Anti Death Penalty Essay

Against The Death Penalty

Death Penalty laws were first established back in the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty. In modern times when Capital Punishment reached America it was influenced by Britain more than by any other country. Death Penalty is not the best way to punish criminals for their actions because it is expensive for people who haven't committed any crimes Taxpayers. The Death Penalty also shouldn't be allowed since it fails to recognize the actual crime. Death Row does not deliver justice and it's less painful than what they really deserve for their crimes, this process should be abolished in all states since is morally wrong.

A study of the costs of seeking...show more content...

People mistakenly identify others and falsely remember details when witnessing a crime. Furthermore bias is a very key part to this, the so called witness may be racist and may think a person of a different race should be incarcerated. Also many false confessions are obtained from accused criminals by leading police. Theres many examples of cases where innocent people were in jail for years claiming they were innocent and later due to new evidence or advances in technology such as DNA testing they have been let free, now imagine that same innocent person can't be let free because they have already been executed. There had been 127 death row inmates who have been exonerated since 1971 now imagine the ones who weren't as lucky but were still innocent. The death penalty is prone to error.

Paying for their crimes is what the laws are made for, if thecapital punishment is administered then inmates won't pay for their crimes. When something is done wrong they should pay for their consequences, not be put to death for it. Permanent imprisonment accomplishes the same things as the death penalty but without the cost and risk. Permanent imprisonment gets criminals off the streets, offers the severe and unbending punishment that they deserve, and ensures that murderers will never be able to strike again. If a criminal is sentenced to life in prison he should stay there and pay for what he did, not be given the chance to have an Get more

The death penalty raises important questions about the right to life, who has a right to life, and under what circumstances a right to life can be taken away. I believe there are no circumstances under which capital punishment is justified. I will proceed to defend my claim that capital punishment is unjustified by arguing a position that killing is wrong because it deprives individuals of valuable futures. To support my thesis that capital punishment is not justified, I will expand upon an argument made my Don Marquis in his essay "Why Abortion is Immoral" in which he argues that killing is immoral on the grounds that it deprives human beings of a valuable future. My argument is as follows:

1.Killing is wrong because it deprives the...show more content...

The outside factors and conditions are irrelevant. Rather, the value is determined by how that person perceives his or her own life and these future experiences. Thus, when someone is killed, he or she is deprived of all the things that were of value and will be of value to him or her in the future. Causing this loss of a valuable future is ultimately what makes killing wrong and immoral because that individual has permanently lost the opportunity to enjoy his or her future experiences which are valuable to him or her. My second premise states that death row criminals are in the same moral category as other human beings with respect to the moral value of their lives. The only factor which differentiates a criminal from a non–criminal is the fact that the criminal, usually irrefutably, violated community standards and the law to commit acrime. In the case of a criminal on death row, he or she would have had to have committed a serious capital crime to receive the death sentence. Since committing a capital offense is the only reason death row criminals are different from other human beings, death row criminals are the same as other human beings in every other respect, including with respect to the value of their futures. Furthermore, the future of a criminal on death row is just as valuable as the future of a human being not on death row. Any form of capital punishment is a form of killing. It does not matter who is actually doing the Get more content

Being Against the Death Penalty

Supporters of the death penalty often thinks that taking a life for a life is being instrumental in justice. However, several studies and research have shown that taking the life of another human being through capital punishment only continues a cycle of violence. Furthermore, other research has shown that flaws in our justice system has led to innocent being prosecuted, guilty being set free, and additional biases being present during death row cases. There is no arguing that crimes associated with the death penalty; such as premeditated murder, are inexcusable. However, if we are to agree that taking the life of another human being can be categorized as the upmost heinous of acts, how can we justify...show more content... Alongside racial discrimination found within death row is that of economic discrimination. Remember the O.J. Simpson trial? What about the Robert Blake trial? Both of these celebrities were arrested under murder charges and taken to trial; both were found "not guilty". What do these two people have in common? They are both exceptionally wealthy. People with substantial income can afford the best criminal defense team when going to trial, whereas those of low economic status cannot. Verdicts are largely dependent on the quality of one's defense team, and the price of a good lawyer can equate to that of an entire mortgage. This fact once again spotlights the flaws within America's justice system that lead to innocent being prosecuted and guilty being set free. How detrimental can a lack of financial resources truly be to a person facing prosecution? An article from deathpenalty.org cited that many lawyers who were assigned by the state to poor defendants were often inadequately trained, later suspended and/or disbarred.

