving lives by removing a criminal from society while providing organs to the critically ill.

Though there remains a small possibility of

wrongfully executing an innocent person, modern legal systems have implemented measures to minimize this risk. Capital crime trials consist of two phases: determining guilt and discussing sentencing. Technological advances, particularly DNA analysis, have made it increasingly feasible to prove someone's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is estimated that out of the total 8,000 criminals executed, only 23 might have been innocent individuals. Furthermore, in 12 of these cases, there was insufficient evidence to establish the accused's guilt.While the death penalty remains in use only in the United States among major commercial countries in the Western world, there are arguments suggesting its abolition based on this fact alone. However, Ernest Van den Hag challenges this perspective by stating that we should not give significant weight to Prof.Conrad's argument solely because other nations have abolished capital punishment. The adoption of cruel concentration camps by other countries should not automatically lead us to abolish it as well. We must question whether we should follow international trends or let them influence our national decisions. Taking decisive action is crucial given the significant crime problem in our country. Law-abiding citizens are being treated unfairly while criminals receive lenient treatment. Measures should be taken to enhance safety on our streets for everyone's benefit. The police should not fear threats from armed individuals they pull over for speeding as they work towards creating a safer community. Those who pose a threat to law enforcement should not have multiple chances to commit atrocities, and potential offenders should be deterred by the possibility of losing their lives if they resort to violence.Although some argue that life imprisonment is a better solution for criminals,

further research is necessary to understand the various benefits of implementing capital punishment and how it could improve the United States.The money saved from this measure should be used for important areas such as education, homelessness, and aiding those in need. It is unjustifiable to allocate these funds towards supporting the lives of heartless murderers in prison, as it only raises the chances of future crimes being committed. Ultimately, there is no valid reason why the death penalty shouldn't be employed more often.

Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds
New