Skip Nav

Essay on the Death Penalty

Research Paper on Death Penalty

❶These 28 procedures represent the broad categories of defendant and inmate protections.

41 comments

The problem of flawed executions
Client testimonials
You May Also Like

Use citation generating tools, such as EasyBib. Introduction Starting Sentence Option 1: You cannot rehabilitate some people and these people should be put to death. If the person is killed, they cannot fix their ways. Every human deserves the chance at life, no matter what they have done and we cannot take that right away.

First Claim Starting Sentence Option 1: Example Claims for Death Penalty Criminals think twice before committing a crime that could get them a death sentence, which deters some crime and makes our country safer. There is no cut and dried proof that an innocent man has ever been executed.

Justice must be carried out and in some cases, that requires a death sentence for the person who has committed an atrocious crime.

Example Claims Against Death Penalty Mistakes are made and innocent people have been sentenced to death. More than death row inmates have been exonerated since It is immoral to have someone commit murder in order to carry out the death penalty.

After all, the executioner is murdering the inmate. The death penalty is motivated by the need for revenge, which is not necessarily justice. As argued by an Ultius essay writer , the death penalty should be abolished for a number of tangible reasons.

Within the world of justice there is perhaps no area as highly contested as that of capital punishment. In the modern era, the question has again and again been raised: Although the use of capital punishment is never taken lightly, our society is moving towards a time and place where it is no longer an acceptable form of punishment. The use of the death penalty should be abolished from the justice system for three major reasons.

For these reasons, the death penalty should be abolished. The United States, as one of the most developed nations in the world, should follow the trend that has been set by many other developed nations of the world and put to rest this uncivilized, childish punishment that follows the mentality of an eye for an eye. When one takes a look at whether or not the death penalty should be permissible from a moral standpoint, the answer is clearly to abolish it.

Humanity must show that it has moved past this primitive way of thinking and be willing to act in a civilized manner when it comes to criminal sentencing even if the accused is an individual that has be linked to truly hiatus crimes.

The rationale behind the death penalty does not ever fit a crime. Even if an individual is not capable of being rehabilitated, no one should have the right to sentence someone else to death. Under the current system of justice, the state can set, as a punishment, an action that has been considered to the worst sort of crime that a person can commit. This seems to be completely illogical and contradictory.

How can anyone possibly justify carrying out an action that is unanimously agreed upon being wrong? The answer is no one; therefore the death penalty does not morally seem permissible. From a moral standpoint, the types of people that receive the death penalty are usually not physically or mentally fit to receive the punishment.

One such group that has suffered from their mental disabilities are the mentally retarded. One of the reasons behind this high percentage is linked to the idea that people that are mentally retarded have a high desire to please figures of authority.

Taking that into consideration, it seems that one cannot in good judgment state that individuals that are in this group can reasonably be able to receive the death penalty considering their mental states.

One of the other most controversial aspects of the death penalty comes in the form of flawed executions. However, for each method that has been used as a means to attempt to execute criminals, there have been flawed attempts that have caused severe pain and suffering for those that have had to endure the process.

The electric chair has reported several instances where multiple attempts were made to execute a criminal before the act was actually carried out such as with the execution of John Louis Evans III Haines.

Even the more modern means of execution have their flawed attempts such as with lethal injection. The execution of Stephen McCoy in May of is a prime example of this. According to witnesses, McCoy reacted violently to the drugs administered to him and was seen gagging, violently coughing, and undergoing body contortions Haines.

Examples like this show that the systems that we have in place have serious flaws in them. From a moral standpoint, one cannot willing and with a clear conscious sentence an individual to an execution that may be cruel and unusual as that violates the Bill of Rights, which the judicial branch is charged with ensuring is never violated.

A second argument that is given against the use of the death penalty is that it does not actually deter anyone from committing the crimes that result in receiving the punishment. The basic argument that is made by individuals that support this form of punishment is that it makes an example out of those that commit these types of crimes and, therefore, will strike fear into the hearts of those that are thinking about attempting to commit the same sort of crime resulting in them rethinking their actions.

