Against the Death Penalty
The death penalty is one of the most controversial issues in our time. There are many issues that show and prove the death penalty is wrong and reasons why it should be ceased. Many issues have objections towards the death penalty shows that the death penalty is unfair, irreversible and expensive.
The Death penalty is an unfair system used as punishment to criminals that performed wrong and unmoral crimes. The death penalty is unfair in the way that is discriminatory towards color, and race. For example, in the trials of many court cases, a person who kills a white person is treated much more severely then one who kills a black person. Of the 313 criminals that have been executed between 1997 and 1995,...show more content...
Events have happen where during the past century about 4 cases a year, an innocent person who was convicted ofmurder, was sentenced to death. Of these cases, there were people who have been proven innocent after the person was executed. A good example of this type of situtation happened in 1990 when Jesse Tafero was executed in Florida for murdering a state trooper. His wife, Sonia Jacobs was also sentenced to the death penalty but was later reduced on an appeal to life imprisonment, 11 years later her convictions were vacated by federal court. Even though Jesse and Sonia's conviction was the same, it was all due to an ex–convict who turned in evidence that help prove the couple was guilty which led one of them to be penalized with death. The ex convict who turned state witness testified against the couple so the ex convict could avoid the death penalty. If he were alive in 1992, he would have been released with his wife. Another example of such cases happened in 1992 when Roger Coleman was executed in Virginia even though another person was suspected as the murder because there was evidence that was never summated to his trial. In court, the jury did not take anyone seriously until late in the appeal process, when they found out he or she was about to kill an innocent man. Even though they tried to delay and stop the execution it was to late. Eventually the case was cleared, and he was later proven innocent. These cases clear prove
The death penalty has been a huge part of many political debates for the past few decades. There are two sides, those for and those against its continued use and both have logical arguments. My research question is if it is ethical and or beneficial for the U.S. government to continue using the death penalty? To gain the attention of my audience, I am going to share two stories that my sources have on those with experience in the debate. The Forbes article, "Considering The Death Penalty: Your Tax Dollars At Work," is an anti–death penalty piece explaining how an innocent man was on death row and his opinion on whether or not it should be used. He said in the piece that living out a life sentence without parole is worse than being executed....show more content...
One, saying it is inhumane and should not be done and the other side says that it is necessary in our society. Some of the non–biased sources go over just the statistics of the death penalty. This includes "DEATH PENALTY INFORMATION CENTER Facts about the Death Penalty" and "Should the Death Penalty Be Allowed?". The first article explains the costs associated with the punishment, how much it is used, states that use it, and people on death row. The second piece gives unbiased statistics on the pros and cons on the death penalty. By providing this background, I hope my audience will be more aware of the debate and have more information. I will then incorporate a few more factual based articles to try and provide all the necessary details, such as "Death Penalty Pro Con" and a few more biased articles then to get opinions going. I feel that all my sources work well together as even when the articles have different viewpoints, they do not contradict one another much. Basically, they highlight the importance of their own arguments and do not really go after the other side. Overall, I feel that I have the sources necessary to write this piece. However, I do feel that having a few more scholarly articles will only help my
Get more content
History: The death penalty is not a new idea in our world. Its origins date back 3,700 years to the Babylonian civilization, where it was prescribed for a variety of crimes (Kronenwetter p.10). It was also greatly used in the Greek and Roman empires. In ancient Roman and Mosaic Law they believed in the rule of "eye for and eye." The most famous executions of the past included Socrates and Jesus (Wilson p.13). It continued into England during the Middle Ages and then to the American colonies where it exist still today. In the colonies, death was a punishment for crimes of murder, arson, and perjury. Although today the death penalty is used for murder.
Common ways of execution in the past where...show more content...
