This results in poor representation of convicted people in courts and unfair verdicts. Another issue associated with the penalty is that the value of life is lessened. Government should be concerned with the damage inflicted on society when a person is sentenced to be killed by juries. Being put to death by a people does not seem to be that different from a heinous murder committed by a murderer. With all of the media reporting executions like movies, societies become desensitized and accept death penalty as the right way to take care of criminals.
The death penalty was established in the eighteenth century and currently within the United States, thirty-six states impose the death penalty, Louisiana is included. The death penalty has become such a controversial topic in the Untied States for various reasons among the religious. Many Americans believe the death penalty is justified when individuals commit heinous crimes. I would have to agree that some crimes people commit deserve a sentence of death, especially when they commit rape, crimes against juveniles, or aggravated murder. Although the death penalty is limited and used sparingly, it reflects in our society and the value of deterrence is weakened.
The Death Penalty Reviewed Matthew Christiani 5-22-12 Phil-05 In the debate over capital punishment, the opponents argue that the death penalty should be legalized because; it is by implementation, that we have been able to decrease the murder rate in society by placing such a high penalty on murder. On the other side of the debate, the supporters argue that capital punishment should not be legalized because it promotes the injustice in which it is intended to prevent. In this paper, I will argue that the stronger of the two arguments is to do away with the death penalty. In the article titled “The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense”, Ernest Van Den Haag concludes that the death penalty is moral and should be legalized because it deters
A death sentence brings finality to a horrible chapter in the lives of these family members. It would mean that the family members of the victim could then end all sadness of the crime committed and try to forget about it as best they can and know that justice has been served to the defendant. If it wasn’t for the various types of punishment there wouldn’t be a way to deter people from committing crime. The death penalty creates another form of crime deterrent. Prison time is an effective deterrent to a point, with some people more time is needed.
A Defense of the Death Penalty Louis P. Pojman The death penalty serves as both a deterrent for would be murderers and a fitting punishment for those who intentionally and out of malice take the life of another human being. Retribution: It is sometimes argued that the death penalty serves as a form of revenge for the victims of heinous crimes. For those who argue from this stance, revenge is never the proper method for assigning punishment because it is done out of anger and with the intent of inflicting harm upon another human being. Vengeance itself is not the basis for designating the death penalty. Instead retribution is justification enough, although it may be accompanied by feelings of anger and hatred.
The ones who throw the bible at the penalty forget to read certain portions. “The murderer shall surely be put to death” (Numbers 35:16-18) this bible excerpt counters the argument. Abstracting the death penalty and saying it is wrong for the government to take ones life is the wrong way to approach the system. If each case was reviewed in the sense that the victim was a loved one, giving the criminal free room and board would be a harder choice. A claim that human life’s value is diminished when someone is executed is a bold claim.
Death Penalty is a Crime To use a lethal injection, electrocution, or gas to murder someone is a crime. This is what law enforcer’s use for the death penalty, also called capital punishment. Death penalty is wrong, and making someone suffer by causing them pain is not a good way for a punishment. The death penalty is racist; also some people that received the penalty were innocent. Our country’s money is being wasted on death penalties.
The people that Shelton killed are considered combatants because they support they governmental system and work with it. Based on Just War Theory, the proportionality of killing these people is that their deaths are outweighed by the justice that will bring to the judicial system. Shelton believes the system to be corrupt, focusing instead on conviction rates rather than making sure the right person is placed behind bars. By killing these people Shelton can put a new mindset into the “system” because those affected by the killings will want the right man punished rather since they now know how it feels to be wronged. All the killings made by Shelton were to people who were directly showed how flawed the system was.
On the other hand there are people that are for the death penalty. They are for the death penalty because they think that the people that have committed these crimes deserve to feel the horrible pain and fear that their victims felt. Some people believe that both side of the death penalty has valid arguments. It is up to each individual to make the decision as to where they stand. The two individuals that are on opposite sides of the death penalty are Edward Koch and David Bruck.
He explains that the death penalty is just an act of torture and is too horrible to be used by our civilized society, stating that it is “torture until death” (220). He goes on to argue that the death penalty is unjust in its practice because it is applied in arbitrary and also in discriminatory ways. Quoting, “Remain grants that the death penalty is a just punishment for some murderers, but he thinks that justice does not require the death penalty for murderers” (221). He goes on to say that life imprisonment can be an alternative decision that stratifies the requirements of the justice