From a utilitarian perspective, the potential deterrent effect of capital punishment is questionable, as research has shown that it does not significantly reduce crime rates (Equal Justice Initiative, 2023). Instead, it perpetuates a cycle of violence and retribution that undermines the ultimate goal of
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
This paper will serve to show that capital punishment is not, in fact, ethically permissible. I will argue this by explaining the government’s duty to its people, and how capital punishment is indeed a violation of these prima facie duties. 1. The government has a duty to protect its people from harm (including murder, abuse of power, etc.). 2.
The US Supreme Court’s decision on the abolition of capital punishment was correct because capital punishment violates the eighth and fourteenth amendments, provides no evidence of deterioration of crime rates, and falls unequally on society. Violates Eighth Amendment:
In his essay, "The Death Penalty," David Bruck hypothesizes that the American people will eventually find that the death penalty is not the best way to punish a convicted murderer. Bruck develops this hypothesis by countering all pro-death penalty arguments with previous cases and specific statistics that apply to the argument. David Bruck's purpose is to persuade the readers to think for themselves on the topic and use what they know as a basis. Bruck uses an educated tone to establish credibility with the reader. He takes apart the views of the local mayor in an attempt to prove anyone wrong who might disagree.
Whether a criminal is guilty of committing murder or any other capital offense, they should all be given the same sentence - life in prison. How is it fair to allow them to voluntarily choose the death penalty over prison? Criminals willingly sought to break the law and should endure the lifelong debt they owe not only to society but to the family of the innocent victims whose lives have been taken. As asserted by Robert Johnson, a professor of justice and law, and Sandra Smith, a professor of legal studies, death by incarceration is a more effective and suitable form of punishment than the death penalty (Cromie and Zott 174). Although some might argue that it is unfair to keep a criminal alive, they fail to understand that the freedom they once had is permanently lost.
The United States remains in the minority of nations in the world that still uses death as penalty for certain crimes. Capital punishment is seen by many as barbaric and against American values, while others see it as a very important tool in fighting violent pre-meditated murder. One of the supporters of the Death penalty was a man named Walter Berns (a professor of American constitutional law and political philosophy.) He wrote clearly about his view on the death penalty in his Crime and Delinquency article, “Defending the Death Penalty.” He argued that the “Opposition to capital punishment is a modern phenomenon, a product of modern sentiment and modern thought” (p. 504) and with the help of historical references and logical reasoning throughout
Death Penalty is a very ominous punishment to discuss. It is probably the most controversial and feared form of punishment in the United States. Many are unaware, but 31 of the 52 states have the Death penalty passes as an acceptable punishment. In the following essay, I will agree and support Stephen Nathanson's statement that "Equality retributivism cannot justify the death penalty. " In the reading, "An Eye for an Eye?", Nathanson gives objections to why equality retributivism is morally acceptable for the death penalty to be legal.
Should America continue to allow the death penalty? This essay will tell you why America should not be continue the death penalty. For starters, the death penalty is punishment by death; usually resulting after a crime that America calls capital crimes or capital offences. There are many of reasons why the death penalty should not be carried out in America or anywhere “Application of the death penalty tends to be arbitrary and capricious; for similar crimes, some are sentenced to death while others are not.”
Annotated Bibliography Draft Student name : Haider Zafaryab Student number: 2360526 Thesis Statement : Capital Punishment is a very controversial topic around the globe. I believe that it does more harm than good and breeds violence in society. Source 1: Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996).
Courts are a major evaluative stage of the criminal justice system and we rely on these courts to determine our outcomes based on the crime that was committed. Today, there is more diversity of leadership in the court system but, race still plays a role in the outcome of the offender. This could range from petty crimes being committed like traffic infractions or facing the death penalty based on the race of the offender or victim. This paper will examine the three types of disparities that cause biased sentencing in the courts. The three types of disparities are race, social class, and gender and these all play a huge factor when making a decision based off an offender.
Deterrence theory states that people follow the law because they are scare of getting caught or being punished. In this article, “The Death Penalty Deters Crime,” David Muhlhausen, expert on criminal justice programs in the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis and a research fellow in empirical policy analysis, confirms the deterrence theory. By means of statistical data and research dating, Muhlhausen contends that the death penalty does deters murder crime which ultimately saves lives. He also believes that executions and murder rates are somehow connected to each other. Even though, some adequate emotional appeals appeared, Muhlhausen’s article failed to prove, logically, the deterrence theory.
Ever since the outset of the American Constitution, capital punishment has existed as a crime sentence in the United States. However, in recent decades, this topic has become highly controversial, as many states have dictated against the death penalty. Although states with this position on capital punishment are increasing, some states, such as Texas, have continued to edict this practice in their provinces. In the State of Texas, the sentence to death upon a person should not be permitted due to the fact it can wrongly convict a person, its court trial is highly expensive, and it brings forth an unjust treatment.
In fact, a study done by the National Research Council, titled Deterrence and the Death Penalty, even went as far as stating that the claims supporting the death penalty are “fundamentally flawed” (2012). What is more important though, is to see if this can be observed in the real world today; and by no surprise, it can. In 2013, the FBI Uniform Crime Report showed that the Southern states had the highest murder rates, and the highest percentage of executions at 80%, whereas the Northeast has the lowest murder rates and only 1% of the year’s executions. So why does the South still have the highest murder rates even though they perform the most executions? One must assume that such extreme practices like the death penalty has to be unnecessary.
In conclusion the idea that the death penalty should be abolished can be supported by many reasons that include extensive evidence. With the death penalty still established we are putting innocent people's lives at risk, spending millions, and continue with racial segregation. The idea that someone's opinion in court can decide the fate of another person is