What if an inmate sentenced to death is later found to be innocent of their convictions? What if the uncovering of this innocence comes after a lethal injection has already been administered? Execution is the ultimate, irrevocable punishment. The risk of executing an innocent person can never be eliminated. Since 1973, for example, 150 US prisoners sent to death

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

Arguments Against The Death Penalty

Death Penalty Paper

Some crimes cannot be forgiven. That is why we have the death penalty to punish those who did these heinous crimes. Some people oppose this and believe that it is wrong and cruel to put a person to death, no matter how awful the people who did these terrible deeds. I am here to oppose that argument, and to say that we absolutely need the death penalty, to end the lives of these hellish figures. However, the currentcapital punishment standards should change, as the system is not perfect. I will list my reasons on why we need the death penalty, and analyze the opposing side to the death penalty.

My first point is that capital punishment should partially be up to the family of the victim(s) to decide. Imagine having to deal with the pain and suffering after a person in your family was tortured and cold–bloodedly murdered by someone. You probably wouldn't ever forgive that murderer for their actions, and that they should pay for you family member's life with theirs. I believe that if a jury agrees that the crime convicted is worthy of a death sentence (or multiple life sentences, life without parole, etc.), it should be the family of the victim to decide what to do with them. However, if a jury finds the case unworthy of a death sentence, the family would not have that option. For my example, I will be using the case entailing the murder of 17 year–old Kelly Anne Bates. In 1996, 48 year–old James Patterson Smith tortured, mutilated, and killed Bates. It was Get

Opinion on the Death Penalty

The death penalty, also referred to as capital punishment, has been abolished in Canada since 1976, but still exist in a few American States. The last execution in Canada took place in 1962.

I disagree with the death penalty for several reasons. My first reason is that I find it extremely inhumane to take someone's life in order to demonstrate the power of the law. Another reason for my disapproval of the death penalty, is the amount of money that it takes to put someone to death, as it would cost the same to keep an inmate in jail for life, as it would to put that same inmate to death. My third and final reason, is the guilty conscience that is placed on everyone involved: the jury who convicted...show more content... Therefore, I do not feel that Canada should permit such a deplorable undertaking of a human life. I know they must be punished, but there is a better way.

Prior to putting someone to death, the accused's lawyer will attempt several appeals to the courts in order to lengthen the amount of time he has to live; and dependent on a technicality, or a sympathetic jury, the accused may be sentenced to life imprisonment. These appeals take up an abundance of court time and cost the public millions of dollars. With the cost of these appeals, it would cost the same amount to keep the same inmate in jail for a life term. Would it not be better for the inmate to perhaps obtain an education or be given the chance to rehabilitate, rather than strapped to a chair and killed ??? I personally would rather see the inmate suffer in prison and have nothing to look forward to rather than letting the government put him out of his misery by killing him. To sentence someone to death takes one trial but to actually get some one in the chair to kill them could take a dozen of trials. The question must be asked why do we bother with this lengthy and costly process when we could sentence people to life in prison, at the same cost.

The killing of a human being is very traumatizing to all. Whenever the courts issue someone to death, the innocent everyday people who are involved must be affected. Just imagine how these normal human beings, like you and I,

Persuasive Essay Against Death Penalty

According to Amnesty International 31 states in North America are exercising death penalty whereas 19 states have banned the exercise. While some states are contemplating whether they should away with death penalty, others are adamant they will not bow out. As such, American people are divided on whether they should support it or not with a few undecided. In this paper I will look at the reasons why I feel it's not justified for any state in North America to practice this form of sentencing. To begin with, not every inmate in a prison is guilty of the crimes he was accused of and ultimately convicted by the court. Many people are behind bars spending years as prisoners as they serve their sentences for the crimes they never committed. If a state decides to execute the wrongly convicted person then several months later new information or evidence arises the deceased wasn't involved in the crimes he was charged with; isn't it right to say the state shed an innocent blood? The deceased's family will go through psychological turmoil fully aware the state killed an innocent man. It would be better if the person was sentenced to life imprisonment. When the state receives new information the imprisoned person didn't commit the crime, then they would release him with apology and compensate him. Furthermore, there is no substantive evidence which firmly shows death penalty deters people from committing crimes. Criminals always have a systematic thought pattern they will never be

