Capital Punishment - Retain or Not?
This essay tangles with the question of whether or not we should retain the death penalty within the American code of penal law.
There is a feeling of frustration and horror that we experience at the senseless and brutal crimes that too frequently disrupt the harmony of society. There is pain which accompanies the heartfelt sympathy that we extend to the victims' families who, in their time of suffering, are in need of the support and compassion of the whole community. Nothing will ever bring their loved ones back. Quite clearly, such violence is to be denounced vehemently.
Appropriate measures should be employed to safeguard our community and reduce the incidence of
…show more content…
Also Steven Brian Pennell was executed after a highly-publicized series of crimes(Steven). We believe that this event in the state of Delaware requires that we as a community once again re-evaluate the use of the death penalty in the light of our conviction that life is a gift of God.
Though the state has the right to inflict the death penalty, we question whether the state should exercise the use of that right. In a world filled with violence, one more act of violence, we believe, only serves to make society less sensitive to the intrinsic value of human life. Usually, punishment is meted out to criminals as an example to deter others from acting in a like manner; or to allow an opportunity for the convicted individual to reform; or for the sake of retribution. However, it seems that the deterrent value of capital punishment is, at the most, doubtful; that the plea for retribution, when the death penalty is involved, reflects a more primitive form of justice than we in the United States would like to claim as our own. Indeed, the taking of the life of another person hardly restores the imbalance created by the original homicide. Rather, it promotes further violence.
The Christian tradition has always upheld the sanctity and dignity of the human being, made in the very image of God (Genesis I). Each person receives life as a gift from God, a gift to be nurtured, a gift over which we have stewardship but not absolute dominion. The right to
Why is the death penalty used as a means of punishment for crime? Is this just a way to solve the nations growing problem of overcrowded prisons, or is justice really being served? Why do some view the taking of a life morally correct? These questions are discussed and debated upon in every state and national legislature throughout the country. Advantages and disadvantages for the death penalty exist, and many members of the United States, and individual State governments, have differing opinions. Yet it seems that the stronger arguments, and evidence such as cost effectiveness, should lead the common citizen to the opposition of Capital Punishment.
The moral and ethical debate on the sentencing and enforcement of capital punishment has long baffled the citizens and governing powers of the United States. Throughout time, the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, and the vast majority beliefs of Americans, have been in a constant state of perplexity. Before the 1960s, the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution were interpreted as permitting the death penalty. However, in the early 1960s, it was suggested that the death penalty was a "cruel and unusual" punishment and therefore unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. Many argue that capital punishment is an absolute necessity, in order to deter crime, and to ‘make things right’ following a heinous crime of murder. Despite the belief that capital punishment may seem to be the only tangible, permanent solution to ending future capital offenses, the United States should remove this cruel and unnecessary form of punishment from our current judicial systems.
In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately
More than two centuries ago, the death penalty was commonplace in the United States, but today it is becoming increasingly rare. In the article “Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?”, Diann Rust-Tierney argues that it should be abolished, and Joshua Marquis argues that it should not be abolished. Although the death penalty is prone to error and discrimination, the death penalty should not be abolished because several studies show that the death penalty has a clear deterrent effect, and we need capital punishment for those certain cases in which a killer is beyond redemption.
The death penalty, or capital punishment, has always been a topic of much debate in the United States. There are those who support it and those who oppose it, and each side has their fair share of points being made, backed by supportive evidence. The topics range from the morality of this punishment, including the methods of execution as well as fairness issues in regards to sex and race. The first issue that will be addressed is in regards to the death penalty working to prevent violent crimes.
