ipl-logo

Should Capital Punishment Be Banned

1192 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The capital punishment debate in america

Whether the death penalty should be banned for all crimes punishable by law or it ought to exist for certain felonies has been a highly controversial issue since the beginning of the 18th century AD with the rise of the abolitionist movement, the latter being strongly influenced by the enlightenment era and especially the works of Montesquieu and Voltaire. Yet, according to historic evidence, capital penalty as a punishment imposed by a state dates back to the 18th B.C, when King Hammurabi established it for 25 crimes in Babylon. We can also notice that the death penalty was enforced in many of the World’s greatest and most influential empires, such as the Roman Empire. However, as it was mentioned above, no one dared to question the …show more content…

If a potential offender realizes the fact that he will be sentenced to death, should he commit any hideous crime such as rape or premeditated murder, chances are that the instinct of survival that exists in every human will kick in; this combined with the fear of him being executed will deter him from actually committing such crime. One of the main concrete evidence to support this opinion was presented by Isaac Ehrlich in 1973. Using his innovative analysis, the results indicated that for every criminal executed, seven lives were saved because other to-be criminals were deterred from committing homicide. To make sure his results were undoubtedly correct, Ehrlich did follow-up studies, only to reconfirm his conclusions once more. Another objection raised by the opposition regarding this topic is that capital punishment will safeguard society. Many people in today’s society firmly believe that a criminal who has expressed violent behavior before, is more than likely to do such a thing again. Furthermore, they often argue that in the same way robbers are sentenced to jail in order to make sure that they will not commit the same crime at least for they time of their sentence, murderers should be punished with death, both for the reasons aforementioned and due to the fact that they will not be able to harm anybody else, in or out of prison. Finally, those opposed to the banning of capital punishment are of the opinion that by executing one that has committed a heinous crime will neither bring back the person murdered nor cure the one who was physically and emotionally scarred for life but it will undoubtedly provide a sense of justice to those who suffered as a consequence of the

Show More
Related
1325 Words | 6 Pages

The death penalty on the other hand would have been effective if the overall public minded to consider it a system for ending criminal acts. While a monstrous number would ensure the nonattendance of the death penalty in their real system, the wrongdoing rate continues going higher for countries that still practice the death penalty. Regardless, there is lacking accurate data to exhibit that death penalty has been convincing similarly as maintaining a strategic distance from criminal acts. It infers

Read More
1997 Words | 8 Pages

While many opponents argue the economics of the issue, they fail to acknowledge that the main goals of punishment are to correct behavior that is deviant from the law and to prevent similar incidences from occurring. Without capital punishment, the culprits would not have to confront the potential of death, meaning that the marginal cost of violent crime would be diminished. Therefore, capital punishment is an effective method to deter

Read More
1161 Words | 5 Pages

He suggests that other social policies also lead to the death of innocent individuals, but they are not banned. The author presents deductive arguments to support his position, including the idea that murderers who are not executed have the potential to harm more innocent people. He believes that opponents of capital punishment should acknowledge their responsibility for innocent lives lost due to murderers who were not executed. Prager concludes that capital punishment is necessary to protect innocent lives. Opponents should confront their responsibility for every innocent already murdered and yet to be murdered by murderers who should have been

Read More
744 Words | 3 Pages

Capital punishment has long been a heavily debated issue. In his article, “The Rescue Defence of Capital Punishment,” author Steve Aspenson make a moral argument in favor of capital punishment on the grounds that that is the only way to bring about justice and “rescue” murder victims. Aspenson argues as follows: 1. We have a general, prima facie duty to rescue victims from increasing harm. 2.

Read More
2229 Words | 9 Pages

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, and the debate about its abolition is the largest point of the essay written by Steve Earle, titled "A Death in Texas”. This form of punishment should be abolished for 3 reasons; First, It does not seem to have a direct effect on deterring murder rates, It has negative effects on society, and is inconsistent with American ideals. To begin, the death penalty is unnecessary since it is ineffective at deterring rates of murder. In fact, 88% of the country's top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, according to the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. In opposition, supporters may argue that it may indeed help to deter murder rates as they have

Read More
1646 Words | 7 Pages

The topic of capital punishment presents a test of values. The arguments in support of and opposition to the death penalty are complex. In the end, this is a question of an individual’s values and morals. The topic requires careful thought to reach a reasoned position. Both sides of the argument are defensible.