Get more content

Argumentative Essay On The Death Penalty

The Death Penalty has a powerful meaning to it; it's not just a punishment for those criminals who commit a horrific crime. The Death Penalty offers the execution, gas chamber, lethal injection, hanging, and firing squad. The capital punishment is a topic that can cause arguments because some say it helps and some say it cannot help in anyway. The death penalty has saved lives after an execution, but it has caused many issues for families.

The Death Penalty was established "far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes" ("History"). It was also apart of the "Fourteen Century B.C.'s Hittite Code, in the Seventh Century B.C.'s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C.'s Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets" ("History"). The Death Penalty was carried out if it was drowning, crucifixion, burning while being alive, impalement, and beating to death. As the time went on by the Eighteen Century A.D. a man named William the Conqueror would not allow people to be hung unless it was a murder case. As the years carried on in 1608 Caption George Kendall was the first man who got executed while being record in his colony. Jane Champion was the first woman who got executed in her colony in 1632. The Death Penalty all started and it did minimize crimes stated in the early 1800.

Furthermore, the Death Penalty is only an execution for

Get more content

There are many reasons to both support and oppose the death penalty. Many people can feel very strongly about whether or not they approve of this method of punishment. I feel that the death penalty is wrong, and I believe that there is much support to back this up. I believe that the death penalty is wrong because it is not an effective deterrent, racially and economically bias, unreliable, expensive, and morally wrong of society. One argument from death penalty supporters is that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to prevent other people from committing murders. It is the belief that people will think out the consequences of their actions before murdering, and consider the...show more content... There are many variables that go into deciding if a person will or will not get the death penalty. I feel that there are too many bias and variables to say that the penalty is dealt out fairly. The people who are up for capital punishment and cannot afford their ownattorney are assigned one by the state, which may be of much lower effectiveness than one could afford with much financial backing. According to the Michigan State webpage: "Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 158 black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 11 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a black victim". This is a clear indication that the penalty is racially bias.

The taking of a person's life is unreliable and once a mistake is made, nothing can be done to make up for it, because you have taken the person's life. Current statistics show that for every 7 people executed one has been released from death row. One in seven does not sound like never good consistency to me, and how many of the 6 still executed could still be innocent? I feel that the death of innocents cannot be justified by the death penalty. A recent study at Columbia University found that two thirds of capital cases had serious errors in them, two thirds does not sound like a very consistent number that I would

Get more content

Arguments Against The Death Penalty

Abstract

The death penalty has been a controversial issue for many years. Those who support the death penalty find it to be a fitting form of punishment for criminal actions. Others suggest that the death penalty is an inhumane practice, even towards criminals. Over the years, it is clear that there are some fatal flaws in how the death penalty operates. Too often in the past has the death penalty fallen victim to courtroom biases. Furthermore, the death penalty is an incredibly expensive and time–consuming process. However, the determining factor of whether the death penalty can be considered justice or not depends primarily on how it affects the overall crime rate. In light of this, William Tucker– the American Spectator's New York correspondent and CEO of TheElevator.com– and Eric M. Freedman – a professor at Hofstra University School of Law – present evidence of the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of the death penalty system.

The Value of a Criminal Life The controversy over the death penalty has plagued the world for years. Individuals such as William Tucker– The American Spectator's New York correspondent and CEO of TheElevator.com– believe that the death penalty reduces crime. Meanwhile, those who oppose the death penalty, such as Eric M. Freedman– a professor at Hofstra University School of Law – argue that it is unneeded.

