Our country’s money is being wasted on death penalties. Statistics prove that the majority of blacks are put on capital punishment; also the majority of the prosecutors are white. That just shows that the death penalty is used for racial reasons. Those who murdered whites were sentenced to death more than those who murdered blacks. When a black person murders another black, it’s barely seen that the defendant receives capital punishment.
Since the capital punishment is still carry on, many opponents and defenders of the death penalty appeal to the sanctity of life. However, the death penalty is not justified. This is because death penalty is not an effective crime deterrent, executed innocent people and it needs a higher cost to carry on. First of all, some opponents argue that death penalty can help deter crime and protect public. For instance, the criminal will think twice before killing for fear of receive the strongest punishment.
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.
Based on the Best Bet theory we can assume that the risk of losing one’s own life and any potential to ever see freedom again is just as good of a punishment as any other. If not using capital punishment reduces how many are deterred and does not reduce the number of innocent lives taken we too are responsible for the loss of those lives. We are responsible not only for our own direct actions but also for our inaction and the consequences of it. Objections to the death Penalty: Objection 1: “Capital punishment is a morally unacceptable thirst for revenge.” Revenge is a personal response, done out of anger and hatred, which inflicts harm to the perpetrator. Retributivism is an unbiased and impartial response to a perpetrator that has wronged another.
Diana Penuela Professor Leano English 1A 10 March , 2011 Capital Punishment Currently in California the death penalty is allowed. Capital punishment lowers the value of human life and it is based on a need of revenge. It also sends the wrong message to our kids and society by asserting that violence is the only way out. Teaching that killing is wrong by killing creates a culture of violence because it is only based on getting back at the prisoner by using violence. Capital punishment does not deter crime; instead it increases the murder rate and there is a chance of error.
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.
Moreover it is shown that in many cases criminals are executed while there are reasonable doubts in their convictions and some have avoided execution by just a few hours before being exonerated. Another issue that was discussed is the inequality of death penalty in practice. There have been serious issues with racial discrimination. For reference in cases with white victims and black defendants convictions occurred twenty two percent of the time while with black victims and white defendants with percentage dropped to a measly three
In saying this Shalom says that since many of the inmates are of lower income the state is expected to pay for both sides of the defense. So it is not really a cost-effective solution since the rates of lawyers are very high (5). The author brings up the common phrase “an eye for an eye”. Many people would feel this to be true. Shalom gives the example of Coretta Scott King who had a husband and mother-in-law killed in an assassination.
That is, is that person a criminal? Many innocent people would be killed if we didn’t have the death penalty because the death penalty puts down our most dangerous lawbreakers to make the streets safe. Without the death penalty our streets would be swarming with our most dangerous felons. The death penalty should
Real justice requires people to suffer for what they did and to suffer in a way that is appropriate for the crime. For example, for murder they should be murdered in the same way. By executing convicted murderers they won’t have a chance of doing the same to someone else. The very small chance of executing the wrong person is balanced by the benefits to society of putting off other murders who were thinking about doing the same. Also, DNA testing and other methods of crime scene science can now be so precise and can eliminate any uncertainty to whether someone is guilty or not.