Unfortunately, this rational is taken with flawed logic. Those that receive the death penalty have usually committed the most gruesome, violent sorts of crimes that usually include one or more murders. Further, those that commit these sorts of crimes are usually mentally unstable. These are the types of individuals that have no regard for the safety of themselves or that of others, and will act out their plans of actions regardless of what has happened in the past or present.

Not surprisingly, death penalty opponents believe that LWOP is more severe than the death penalty. This absurd belief, which has now become the newest mantra of opponents, is contradicted by all other surveyed groups, including prisoners B. Death Penalty opponents claim that there is a "brutalization effect" with executions, meaning, that executions show a low regard for human life and do, thereby, cause an increase in the murder rate.

If the brutalization effect is real, it would be the only known legal sanction to cause an increase in wrongful behavior. Why would criminals become more likely to engage in illegal activities because the punishments for those activities become more severe?

Have dramatic increases in the rates of incarceration resulted in dramatic increases in kidnappings? Further denouncing the brutalization effect is the fact that many respected studies show that executions do produce an individual and a general deterrent effect. And, there is, of course, common sense. There are four rational conclusions one can make regarding general, or systemic, deterrence.

Regarding deterrence, it is necessary to err on the side of saving innocent life and not to err on the side of sacrificing innocent life. These are moral imperatives. There are two mistakes we can make with those convicted of violent crimes. First, we can misjudge their character and keep them incarcerated too long, when they could have become constructive free persons, repaying even more their debt to society and to their victim s. Secondly, we can misjudge their character and release them too soon, so that they further destroy the lives of our children, our brothers and sisters, our spouses and our parents, creating additional economic, physical, emotional and spiritual loss.

For far too long, the U. Not in our name. And, we must always err on the side of caution and compassion for those not yet harmed. The most conclusive evidence that criminals fear the death penalty more than life without parole is provided by convicted capital murderers and their attorneys. When the death penalty becomes real, murderers fear it the most.

While it is obvious that the fear of execution did not deter those murderers from committing a capital crime, it is also clear that such fear is reduced because executions are neither swift nor sure in the U. However, as the probability of that punishment rises for those murderers, even they show a great fear of the death penalty.

Although you will never deter all murderers, the effect of deterrence will rise as the probability of executions rise. Because, as the probability of executions rises, the fear of that punishment will also rise. And, that which we fear the most deters the most. Indeed, prisoners rate the death penalty as the most feared punishment, much more so than life without parole. Opponents proclaim that the death penalty is a barbaric act so dreadful in its implications that we can hardly bear to contemplate the horrors of its terrible character.

That proposition is, of course, absurd on the face of it Revised from M. Stanton Evans, Clear and Present Danger. Assume that all murderers would instantly die upon murdering. Murderers would then kill only if they wished to die themselves.

Therefore, if a swift and sure death penalty was universally applied to our worst criminals, it is logically conclusive that the death penalty would be a significant deterrent and that many innocent lives would be saved. In fact, swift and sure executions do result in deterrence: A The greater the publicity surrounding executions, the greater the deterrent effect.

American Journal of Sociology, 86;, Steven Stack, Wayne St. The State of Delaware has the highest execution rate per capita and low homicide rates. Indeed, one study showed that criminals, by a 5: Indeed, prisoners rate the death penalty as a much more severe penalty than they do life without parole B. While it is difficult to prove a negative, i. Extensive worldwide research on individual deterrence would, undoubtedly, reveal significant general deterrent effect. Regarding the deterrent affect of the death penalty, poet Hyam Barshay made the following observation, "The death penalty is a warning, just like a lighthouse throwing beams out to sea.