Freedman's article The Case Against the Death Penalty and Tucker's article Why the Death Penalty Works reflect why

Persuasive Speech: Why I Believe the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished Hello, everyone. My name is Devlin O'Connell and I am going to be speaking to you today about why I believe the death penalty should be abolished. There are three factors that I base this argument off which surround ethics, efficiency, and expenditure. In relationship to ethics, I would like to begin with a quote by human rights activist, Desmond Tutu, "To take a life when a life has been lost is revenge, not justice." Capital Punishment, also known as the Death Penalty, is described as a government practice where a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for crimes such as murder, treason, espionage, and genocide. While it may seem unlikely that many people would be convicted of a few of the latter crimes, there were nearly 3,000 people on death row in the last year. Of those 3,000 people, 117 were found to be innocent. It is predicted that at least 3% more of those sentenced would have been exonerated with enough time and resources. Let that sink in. An untold number of innocent people have been executed. As it is, many relatives of victims have said that they do not wish for their relative's killer to be put to death. Circling back to Tutu's quote, the government is not providing these families with justice – but with revenge. We are "perpetuating a cycle of violence unworthy of a civilized society," to quote Bernice King, "retribution cannot light the way to the genuine healing that 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

Anti–Death Penalty

Arguments Against The Death Penalty

One of the most heavily discussed topics today is the death penalty. On one side of the spectrum, many argue that death is the only form of justice for the most heinous crimes. On the other, many argue that it is a pointless waste of time. Recent studies have supported the latter argument. In 2011, states without the death penalty have had 18% less murder rates than states that do enforce it. For the ten years prior, the murder rates in the state without the death penalty have been consistently lower and even, at times, the murder rate in those states have been lower than average ("Deterrence: States Without the Death"). Furthermore, "In New Mexico, according to the legislative finance committee a death penalty case costs approximately $20–25,000, compared to $7–8,000 for a non–death penalty murder case" (de Leon). From a monetary front, the death penalty has been shown to cost more on average than a regular life sentence. Money is being wasted on a service that harms an individual. The death penalty is not an effective form of deterrence because studies have shown that states with the death penalty have higher crime rates, and it provides no form of justice to anyone.

The death penalty is highly flawed in its form of justice. Many innocent people are sent to death row, along with the guilty. As a result, an innocent person ends up paying the price of his life for a crime that he did not commit. As many as twenty five people were exonerated from death in the state of Florida alone ("Innocence and the Death Penalty"). Twenty five lives almost lost is no form of justice. There are approximately 3.03 exonerations per year in the U.S. ("Innocence and the Death Penalty"). And that is not even counting for the amount of people executed despite there being some doubt to their guilt. In 2004, Cameron Willingham was executed for the deaths of three children in a house fire. After examining the evidence presented against the defendant, four national arson experts have said that the case against him was highly flawed and the fire may have been accidental ("Executed But Possibly Innocent"). This is not an isolated case; many people who were executed were either later proven innocent or there is Get more content

Against the Death Penalty "Murder is wrong" ("Capital Punishment"). We've been taught this indisputable truth since childhood. The death penalty is defined as one human taking the life of another. Coincidentally, that is a classification of murder. There are as many as thirty–six states with the death penalty, and it's essential that they change it. The United States needs the death penalty abolished because it is filled with flaws, cruel and immoral, and is an ineffective means of deterrent for crime. I understand why you would want to have the death penalty in effect. You probably think that it will be cheaper to execute people instead of paying taxes for them in jail. There is also a probability that you think that you will...show more content...

Another flaw is it is morally wrong. No matter how people sugar–coat it, murder is murder, in the name of justice or in vengeance it is morally wrong. Everyone deserves to live, no matter their circumstances are. Federal states should not be allowed to decide who lives and who dies, especially in a country such as the United States, which prides its self on freedom ("Top Ten"). Moreover, the death penalty is applied at random ("Facts"). "The death penalty is a lethal lottery: of the 15,000 to 17,000 homicides committed every year in the United States, approximately 120 people are sentenced to death, less than 1%" ("Facts"). Many criminals have committed the same crimes, but few have been sentenced to death for their crimes. In Addition, there is a chance mentally ill citizens could be convicted to death ("Facts"). According to Amnesty International and the National Association on Mental Illness, One out of every ten persons who has been executed in the United States since 1977 is mentally ill. "Many mentally ill defendants are unable to participate in their trials in any meaningful way and appear unengaged, cold, and unfeeling before the jury" ("Facts"). Many mentally ill defendants have been drugged against their will in order for them to be competent enough to be executed ("Facts"). Some states still haven't put a ban on executing mentally ill people such as Organ, although the United States Supreme Court has declared that Get more content

