Argumentative Essay: Jury Duty

Coincidentally White As Reconstruction drew to a close in early 1877, a national debate about the proper selection of jury pools came to the forefront. Two major Supreme Court cases highlight this debate: Virginia v. Rives and Ex Parte Virginia, both of which stemmed from the killing of Aaron Shelton in Patrick County, Virginia. Following a seemingly unjust verdict given by an all-white jury pool in the murder trial, the defense attorneys petitioned a federal district judge, Alexander Rives. Rives not only took over the case, but also "charged a racially mixed federal grand jury" to "consider whether to indict state judges in the five counties from which the jurors were drawn" (HBS Rec.

“Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” This quote stated by George Bernard Shaw represents America’s jury system perfectly. We should ultimately eliminate the jury system from court, and use the bench system in all criminal and civil cases. Although there are many reasons why eliminating the jury system is a better choice, many people want to keep the jury system only because we have used it for a long time and they fear change. Without change, progress is impossible and those who want to keep the jury system should change their mind.

The death penalty is not fair because it is unconstitutional. The death penalty is in direct violation the 8th amendment as it states, “ Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted” ( The 8th amendment ). This is important because in the 8th amendment is says no cruel or unusual punishment but the death penalty is both of those things, making it hard for the death penalty to be seen as a good thing. The death penalty also violates the 14th amendment. The 14th amendment states that every citizen has equal protection of the law.

In the year 2000, during the presidential election, many people had believed that Al Gore had won, only to discover in the morning that George W. Bush had been declared the winner. In fact, the election was simply too close to call. In the end it came down to one: Florida, where Bush 's younger brother, Jeb, was governor. Florida electors were unable to commit themselves to either Bush or Gore owing to the closeness of the vote. Brush fires erupted in several precincts where the candidates ' surrogates traded allegations about various improprieties.

Pojman uses the analogy if someone committed murder, they would be struck and killed instantly by lightning because by taking another life they forfeited theirs. I find that the following two points from Pojman provides a valid argument as of why we should have the death penalty. He states if we choose a policy of having the death penalty and “… we’re right, we have saved the lives of the innocent. If we are wrong, unfortunately, we’ve sacrificed the lives of some murderers.” (Pojman 144).

“The boy is five feet eight inches tall. His father was six feet two inches tall. That’s a difference of six inches. It’s a very awkward thing to stab down into the chest of someone who’s half a foot taller than you are. ”-(Juror two, 54)

As a U.S. citizen there are pretty much only three things you should be doing, that is paying taxes, voting, and serving on a jury. Skipping over the first two brings us to jury duty, which many feel to be a nuisance, but really, is it? Our right to a jury trial is one of the foundations our country was built on. Just because you don’t have a choice when it comes to jury duty, doesn’t mean it’s something that you should feel negative toward. Yes, that piece of mail we receive “summons” us to report to jury duty, but don’t think it that way.

While there are far more subjects to discuss regarding to this issue, I feel it necessary to state that I believe the death penalty should exist in a perfect society. I believe that certain crimes and certain situations warrant the punishment of death. However, the our society is not perfect. The justice system has failed to fairly use this punishment in far too many instances, and concludes that they cannot justly wield this

9) The testimony of the woman who lived across the el tracks a) The woman testified that she witnessed the murder being committed through the window of her home and the moving el train while in bed. Juror Four recollected that the woman “‘went to bed at about eleven o’clock that night. Her bed was next to the window—and she could look out while lying down and see directly into the boy’s window across the tracks.

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.

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.

Even though it is true that taking the life of another is not right, it is even truer that the punishment should fit the crime. The death penalty is an exercise of justice that promotes retribution for crime and moral punishment for those who choose to take human life. Also, it prevents society 's worse offenders from re-offending, and it provides justice for the victims whose lives were cut short without a second thought. To better understand why capital punishment is a justifiable act, Kant 's theory gives a clear and logical understanding of the eye for an eye approach. Additionally the utilitarian view also explains why capital punishment is justifiable in regards to comfort for the victim 's family and prevention of re-offending.

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.

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.

Jury systems exist all around the world. Many have a long history, while others are just emerging. Juries of different countries examine trials and decide on many factors in a court case. They play a vital role in court and are the deciding factor about whether a victim is guilty or not. The role of a jury may be different depending on the country.