...Should the death penalty be used on violent criminals? Did you know that exactly 32 states use the death penalty? 18 states have death penalty bans. The Death Penalty should not be a punishment for justice because it violates the eighth amendment, innocent lives are at risks of death, and we also pay millions for the death penalty just as much as we pay for the criminals to live in the prison. One day there was a man named Nicholas Stokes, he got his car stolen by a woman named Lucy Mistress who murdered her abusive ex-boyfriend. Lucy drove the car to the crime scene and unfortunately for Nicholas he didn’t notice his car was stolen because he was off of work and just so happend to sleep all day. The police got to the crime scene and ran...
Words: 775 - Pages: 4
...(ProQuest Staff) The Death Penalty, “is the process by which convicted criminals are executed by a governing authority” (Issist and Newton). And “It violated the eighth amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment” (ProQuest Staff). The death penalty should be abolished because it is a violation of the Eighth Amendment and often results in the deaths of innocent citizens. The death penalty should be abolished because it violates the 8th amendment. To begin, the death penalty is cruel and unusual and should not be allowed, but only “Eighteen states have abolished the death penalty” (Issitt and Newton). Warner, committed a murder and was given a botched execution. He was, “In a renovated death chamber, the lethal cocktail began flowing into the veins of...
Words: 731 - Pages: 3
...Is the Death Penalty Just and Applied Fairly? Susan Doe PHI 103 Instructor Robert Bass April 15, 2013 Is the Death Penalty Just and Applied Fairly? The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is the punishment of execution, administered to someone convicted of a capital crime; it is the most severe form of corporal punishment. The death penalty in the United States has been an ongoing debate throughout history. Capital punishment has been banned in many countries, except in the United States; there are thirty-three states that currently have the death penalty. According to ProCon.org, the United States has executed 1057 people from 1997 through 2006. There are some that are against the death penalty, they feel that it is unconstitutional and immoral. Then, there are others that have a different feeling towards the death penalty; they feel that the ones that commit serious capital crimes should be punished with their own life. Those that support capital punishment say that it is deterrence and that it wastes money on the ones that are doing life. Those that are against capital punishment say that it is killing innocent people and that it is not saving money, that it costs more to put someone on death row. Is the death penalty just and applied fairly? There is no evidence that supports the death penalty being a deterrent to violent crimes. The death penalty is a waste of taxpayer’s money. There have been many innocent people have been sent to death row. Both...
Words: 2072 - Pages: 9
...Death Penalty By Susan Doe PHI 103 April 15, 2013 Is the Death Penalty Just and Applied Fairly? The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is the punishment of execution, administered to someone convicted of a capital crime; it is the most severe form of corporal punishment. The death penalty in the United States has been an ongoing debate throughout history. Capital punishment has been banned in many countries, except in the United States; there are thirty-three states that currently have the death penalty. According to ProCon.org, the United States has executed 1057 people from 1997 through 2006. There are some that are against the death penalty, they feel that it is unconstitutional and immoral. Then, there are others that have a different feeling towards the death penalty; they feel that the ones that commit serious capital crimes should be punished with their own life. Those that support capital punishment say that it is deterrence and that it wastes money on the ones that are doing life. Those that are against capital punishment say that it is killing innocent people and that it is not saving money, that it costs more to put someone on death row. Is the death penalty just and applied fairly? There is no evidence that supports the death penalty being a deterrent to violent crimes. The death penalty is a waste of taxpayer’s money. There have been many innocent people have been sent to death row. Both sides will be argued to give an unprejudiced look with...
Words: 2064 - Pages: 9
...Deeq Arab July, 22 2008 Eng 102 Tuesday-Thursday 12:30-1:50 Mr. Chris Anderson Death Penalty Death penalty is one of the rules mankind practiced it for long times since the early ages of men there has been the death penalty in one way or another. The death penalty has created a lot of argument between people. In the United States the use of capital punishment was famous in the early 1950s executing nearly 100per year. After the 50s supporter started to weaken and in time it went down and came up. In any issue some people will go for it, some will not. In this case of death penalty some people believe that if you take a life you are a menace to society and should be banished from this earth. On the other hand some believe that life is valuable and no one is applicable to take a life other than the creator of life. The critics of the death penalty say practicing these activities such as the death penalty give respect and harmony to murders who take life by force. After all we are humans and our minds are the mother of different ideas, views and arguments. Is the death penalty just? Pro Supporters say there is no better punishment for a person who takes a life other than the death penalty. Majority of supporters of death penalty relied on Holy Scriptures which most of them state that a human life is worth a human life. that is the right justice. It’s cruel and inhuman practice but the person that commits the murder didn’t think about it when he/she were in charge...