I Am Against the Death Penalty

The death penalty is the worst that can happen to a criminal if he is tried for murder, treason, or airplane hijacking. This is a very touchy subject for politicians also. Many politicians will not even speak about it for fear of looking too soft on crime, or, if they are in favor of it they will look too barbaric and uncivilized. A recent poll shows that theAmerican population is split nearly half–and–half on the topic. In the poll, 41% preferred the death penalty, 44% were against it and 15% were unsure (Death Penalty Info). Of the fifty states, thirty–eight states use the death penalty plus the U.S. Government and Military (Death Penalty Info). Twelve states plus the District of Columbia do not...show more content... There are many instances where the criminal has needed more than one jolt of electricity in order to kill the person. In between each time they send the electricity the body needs time to cool down before the physicians could check to see if the condemned person still was still alive. Lethal injections can also have problems as shown by the death of Raymond Landrey. ?Pronounced dead 40 minutes after being strapped to the execution gurney and 24 minutes after the drugs first started flowing into his arms. Two minutes into the execution, the syringe came out of Landry's vein, spraying the chemicals across the room towards witnesses. The execution team had to reinsert the catheter into the vein. The curtain was closed for 14 minutes so witnesses could not observe the intermission.? There have been accounts where witnesses have fainted, and suffered from insomnia after viewing an execution that went wrong.

One of the prime reasons that people support capital punishment is because of the deterrence factor involved with the death penalty. Four authors looked into the deterrence factor of capital punishment in Texas and their findings were very intriguing. The authors examined the patterns of executions and murders and found that there was no deterrent effect (Death Penalty Info). This also was true in Oklahoma. The author William Baily researched the

Human rights are fundamental rights which every human being is entitled to just because they are human.

The death penalty is the ultimate, irreversible denial of human rights. It is the cold blooded killing of a human being in the name of 'justice'. In 1948, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; in Articles 3 and 5 it states that "no one shall be subjected to cruel or degrading punishment and everyone has the right to life and liberty". The death penalty violates both of these fundamental rights.

The United Nations Rights Commission (UNHRC) has passed a resolution calling for all nations that continue executions, to restrict the number of ...show more content...

They are:

– The Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at abolition of the death penalty, which has now been ratified by 53 states. Nine other states have signed the Protocol, indicating their intention to become parties to it at a later date;

– Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning the abolition of the death penalty, which has now been ratified by 44 European states and signed by one other; and the

– Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty, which has been ratified by eight states.

Protocol No. 6 concerns the abolition of the death penalty in peacetime, whereas the other two protocols provide for the total abolition of the death penalty but allow States wishing to do so to keep the death penalty in wartime.

A recent study found African American defendants were almost 4 times more likely to receive the death penalty than people of other origins who

committed similar crimes. This inequality breaches Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, "All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law". In the

Should the United States stop using the death penalty?

The use of the capital punishment or the "death" penalty should not stop being used in the U.S. or declared as cruel or unusual punishment. In many cases people slaughter multiple people without flinching and go on with their day should these people be allowed to live anymore ask the families of those murdered people. What do you think they would tell you? Some people say that we are getting fewer and fewer use of the death penalty so it should be abolished. If it is being used so little these days doesn't it mean that it's working punishment isn't only used to punish those guilty but to set an example for those thinking of committing a similar crime. "Last year the U.S. executed 39 people fewer than the year before."(What it means if the death penalty is dying,Richard Dieter) Crimes such as rape, torture, treason,kidnapping, murder, larceny, and perjury would have anarchy throughout the community if not acted on...show more content...

In saying this it costs less money than to house feed and possibly treat medical conditions of criminals i'm not saying that it's a scapegoat for saving money to not let them live. Ask the families of those lost of the Boston Marathon incident do those who did this horrible act be allowed to be fed better than children at our own public schools and a roof over their head when thousands of people in the U.S. are homeless. There are cases in which using the death penalty is deemed unconstitutional which supports people arguments against it but it does not apply for all cases. On the other hand other cases in which it is not used when it should be only exposes the corruption of our seemingly perfect just system. The death penalty should not be taken away and permanently stated as cruel and unusual

Get more content

Argument Against The Death Penalty Essay

In 1992, 17 year old Johnny Frank Garrett was put to death for confessing to raping and murdering a 72–year old nun. A crime as heinous as this certainly deserves the death penalty as a punishment right? The only problem is that Garrett didn't do it. Garrett was in fact, a mentally ill man who suffered severe childhood trauma, significant brain damage and multiple personality disorder. His mental instability and repeated police interrogation are only things that caused him to confess to killing the nun. Shortly after the confession, a psychologist declared him mentally unfit to admit to such a thing, and Garrett would proclaim his innocence right up until he was executed by the state of Texas who had conveniently ignored the psychologist's...show more content...

