Capital Punishment Essay, Research Paper
?The?Capital punishment is the infliction of the death penalty on persons
convicted of a crime.? This has been a topic of debate for many years.
People who are for:
People who are against:
?Why do we kill people to prove killing people is wrong??
The 1st argument I have against capital punishment is that it?s
unconstitutional. Every person has an equal right to ?life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness.? This is a quote from American Civil Liberty Union
National Office, ?Capital punishment is a barbaric remnant of an uncivilized
society. It is immoral in principle, and unfair and discriminatory in practice.?
Does the government have the right to kill? Maybe in self defense, like a
policeman firing on a armed and dangerous criminal. Suppose we apply the
same standards to the government that we have for civilians. A civilian has
the right to shoot at an intruder as he is entering his home but if the civilian
catches the intruder and has him under his control, the shooting him would
be considered murder. That?s what capital punishment is…simple murder.
Against: I agree that capital punishment is a relic of barbarism but as murder
itself is barbaric, death is a fitting punishment for it. It goes along with the
?eye for an eye? principle. For example, someone steals $10 from you and
then the person who stole your money has the same thing happen to them?
Doesn?t that satisfy you? Many feel the same about murders who are
sentence to die. The criminal has brought the punishment upon himself, they
deserve what they get.
Cruel and unusual
The 8th amendment of the us constitution, condemn gruel and unusual
punishment is used to protest capital punishment.
For:: When the constitution was drafted, capital punishment was
practiced widely in this country, yet it was not specified as wrong or as cruel
and unusual. John Locke went as far to say that murder is not intrinsically
wrong. How can the constitution be brought into this argument, since it
makes no mention of capital punishment?
The methods by which executions are carried out can involve physical
torture. ?Electrocution has on occasion caused extensive burns and needed
more than one application of electric current to kill the condemned. It often
takes 10 minutes or more to die in the electric chair. It is also torture to keep
someone locked up when they know they are waiting to be killed.
Officials often defend this and say it?s not cruel and unusual, but how can
they defend this opinion in the case of John Evans who was executed by
electrocution in 1983? According to witnesses at the scene Mr. Evans was
given three charges of electrocution over a period of fourteen minutes. After
the first and second charges Mr. Evans was still conscious and smoke was
coming from oall over his body as a result of his flesh burning. An official
there even tried to stop the execution on account of it being cruel and unusual
punishment, but was unsuccessful. Witnesses later called th whole incident a
The death penalty costs more than life in prison. It costs 5 to 6 times more
than lifetime imprisonment, according to studies in a number of states. Most
costs occur at trial level. Indiana, with smaller death row than Virginia?s
estimates it could save $5 million per year by abolishing capital punishment.
Murder rates are lower in states that have abolished the death penalty. The
Supreme court, United Nations, and numerous independent studies have
concluded that the death penalty has no effect on the crime rate, on average
the murder rate in U. S. which execute is almost double the rate in states
without the death penalty.
possible death of innocent
?In case of a mistake, the executed prisoner cannot be given another chance.
Justice can miscarry. In the last hundred years there have been more than 75
documented cases of wrongful conviction of criminal homicide. The death
sentence was carried out in eight of these cases? Undoubtedly many other
cases of mistaken conviction and execution occurred and remain
undocumented. A prisoner discovered to be blameless can be freed; but
neither releases nor compensation is possible for a corpse.
DOESN?T DETER CRIME
Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty does not act as a deterrent to
crime. ?Expert after expert and study after study have emphasized and
emphasized the lack of correction between the threat of the death penalty and
the occurrence of violent crime? Ehrlich?s study on the deterrent effect of
capital punishment in America reveals this. It spans twenty-five years, and
show that in the first year the study was conducted there were 8,060 murders
in 1957 and 65 executions. However in the last year of the study, there were
22,520 murders committed and 1 execution performed. The absence of
deterrence is clearly shown.
What is the difference between the state killing and an individual killing?
The end result is the same…one more dead body, one more set of grieving
parents, one more cemetery slot. Every time we execute someone, we are
sending the most profound message of the value of human life. Every time
we execute someone, we as a society sink to the same level as the common
killer. The American people have blood on their hands, and it will stay there
until we finally remove this barbaric practice from our nation.
Why do we kill people to prove that killing people is wrong? It is easy to
argue the practical points of opposition to the death penalty. It is obviously
not problem to be a deterrent unless my understanding of the word is
completely false. It costs more to prosecute capital crimes and ultimately life
in prison is more cast effective. The death penalty prolong the cycle of
violence and extends the pain of violence to the executed person?s family.
The punishment is irreversible, and one error in the realm of punishment is
unthinkable. The death penalty blatantly is an issue of elitism in society. It
is logical that those who can afford the best lawyers will fare the best in court
while those who simply cannot afford the best legal advice ride the winds of
chance. Capital punishment degrades society. .. . Why do we kill people to
prove that killing people is wrong?