The use of capital punishment in the U.S. is a growing concern for most American citizens. According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty percent are against it. These statistics show that few people are against capital punishment (“Fact” 1). With the use of the death penalty growing the controversy is becoming more heated. With only twelve states left not enforcing it the resistance is becoming futile (“Fact” 4). Many debates have been made and even clauses have been invoked, such as, the “Cruel and Unusual Clause” that was invoked by the Supreme Court in 1962 (Meltsner 179). The use of death as a punishment has been viewed as “cruel
Capital punishment, the state imposed penalty of death, continues to be one of the most controversial issues in contemporary American public policy. Since the earliest days of its employment in the colonial era until today, citizens have struggles with the issue of when and under what circumstances the taking of a human life by the state can be morally or legally justified. For some opponents of the death penalty, the simple answer is that the taking of a human life is always morally and ethically wrong, even when conducted under the auspices of state authority as a legal punishment. In contrast, proponents of capital punishment have contended with equal fervor that the death penalty is morally justified as a form of retributive justice,
“The use of the death penalty in the United States has been rapidly declining since the end of the 1990s” (Dieter, 2015). This is contrast to the believes of the Founding Fathers where “the death penalty was widely accepted at the time the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights were ratified” (Gardner & Anderson, 2014). While the crimes have not changed, aspects of capital punishment which were once viewed as constitutional, today are deemed cruel and unusual. The prevailing liberal view sees the death penalty as morally unjustified and a vengeful form retribution. “It is the most brutal form of state power, requires massive state administrations and it costs significantly more than life imprisonment which is both more humane and equally effective” (Davidson, 2015). They point to the lack of deterrence it provides and highlight the racial and gender biases of the criminal justice system and the potential for the execution of the innocent by the State. In contrast, those in favor of capital punishment see it as a valid, moral and constitutional punishment as punishments should be imposed in proportion to the crime. The death penalty is reserved for the most violent of crimes in society and without it, justice is not achieved for victims and their families. The death penalty must be viewed again as a valid, moral and legal
The first known execution was in the colony of Virginia in 1622, by the 1800s the law in the United States not only accepted capital punishment but also required it (“Facts about the Death Penalty” 3). Execution was the automatic penalty for anyone convicted of murder or several other serious crimes. The debate has shifted from whether capital punishment is appropriate in a modern civilized society to questions about the fairness of the trials and the reliability of the results. These questions have contributed to the rise of citizens who oppose the death penalty (“Facts about the Death Penalty” 3). A divided United States Supreme Court also appears to be struggling with several important aspects of the death penalty. Especially vulnerable members of society like children, the mentally ill, and the mentally retarded who are viewed as undeserving
In the United States there are currently thirty one states that still practice Capital Punishment leaving the remaining nineteen states with death penalty bans such as the state of New York. The authors moral compose dictates a personal position that regardless of what actions a person takes against another, even if it is violent in nature, all life is precious and being put to death as a penalty is not an option. In line with the abolitionist view “Retribution is uncivilized” and putting someone to death cannot bring back the victim or in any meaningful way repay the victims loved ones(Souryal,
The fight and controversy behind capital punishment is not a new idea. The death penalty has divided America down the middle, with half against and half pro the punishment. Due to the sensitivity of capital punishment, the Supreme Court has dictated which states capital punishment is legal. Despite it being legal in these states, it is up to the prosecutor’s discretion to vie for this punishment as opposed to other forms such as life in prison, rehabilitation, etc.
Many would think that the victim’s families would want revenge for the ones they’ve lost, but that isn’t always true. According to Carlson’s story, he wanted vengeance for his sister’s death in 1983, but once he witnessed the execution of the man who committed the murder, it left him with “horror and emptiness”.(1) Carlson realized that “capital punishment only continues the violence that has a powerful, corrosive effect of the society”(1). The death of another person is never justifiable, no matter what act they committed. There’s always someone affected by the death of another, whether that person was sentenced to die, or was murdered.The justice system should not have a say in whether a person’s life should be taken away, nor should any
From an early age, children are taught that murder is morally wrong. In today’s complex society that is impeded by unsettling periods of civil unrest, it is an expectation for everyone to acknowledge and accept that murder is one of the worst crimes individuals can commit. Perhaps it can be said that the death penalty is one of our legal system’s biggest contradictions of itself, as, if someone commits murder (or another heinous crime of that caliber), such ‘murderers’ will, in states that have capital punishment laws, be sent to Death Row and ultimately murdered in order to prevent potential future crimes by such perpetrators. I believe that the death penalty is wrong not only as it is immoral to take a life, but also, such ineffective laws waste money and do not deter crime.
The most severe form of punishment of all legal sentences is that of death. This is referred to as the death penalty, or “capital punishment”; this is the most severe form of corporal punishment, requiring law enforcement officers to actually kill the offender. It has been banned in numerous countries, in the United States, however an earlier move to eliminate capital punishment has now been reversed and more and more states are resorting to capital punishment for such serious offenses namely murder. “Lex talionis”, mentioned by the Bible encourages “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” mentality, and people have been using it regularly for centuries. We use it in reference to burglary, adultery, and various other situations, although,
The death penalty is a tough debate and an overwhelming argument in this country. We as Americans put Timothy McVeigh to death by lethal injection just three months ago. Arguments can be made for and against the death penalty, but this is not the problem. Capital Punishment is supposed to be a deterrent to crime, but is the death penalty really a deterrent? Capital Punishment is not a deterrent for crime, and the effects of Capital Punishment are actually hurting the American citizens. Capital Punishment affects the American citizens by having those citizens pay millions of dollars for death row inmates, and these criminals affect those same citizens because the