Georgia, (408 U.S. 238). This case was the first time the Supreme Court ruled against the death penalty (http://www.time.com/time/magagzine /archive/1994/940523.crime.html). The rule was a vote of 5 to 4 by the jury. "The dissenting Justices argued that the courts had no right to challenge legislative judgment on the effectiveness and justice of punishments. The majority however held that it was not the actual death penalty that was cruel and unusual punishment, but rather the judicial process, which determined who would receive the death penalty sentence. This process violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment. They decided some factors should be considered before giving a criminal this sentences such as a separate trial for sentencing, the viciousness of the crime, and environment factors like the criminal's background" (http://www.time.com /time/magagzine/archive/1994/940523.crime.html). Due to the way this case was done it created three options for the use of the death penalty. The three options where, mandatory death sentences for certain crimes, development of standardized guidelines for juries and outright abolition (http://www2.law.cornell.edu/cgi–bin/foliocgi.exe/historic/query=[group+.../pageitems=[body]).
This was a stop to the death penalty until the case of Gregg Vs. Georgia, (428 U.S. 153). In this case the Georgia Supreme Court reviewed the rights of constitution and how the
When you turn on the television, radio, or simply open the local newspaper, you are bombarded with news of arrests, murders, homicides, and other tragedies. There are many things that I don't agree with in today's society but, out of all the wrong doing that takes place, I believe murder including the death penalty is the worst of them. I am strongly against the death penalty because it violates God's rules, costs the tax payers too much money, and possibly the "wrongly accused," may have to die because of the cruel and unusual punishment of the death penalty. How often do these concepts get into the public's mind when it hears of our 'fair, trusty' government taking away someone's breathing rights? Do we honestly want people thinking of...show more content...
I believe that religious beliefs are the corner stone for our law system, especially since our country was built to escape religious execution. Executing someone should not be made an exception to God's rules. My next reason for being against the death penalty is the fact that taxpayers waste too much of their money with the death penalty. The average death penalty case is appealed at least three times. This means that "we", the taxpayers, must pay for the same trial to be heard at least three times. After a while this adds up and becomes expensive. Also, the average convicted murderer spends 12 years on death row. If people who support the death penalty are positive enough to kill the person for committing the crime, shouldn't the supporters be confident enough to execute them in right then? Why spend everyone else's money keeping these inmates in jail? Our money should be spent to help better society, not to accommodate the prisoners that are going to end up dead anyways. There's always the chance of an innocent person being in the wrong place at the wrong time. A little bit of evidence and a good lawyer could sentence someone to life in prison, and maybe even the death penalty. Some innocent person could be spending and or possibly ending his life in captivity for just walking down the wrong street on the wrong day. That person does not deserve to serve the time that's not rightfully his and take the needle that shouldn't
Get more content
"More than 4,500 people have been executed in the United States since 1930. There is no way of knowing how many have been executed in U.S. history because executions were often local affairs, with no central agency keeping track of them (Maloney, 1999)." Over 4,500 people were executed and this doesn't even include the unreported deaths. Decades ago, death penalty cases were not even to be reported in many times. For many years, people have been rationalize themselves for death penalty as " an eye for an eye"(2010).This "eye for an eye" statement is no longer giving any excuses for killing humans. The controversial idea of whether humans are rational enough to decide someone's life or death has been questioned. Humans absolutely don't have...show more content...
People who commit the crime should get imprisoned for what they did for how long ever it is given. Murderer who took away other's lives should be imprisoned for what they did for the rest of their lives. Death penalty is absolutely not necessary because imprison itself will take away the whole lives; they will not be allowed to have any life as human in society. We kill him, because he killed is simply how death penalty works. Death penalty is only to take away people's life, not reasonable punishment for their sin. Of course, people think death penalty is not just about the punishment. People who believe in death penalty show the reason why they do is that death penalty for sure is a deterrent to homicide. They also take this as a justification of supporting death penalty system (2010). So people actually expect something out of this system other than just killing the murderers simply for what they did. This is supposed to be a great solution to make better society by lessoning the potential crime. In theory, the fact that society has a death penalty system should somewhat scares the potential murderer and prevents them from committing murder. But the percentage of murder crime shows the otherwise. Do potential murderers consider the death penalty before they the murder? The answers are likely to be No. "Most deterrence research has found that
Get more content