Words: 2236 - Pages: 9
...Capital Punishment: Why the Death Penalty is Morally Permissible Karina Morgan April 13, 2010 Professor Mark Reynolds PHI 206 Sec. 04 Word Count: 1,910 Syllogism for Argument: 1. Every human has a right to life 2. But this right is not absolute because a person’s life can be overridden for good reasons 3. So the right of life does not hold in every situation no matter what 4. One of these situations includes taking the life of another innocent human 5. Therefore, it is morally permissible to set the right to life aside, and use the death penalty, if they took the life of an innocent human. Outline I. The Death Penalty -Thesis- Although all humans have the right to life, there are certain situations that can overrule this right, such as taking the life of an innocent human. Since the right of life does not hold in every situation and if an innocent human’s life is taken, then it is morally permissible to set the right to life aside and use the death penalty on the person who committed murder. II. Pro-Death Penalty A. Retribution a. The death penalty is the best way in order to serve justice to convicted murderers of innocent people. b. The families and friends of victims will feel more secure if justice is served. c. There will be no worry about the murderer being able to commit more murders or to have any chance of receiving parole. B. Deterrence b. If the death penalty is continuously used in...
Words: 2459 - Pages: 10
...the death penalty, for the sake of justice, and to save innocent lives. I think they are right” (Schonebaum 55). The Death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is an act where the state condemns a criminal to death for committing an atrocious crime. The death penalty has been a method of crime deterrence for centuries for most countries, creating fear in the hearts of criminals. However in our modern era the death penalty has been irrelevant and seemingly...
Words: 1599 - Pages: 7
...critics of the death penalty maintain the death penalty is wrong because it is irrevocable. What reply does Reiman offer to this position? A: Reiman’s reply to the viewpoint of the death penalty being irrevocable is such that “it’s not that the death penalty is irrevocable and other punishments are revocable; rather, all punishments are irrevocable though the death penalty is relatively more irrevocable than the rest” (Hinman, 2006, p. 153). In other words, Reiman feels that the death penalty being wrong just because it is irrevocable is too much of a blanket statement that discounts other options, such as the case of prisoners who are put to death but then found innocent and in matters of someone living life in prison then being found innocent. In the case of the former and the latter, money can be given to the ex-prisoner found innocent and that their name can be cleared. With that being said, someone put to death and then being found innocent and an innocent person being set free after a long incarceration are not irrevocable things—time has passed and cannot be returned. Reiman’s reply to these stances is that these situations are very few and far between. In contrast, Reiman explains that “we accept the death of innocents elsewhere...and it is not plausible to think that the execution of a small number of innocent persons is so terrible...especially when every effort is made to make sure that does not occur” (Hinman, p. 153). Therefore, Reiman agrees that the death penalty is...
Words: 286 - Pages: 2
...Should the death penalty be mandatory for people that kill other people PANNASASTRA UNIVERSITY OF CAMBODIA Commitment to excellence Commitment to excellence PROFESSIONAL WRITING HOMEWORK ESSAY Topic Should the Death Penalty Be Mandatory For People That Kill Other People? Submitted to Professor LY Meng Written By NHEN Socheath May 30, 2014 Brainstorming Process Should the death penalty be mandatory for people that kill other people? Proponents Opponent * Guarantee justice for the victims - A life in prison is enough * Decrease Crime Rates - Crime remains the same * An eye for an eye is the solution - give a second chance to change * Killing a murderer is fair - Killing is always wrong * Killing is not cruel - Killing is cruel * Practices sometime go wrong - Risk of taking innocent life * It is morally right and fair - Against religious ethics Proponents Opponent * Guarantee justice for the victims - A life in prison is enough * Decrease Crime Rates - Crime remains the same * An eye for an eye is the solution - give a second chance to change * Killing a murderer is fair - Killing is always wrong * Killing is not cruel - Killing is cruel * Practices sometime go wrong - Risk of taking innocent life * It is morally right and fair - Against religious ethics OUTLINING I. Introduction Thesis Statement: I personally do not agree that death penalty can...
Words: 1535 - Pages: 7
...Sufian Tanveer Death Penalty The death penalty has been around since the beginning of crime and has been reserved for the worst of crimes. Many people believe it’s justified, reasoning that the punishment should fit the crime. However, a large demographic believes it violates the rights of man and is inhumane. The death penalty is a primitive idea and is reminiscent of the uncivilized ideas of the dark ages and is unfitting in the modern world. It has been abolished in 32 states and is likely to rise. It’s morally wrong and violates practically every religion. The premise behind the death penalty is murder for murder. The death penalty should be abolished because 1) it’s a waste of taxpayer funds, 2) innocent people can be wrongly sentenced, 3) and life without parole is more beneficial. Enacting the death penalty actually costs more than having an inmate spend the rest of their life in jail without parole. It’s better to put an existing death row inmate in life without parole because less money is spent and it does not stir up as much commotion on whether it’s lawful or not. The reason why the death penalty costs more than housing an inmate for life is because the appeals. A candidate can appeal on almost any grounds because of how sensitive the death penalty is. If a candidate was only allowed one appeal it would remedy this issue. Millions of dollars is spent on criminals deciding on whether they should live or not. Any money should not be put towards the benefit of...
