Controversy: The Anti-Death Penalty Reform

The death penalty goes far back into history, across many different civilizations, and many different cultures. It has been around since the beginnings of colonial America, and was very different compared to todays standards. “In colonial America, criminals

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.

Some see the death penalty as the only means to extract justice for victims. Others see it as a morally reprehensible act where a second wrong is committed in order to make something right. With recent issues surrounding the death penalty in which execution hasn 't gone as planned sparking a nationwide debate, this is my outlook on why I 'm for the death penalty not only being abolished in the state of Texas but in addition to the entirety of the US..

The death penalty is a precedent set centuries ago as a method of punishment for severe crimes. In 1923, the state of Texas declared that those sentenced to death were to suffer through the electric chair by the hands of the state, instead of being hanged by the hands of the counties (TX Executions). Later on, Texas would adopt the lethal injection method. Many see the death penalty as an inhumane violation of the basic rights defined in the Bill of Rights. On the other hand, others may argue that it is unpractical to abolish the death penalty due to the voidance of justice.

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.

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, is a legal process in which a person is put to death as a punishment for a crime by the government of a nation. The United States is in the minority group of nations that uses the death penalty. There are thirty-three states that allow capital punishment and seventeen states that abolished it (Death Penalty Information Center). The morality of the death penalty has been debated for many years. Some people want capital punishment to be abolished due to how it can cost a lot more than life imprisonment without parole, how they think it is immoral to kill, and how innocent people can be put to death.

In 1608 there was about one execution, compared to the year 1850 where there was about 4000 executions made. The years between 1900 to 1972 there was almost 8000 executions, performed in the United States. Nevertheless, in 1973 to 2002 the number executions dropped greatly to around 1000 executions. (Table 1). As previously stated the death penalty has gone through drastic changes throughout history, ecpecially the number of executions through the years This chart* chronicles the United State’s use of the death penalty over the past four centuries.

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

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

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.

In conclusion, the death penalty should be brought back in to action, as it is proven to be a useful tool to maintain criminal behaviour within our societies. With the opinions of professionals and the help of the justice system functioning at a level where innocent individuals are not being wrongly convicted, we will be able to maintain deterrence and retribution within our country. It is very important that our legal system steps up to plate making the death penalty back into action to serve justice properly to those individuals who truly deserve

Throughout its history, the United States judicial system has dealt with an abundance of cases relating to capital punishment. The topic has sparked much debate on whether or not the death penalty constitutes as cruel and unusual punishment. Much like the political world we live in, people have their own opinions on whether this punishment is humane. Many, in support of the death penalty see it as an opportunity to rid the country free of the worst criminals to ultimately achieve a much safer society. On the other hand, people in disagreement argue that no execution can be deemed “humane”.

Patsie Egleston Mrs. Furr 29 November, 2016 ENG-113 Capital Punishment Much like abortion or the idea of gun control, capital punishment has been one of the most controversial and talked about topics of the twenty-first century. Many do not agree with the idea of the death penalty, or execution at all for that matter. However, if capital punishment were to be allowed in all fifty states the crime rate would decrease; there would be less government spending due to life in prison without parole; it would provide just punishment for crimes committed against the rights of life; freedom and safety of victims; and others would feel safer with those criminals locked up, waiting to get what they deserve.

The death penalty has sparked a national debate in the united states for a number of reasons. These reasons, include the responsibility of the government to protect the general public by removing dangerous criminals society while not violating the constitutional prohibition against cruel or unusual punishment. Another element of the debate on the legality of maintaining the death penalty include the cost of incarcerating criminals for life. Finally the moral element. Is it right for the state to kill it's own people.

Some arguments end up being irrelevant to the actual morality of the death penalty itself, or are simply impossible to answer definitively. We certainly will not be able to cover every argument here, or even most of them. Instead, we will try to see why we should keep the death penalty by looking at possible fallacies in otherwise impeccable sounding arguments against it. The first argument against the use of the death penalty that feels important to address is presented by Hugo Adam Bedau, who proposed the “Minimal invasion argument against the death penalty (Vaughn pp.333).”