We hear about shipwrecks, but we do not hear about the ships the lighthouse guides safely on their way. We do not have proof of the number of ships it saves, but we do not tear the lighthouse down. See works by Profs. Although these studies have been produced by respected social scientists, there are also studies which show no general deterrent effect. Indeed, with the complexity of these studies and with the number of variables required to accurately measure the general deterrent effect of executions on murder rates, it is arguable if there ever will be a statistical consensus with general deterrence studies.

With so few executions and so many murders, the general deterrent effect may remain statistically elusive. However, it is that very inconclusive nature of general deterrence which provides the two reasons which require executions.

First, we must choose to use executions because they may save innocent life. Whereas, if we choose not to use executions and there is a general deterrent effect, we would be sacrificing innocent lives. Therefore, a moral imperative exists to choose executions see B. Secondly, the individual deterrent effect would not exist but for the presence of general deterrence. And because the individual deterrent effect is proven and cannot be contradicted, we know that the general deterrent effect must exist, even though its existence may remain inconclusive by statistical analysis.

Opponents state that if the death penalty was a deterrent then states that have the death penalty would have a reduced homicide rate. Delaware, which executes more murderers per capita than any other state in the U. Furthermore, general or systemic deterrence is not necessarily measured by low or reduced homicide rates, but by rates that are lower than they otherwise would be if the death penalty was not present.

Additionally, some countries, such as Saudi Arabia, have swift and sure executions and very low violent crime rates. It is not surprising that the U. While most in the U. The highest murder rate in Houston Harris County , Texas occurred in , with murders. Texas resumed executions in Sister Helen Prejean Dead Man Walking joins this hideous chorus, proclaiming that " m iddle-class and upper middle-class white people Clearly, these statements reveal only their prejudice.

And there is, of course, no excuse for anyone that commits capital murder. Stevenson and Prejean do hereby reflect either their unbelievable ignorance or their willful and foul deception. Based on their active involvement in the death penalty debate, both Stevenson and Prejean should must? In fact, statistics indicate that wealthy capital murderers may be more likely to be executed. Furthermore, whites who kill whites are slightly more likely to be on death row than blacks who kill whites.

Finally, whites who kill blacks are slightly more likely to be on death row than blacks who kill whites. Since , there is absolutely no credible evidence to support any other conclusion. Could it be that we just hate white murderers more?

Or that we only care about white capital murder victims? Or should we conclude that the "system" focuses its benevolence toward black murderers, but its racism against black victims? Such perverse conclusions, by opponents, are expected and serve only to further undermine their quickly eroding credibility. Successful capital prosecutions have nothing to do with the race of the victim or of the defendant and everything to do with the nature of the crimes.

The most thorough evaluation of this subject was presented in McCleskey v. Could it be that whites are, overwhelmingly, the victims in death row cases because whites are, overwhelmingly, the victims in capital crimes? What is the ratio of white to black victims under the relevant, but non-homicide circumstances, which, when combined with homicide, become capital crimes?

A The most relevant economic violent crime is robbery with injury, which shows a 4: E In death penalty states, police victim murders are capital crimes.

Death Penalty Persuasive Essay

Main Topics

Privacy Policy

This assignment instructed students to write a persuasive essay which argues for a specific viewpoint or a specific action to be taken on a societal issue. I argued for a specific stance to be taken on the issue of the death penalty. The audience for this essay is the opinion section of the.

Privacy FAQs

The Death Penalty - The death penalty continues to be an issue of controversy and is an issue that will be debated in the United States for many years to come.

About Our Ads

This is a very long document. Please allow the page to load completely. DEATH PENALTY AND SENTENCING INFORMATION In the United States 10/1/ There are vast differences in the way people view the death penalty. Some oppose it and some agree with it. There have been many studies trying to prove or.

Cookie Info

English Task –Argumentative Essay The Death Penalty The argument of whether the death penalty is effective is an age-old and contentious issue. Keywords: death penalty debate, death penalty argument. The death penalty is the ultimate punishment. There is no harsher punishment than death itself. Currently fifty-eight nations practice the death penalty. Our nation, the United States of America, is one of the fifty-eight nations that practice the death penalty.