I have researched a few stories behind the stand your ground law and its amazing how so many people have got away with murder. People seem to be taking what they believe to be justice in their own hands. Doing something off your own opinion isn’t always the right thing to do. You may not like people who wear red shirts. Do you think they should die?
However, if a doctor or another individual assists in the suicide, it is then considered murder. Doctors are supposed to save lives, not take them. Society does not find that ending one’s life, whether personally or assisted, is acceptable. Doctor assisted suicide is one of the top most controversial issues in America (Ertlet, 2011). Dr. Jack Kevorkian was one of the most well-known physician-assisted suicide supporters in America.
In the book is described how the verdict of someone is a game of chance compared to the “Wheel of fortune”. It’s also mentioned how a price is put on a human life. Analyzing the paragraph without background information made me thought that the Justice system in the Holcomb is unreasonable and unfair. It seems that the author wants to make us understand that the way the government in Holcomb treats the criminals is not supported by evidence. Perry had some mental problems throughout the book but he was still hanged without a hundred percent check that he might not have full consciousness of what he did.
They put this man to death without evidence to support that he committed this crime. Also the death penalty cost lots of money, people are sometimes falsely accused, and biblical reasons don’t support this. No one should be sentenced to death because of a mistake they made in their life. A person can just be in jail for the rest of their life instead of the government paying for someone to be put to death. It is twice as much money to have the death penalty than to have someone in jail.
This shows he cares more about what is right for the people then his own personal benefits. The authors used very strong language quoted by Del. Davis throughout the paper such as, “the death penalty is flawed, ineffective and racially biased. And if we can get enough people to understand that, then in a few years we can repeal the death penalty in the United States once and for all” (Jealous & Braveboy, p. 11). Those sentences speak a lot about how powerful words can affect us.
Due to the amount of appeals and thorough investigation of each case, no piece of evidence is overlooked for the benefit of the defendant. Unless there is strong criminating evidence and the court is certain the accused is guilty, the death penalty would not be issued. For the 2,293,157 behind bars in our country the miniscule 3,220 on death row is unlikely to contain innocents due to their case being examined extensively. If one innocent man was wrongfully put to death by the state, should we abolish the death penalty? This argument can be compared to if a police officer shoots an innocent man, the country should purge police officers of their weapons.
When did the government have a right in the way of life and death situations? No matter how provoked the person is, you shouldn’t kill them. People talk about how it helps because then you wouldn’t have to be paying for inmates in jail. All our taxes aren’t just for inmates it is also used to pay the debts people owe. Governments need them, to pay off war supplies etc., even if all the inmates were wiped out, we would still have to pay taxes.
“Different prosecutors in the state have different attitudes,” Tidmarsh said. “The arbitrariness in that sense of the death penalty is, to me, stunning. It’s not the quality of the act [that determines whether someone is put to death] … In many circumstances, it is the quality of the person who decides whether or not to seek the death penalty.” The judicial system deludes all involved to believe they are not responsible for putting someone to death, Tidmarsh
I do not believe this to be true, I believe that long-term imprisonment is what criminals are not afraid of. It is said that the death penalty encourages and legitimizes unlawful killing. But let’s think about it “murder, is unlawful and undeserved while the death penalty is lawful and deserved for unlawful act.” Imprisonment will never be a harsh enough punishment because they live off of our taxes, and it is sad to say that we are paying to keep these criminals alive. But most religious people will argue that capital punishment is breaking one of the Ten Commandments but the bible also says that “it is an eye for an eye.” That statement does not mean that when a person does something to you, you do it back but God put rules and people on this earth and gave them choices to make and I feel that if you truly love your brothers and sisters within this world the death sentence is appropriate because your are keeping them from hurting any other people. So many non-supporters of the death penalty say they are against it because of racial discrimination, or how it treats humans as like animal, or that it is cruel and unusual, or that retribution is another word for revenge and therefore they believe that life imprisonment is a just enough punishment.
About two years ago Illinois abolished the death penalty. The death penalty is an inhumane way to get rid of people that have committed serious crimes but that doesn’t mean that they have the right to do that. Some people say that the death penalty is much cheaper than keeping criminals in prison. Does this leave u perplexed? Well it shouldn’t because it costs a lot of money to create those lethal injections and electric chairs and other tools used to give the death penalty.