Words: 707 - Pages: 3
...An issue that has continually created tension in today's society is whether the death penalty serves as a justified and valid form of punishment. Whenever the word "death penalty" comes up, extremists from both sides start yelling out their arguments. One side says deterrence, the other side says there's a potential of executing an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder. Crime is an evident part of society, and everyone is aware that something must be done about it. Most people know the threat of crime to their lives, but the question lies in the methods and action in which it should be dealt with. In several parts of the world, the death penalty has been apportioned to those who have committed a variety of offenses from the time of ancient Babylon to present-day America. The Roman Empire made use of the death penalty liberally, as did the Church of the Middle Ages. As history tells us, capital punishment, whose definition is "the use of death as a legally sanctioned punishment," is an acceptable and efficient means of deterring crime. Today, the death penalty remains an effective method of punishment for murder and other heinous crimes. There is debate over the morals and effectiveness of such a harsh sentence. Most commonly, the death penalty is challenged as a violation of the Eighth Amendment, which says that the U.S. cannot use "cruel and unusual" punishment. Due to the fact that "punishment" is a legal...
Words: 1630 - Pages: 7
...For decades the death penalty has been an emotional and almost unmentionable issue that has affected people in many different ways. Whenever the word "death penalty" comes up, extremists from both sides start yelling out their arguments. One side says deterrence, the other side says there's a potential of executing an innocent person; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder. Regardless of people’s philosophic points of view, it is important to be aware of the facts. This is exactly what I would like to talk about in this essay: the facts regarding this controversial issue. I do not have the answer to this question; I believe both viewpoints have good arguments. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion in this or any other matter, but no one is entitled to his own facts. What is the death penalty? Congress or any state legislature may prescribe the death penalty, also known as capital punishment, for murder and other capital crimes. (Death Penalty: An Overview, 2010) As far back as the Ancient Laws of China, the death penalty has been established as a punishment for crimes. In the 18th Century BC, the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon established the death penalty for twenty five different crimes, although murder was not one of them. The first death sentence historically recorded occurred in 16th Century BC Egypt where the wrongdoer, a member of nobility, was accused of magic, and ordered to take his own life. During this...
Words: 2381 - Pages: 10
...In 1995, Larry Griffin was sentenced to death for the murder of 19 year old Quintin Moss based on only one witness report. Almost 10 years later, new evidence by the NAACP had confirmed that Griffin was not involved in the crime, however, it was too late for he had already been executed. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a sentence of execution for some form of crime such as murder, treason, espionage, war crimes, and large-scale drug trafficking. The death penalty in the United States is extremely flawed; it is applied unfairly and unequally, expensive, ineffectual against deterring crime, puts innocent lives at risk, and largely unethical. Despite the overwhelming evidence against capital punishment, thirty-one US states...
Words: 871 - Pages: 4
...was released he started working out in a local gym with some youth in the community. He was attempting to keep them off the streets and out of prison. The gym Bozella was working out in was later closed down leaving him and the youth no where to go. He now dreams of one day opening his own gym to help the at-risk children. He also dreamed of getting a professional fight. He got his chance to box in a professional fight and he won. The Innocence Project has a hard time freeing the innocent because evidence is often destroyed, eye-witnesses are unreliable, and DNA testing was not always available. After a case is finished and someone is in prison, evidence gets destroyed to make room for more evidence in other cases. This makes it impossible to retrieve to help prove the innocence of some of the wrongfully convicted. Eye-witnesses are often wrong in giving descriptions and choosing out of a line up. They say when an eye-witness identifies the suspect in a line-up where all the people are revealed to the witness at once, the witness is often overwhelmed and chooses the wrong one. The way to solve this problem would be to have the suspects walk out one at a time so the eye-witness can take time to see each one alone. They also suggest that the cop that is in the room with the witness should not be aware of who the suspect is because he can give hint to which one if he knows. I think these should be written into laws to help protect people who have been arrested get a fair trial....
Words: 682 - Pages: 3
...Capital Punishment: Why Death Penalty Is Morally Permissable Capital Punishment: Why the Death Penalty is Morally Permissible Karina Morgan April 13, 2010 Professor Mark Reynolds PHI 206 Sec. 04 Word Count: 1,910 Syllogism for Argument: 1. Every human has a right to life 2. But this right is not absolute because a person’s life can be overridden for good reasons 3. So the right of life does not hold in every situation no matter what 4. One of these situations includes taking the life of another innocent human 5. Therefore, it is morally permissible to set the right to life aside, and use the death penalty, if they took the life of an innocent human. Outline I. The Death Penalty -Thesis- Although all humans have the right to life, there are certain situations that can overrule this right, such as taking the life of an innocent human. Since the right of life does not hold in every situation and if an innocent human’s life is taken, then it is morally permissible to set the right to life aside and use the death penalty on the person who committed murder. II. Pro-Death Penalty A. Retribution a. The death penalty is the best way in order to serve justice to convicted murderers of innocent people. b. The families and friends of victims will feel more secure if justice is served. c. There will be no worry about the murderer being able to commit more murders or to have any chance of receiving parole. B. Deterrence ...
Words: 337 - Pages: 2