Read More
1021 Words | 5 Pages

In recent years, anti-death penalty propagandists have succeeded in stoking the fear that capital punishment is being carelessly meted out. Ironically, Of the 875 prisoners executed in the United States in modern times, not one has been retroactively proved innocent. The benefits of a legal system in which judges and juries have the option of sentencing the cruelest or coldest murderers to death far outweigh the potential risk of executing an innocent person. First and foremost, the death penalty makes it possible for justice to be done to those who commit the worst of all crimes. The execution of a murderer sends a powerful moral message: that the innocent life he took was so precious, and the crime he committed so horrific, that he forfeits

Read More
1145 Words | 5 Pages

This article discusses individual cases and crimes and gives analysis of the arguments made against death penalty in real world. Firstly it discusses the deterrence argument while going through a number of cases. The conclusion is that it has no effect on reducing homicides but ironically it breeds violence as in some cases offenders committed a capital crime in a territory where execution still prevails while they could have easily avoided it. Second thing discussed is the cost, the research in article shows that it costs significantly more money to put a convict to death than to incarcerate him for life in a prison. Moreover it is shown that in many cases criminals are executed while there are reasonable doubts in their convictions and some have avoided execution by just a few hours before being exonerated.

Read More
1246 Words | 5 Pages

If not guns, it's knives. If not knives, it's clubs. If not clubs, what's next? As much as we would like to believe we live in a perfectly sound world, the reality is, the world which we live will always have crime. Contrary to popular belief, gun crime is not the only kind of crime there is.

Read More
1016 Words | 5 Pages

If the cold-blooded killing of thousands does not lower premeditated murder, there is really no point (because let 's face it, the saying “eye for an eye” is childish and socially unacceptable). This same conclusion was agreed upon in a recent poll by almost 90% of the world’s criminological societies (Facts About the Death Penalty). However in all honesty, the argument against the death penalty doesn’t just stop at its redundancy, but also its

Read More
767 Words | 4 Pages

Why death penalty must end ‘’An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind,’’ said Mahatma Gandhi. The execution of someone who has possibly done a crime is an inhuman act. Death penalty is hypocritical and flawed. If killing is wrong, why do we kill when a criminal has done the crime of killing someone? In this essay, I will write why death penalty should end by writing about the violation of human rights, execution of innocent people, the fact that it does not deter crime and money.

Read More
961 Words | 4 Pages

Each year in many countries around the world people are murdered in the name of “justice”. But can justice really include a sanitised form of revenge? Many people are for the death penalty regardless of what it actually is. A major way that the death penalty is flawed is shown in the amount of innocent people who are sentenced to death.

Read More
1267 Words | 6 Pages

The Death Penalty, loss of life due to previous crimes and actions, is believed by some to be extremely costly, inhumane, and cruel unlike some others whom believe it is just, right, and provides closure. The Death Penalty is not a quick and easy process. Most who get sentenced to deaths row wait years for their ultimate punishment of death. Some believe that it is not right to punish and kill a human for actions they have done because, they believe that the inmate should have another chance. Then others believe that it is right to punish someone for their actions especially if their actions involve killing another or multiple humans.

Read More
1320 Words | 6 Pages

Should Death Penalty be abolished? Over decades people have been arguing about whether the death penalty should be abolished or not if death is morally right or cruel and unusual penalty. Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is a government-sanctioned practice whereby a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for crime. Is it right to see people dying even though it’s under the act of government punishment?

Read More
1048 Words | 5 Pages

In the case of the death penalty, it has the added bonus in guaranteeing that the person would not offend again. Supporters of harsh punishments argue that the would-be criminal would consider the costs versus the benefits of committing a crime. If the costs outweigh the benefits, then it is assumed that he would stop what he is doing, effectively ‘deterred’. Furthermore, the usage of harsh punishments to effectively deter crime is ethically justified as it prevents more people from falling victim to crime. However it is extremely difficult to judge a punishment’s effectiveness based on its deterrence effect, consequently we must consider other variables that would entail a person to commit a crime.

Read More

More about Should Capital Punishment Be Banned

Related Topics

Open Document