The different drastically different sentences for two people found guilty of the exact same crime is conclusive proof that something is flawed in the justice system and it needs to change, and one of those changes has to be the abolition of the death penalty. If Garrett had been sparred, like he should have been, he would still be around today and able to get the mental help he needed to overcome his mental handicaps and make something of himself.

Garrett's case is certainly not unique either. Over the years, at least hundreds of other people have been put to death for crimes they did not commit, and the recorded cases are only the ones we know about. Common sense dictates that there are probably many more innocent people that have been executed and evidence proving them innocent has yet to be discovered. Knowing that we put innocent people to death is only one of the many reasons that the death penalty needs to be abolished. Another reason that the death penalty needs to be abolished is that when we enact this penalty, we cease to view criminals as humans, and begin viewing them as sub–humans who are no deserving of the same rights that the rest of us enjoy. The United States' Constitution itself states that all of us, even the lowest criminal is deserving of basic human dignity and basic rights. One of those rights is the right to life. When we take someone's right to life away from them, they die as something less than human in our

Cinthia Pierce

J. Polanowski

Philosophy 1111

21 October 2015

Death Penalty

Are you for or against the death penalty? Do you even know what the death penalty is? The Death Penalty is when a person is charged for a crime and receives punishment such as execution, and is put on death row. It has been a back and forth argument over decades on rather or not we should instill the death penalty. A common belief among people is, if someone commitsmurder, then they need to be put on death row, but if someone commits a crime for stealing jewelry, they don't need to be put on death row. I believe there should be no death penalty due to wrongly accused, mental illness, and deterrence; also I will comment on other arguments as well. Even though most people, like the victims' family will argue for the death penalty, there will be others who will argue against the death penalty. Whenever a defendant has been wrongly accused, it gives them a bad reputation. Also, if one is accused but actually innocent, then the person who was running the case could and should get in trouble. The police and investigators might have missed steps, didn't thoroughly think the evidence through or obtained weak evidence. In most cases, the criminal is examined for a mental illness and if they are positive then their lawyer argues for them. I don't believe one with a mental illness should be put away in prison or be executed because they may not know what they did wrong. Deterrence is basically whenever you try

Get more content

Life is sacred. This is an ideal that the majority of people can agree upon to a certain extent. For this reason taking the life of another has always been considered the most deplorable of crimes, one worthy of the harshest available punishment. Thus arises one of the great moral dilemmas of our time. Should taking the life of one who has taken the life of others be considered an available punishment? Is a murderer's life any less sacred than the victim's is? Can capital punishment, the death penalty, execution, legal murder, or whatever a societywishes to call it, be morally justifiable? The underlying question in this issue is if any kind of killing, regardless of reason, can be accepted. In this...show more content... Today our society is assaulted with a barrage of violent images, whether fictional or not. People no longer think twice when they see a character die in a movie or a bullet riddled high–schooler jump out of a second story window. The concept of human life has completely lost its meaning. Capital punishment contributes to this problem. A convict is not thought of as a person. All humanity associated with them is removed. This rationalization is required in order have a society where capital punishment is legal. If a society removes humanity from convicts, characters in movies, or people on the 6 o'clock news it will begin to remove humanity from people encountered in every day life.

With time violence may become such a commonplace that even seemingly sane people will see no problem murdering a store clerk, opening fire on someone that cut them off on the highway, or killing a disobedient child. "A society that chooses violent death as a solution to a social problem gives official sanction to a climate of violence." (Prejean, 57)

The next argument supporting the immorality of capital punishment is that the reality of it is hidden. The majority of Americans support the death penalty, yet a very small minority of them has actually witnessed an execution. Also, very few Americans have known an executed criminal.

These two facts contribute to the entire rationalization process. No matter how anyone looks at it, no one can deny the fact

Argument Against the Death Penalty