Should Capital Punishment Be Both Cruel And Unusual Punishment

The death penalty has been one of the most controversial debates in the United States. Some believe that an eye for an eye is an effective mean of punishment while others believe that such mean of punishment is not effective in modern society. Edward Koch believes the death penalty affirms the sanctity of life. In the article by Edward Koch, published in The New Republic, “Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life,’ he utilizes the rhetorical devices of ethos, pathos and logos to justify his position for the death penalty towards the people opposing the death penalty.

Oshinsky did a remarkable job explaining the history of the death penalty in a clear and concise way. While the text was fairly short, he effectively provided his readers with well documented and relevant information on how controversial the death penalty has been throughout the past few centuries. He undertook an exceptionally important issue that many Americans do not know much about, or may have conflicting feelings

The most important issue that must be addressed in this case is the principle of the “evolving standards of decency” and the uses of a national consensus. The “evolving standards of decency” were developed by Trop v. Dulles and have been implemented in one way or another in all of the precedents dealing with “cruel and unusual” punishment. It is important to treat these principles as an important aspect of “cruel and unusual” punishment jurisprudence, therefore turning from these set of principles would be foolish and a disregard for every precedent. However, it is important to acknowledge that each case satisfies the standards by using a different method; some use the presence or lack of state legislature as a judgment of consensus while others look at foreign countries.

Difficult, protracted executions constitute infringement of the eighth Amendment, which forbids savage and surprising discipline. Capital punishment disregards the privilege to life as announced in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is a definitive remorseless, cruel and corrupting

The reasoning behind the abolition of the death penalty was because many prisoners on death row at the time were mentally unstable, no evidence had shown that the death penalty acted as a deterrent of crime and that innocent people may be executed (history.com, n.d.). The debate about the abolition of the Death Penalty started on July 3rd, 1922 when Queensland first abolished this form of punishment; other states soon followed and the last state being New South Wales having abolished the punishment in 1985 for all crimes as in 1955 the abolished the punishment for murder but

The death penalty has been significantly changing according to these six cases: Atkins v. Virginia (2002), Roper v. Simmons (2002), Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008), Graham v. Florida (2010), and Miller v. Alabama (2012). These six cases discuss the “evolving standards of decency”. The “evolving standards of decency” state that the implementation of the death penalty is deemed unconstitutional for certain circumstances, defendants, and crimes. When implementing this test, the courts analyze the most prevalent opinions among the different state legislatures, judges, sentencing juries, and the general public in order to determine whether the use of the death penalty is cruel and unusual.

Punishments for severe crimes around the world have been a subject of debate for many years. Different countries have varying views on what punishments are too extreme. The legality of certain forms of punishment is continually evolving in today's age. With the determination of constitutionality, a complex and evolving issue there are many debates around what constitutes cruel and unusual punishments. Despite ongoing controversies and discussions, punishments for serious crimes, including capital punishment, remain legal in some countries and continue to be imposed.

The Effectiveness of the Death Penalty in Texas The death penalty is one of the most controversial topics in America today due to its turbulent nature. Capital punishment is highly debated and it encompasses a plethora of ethical, religious, political, and legal issues. Texas is one of the thirty-eight states in the nation that practices this form of punishment. (Naidoff, Caitlin)

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.

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.

Rough Draft Is the death penalty an effective and justified punishment? This is a topic many Americans have discussed for a long time, and has caused much controversy. Both sides have their pros and cons, and they will be discussed. The first point that many people have about capital punishment is that it’s unconstitutional.

Although the death penalty may bring some closure to families of the victims and even the victims themselves it still should be abolished because the negatives outweigh the positives. People could be murdered by the state even if they are innocent. They are taking away any chance these people have at a normal life even though it's a life that they deserve and did nothing to have it taken away. 6. Conclusion

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.