The death penalty is considered a deterrent to criminal activity but does it make the execution morally correct or just brutal? A sentence of death has been handed down for centuries. The Greeks and the Romans were the first to implement such punishments. The types of brutal methods that were used consist of but not limited to: being buried alive, boiled in oil, burned, stoned and crucifixion, just to name a few (Constitutional Law and the Criminal Justice System 2002, p. 316). One of the methods of execution that was used in the 1600’s by the Romans was crucifixion.
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.
The penalty of death is a very thought out process when it is subjected to a convict. The convict has to deserve the severity of the punishment and the courts cannot have any thoughts of the sentencing as unconstitutional for it to come into affect. Some arguments that were made that are for the death penalty, “gives closure for victim’s family who have suffered, creates form of deterrent crime, parole or escaped prisoners are given another chance to kill, and gives prosecutors another bargaining chip for plea bargain process” (Messerli). The constitutional arguments against the death penalty are, “financial costs of death penalty cost more than life in prison, appeals clog court system, why kill people who killed someone, innocent men and women may be put to death, and it does not bring the victim’s life back” (Messerli). The arguments for and against the death penalty are very strong arguments and could persuade a person’s mind to believe in both sides.
God gave us life isn’t he the only one that should be able to take life away from us. However, supporters of capital punishment might argue that this kind of punishment is important for the family of the victim of a crime as it will bring them closure and the feeling that justice has been served. Nonetheless, there are some that feel that the death penalty is very bias and unfair. Some feel that those sentenced to the death penalty are those that are mentally ill, poor, males, and racial minorities that are over-represented among those executed. One pilot study of over 2 dozen convicted criminals on death row found that all had been so seriously abused during childhood that they probably all suffered from brain damage.
However as murder is the most serious crime many believe that it is correct that it follows a mandatory sentence as it gives the family and society a sense of justice is being done. In 2008 Maria Eagle the justice minister stated that ‘’ Murder is a unique crime of particular moral and social significance and the mandatory life sentence reflects society’s abhorrent of it.’’ Basically stating that the mandatory sentence helps reflect society’s disgust at what the defendant has
Christina M. Owens Writing Assignment October 29th, 2012 Capital Punishment by Lethal Injection Capital Punishment is defined as the execution of a convicted criminal by the State as punishment for crimes known as capital crimes or capital offences. Capital Punishment is given when the crime is considered so vast and so horrible that it is over the realm of being forgiven or pardoned. Capital punishment in the United States is officially certified by 38 of the 50 states; the minimum age at time of crime to be subject to the death penalty is 18. Throughout history, statistics have proven that Capital Punishment furthermore known as the death penalty to be a working prevention of major crimes. When the death penalty is carried out, it
The crime of blasphemy was severe due to the amount of crime he led up to, by claiming he was Christ the judges would take this very seriously as if going against them. 3) What is the difference between ‘retribution’ and ‘deterrence’? Retribution means a punishment inflicted on someone as revenge for a wrong or criminal act whereas deterrence is the use of punishment as a threat to deter people from offending and creating crime. 4) Explain how the law in the 18th century was applied differently to different groups in society? Punishments varied according to a person’s social group.
Homicide covers a broader range of murder, but murder is considered a form of criminal homicide. There are several types of homicide; one type is murder of first degree. This form of murder is premeditated and intentional criminal act. When a criminal act is intentional, it is committed purposely with a guilty intention which would be referred to the mens rea aspect of the crime. First degree murder is felony-based crime that receives a punishment of life imprisonment with no eligibility for parole and some cases may receive the death penalty.
In the article titled “The Folly of Capital Punishment”, Jeffrey Reinam concludes that capital punishment is immoral to our society; and thus, should not be legalized. Reinam reasons the death penalty is unjust, inhuman, and goes against the progress of civilization. Reinam’s primary argument and rebuttal to Ernest Van Den Haags deterrence argument, is that the death penalty goes against the advancement of civilization. Reinam explains that throughout history we take steps to "lower tolerance for one's own pain and that suffered by others". Due to the states high visibility, size, and moral authority, it is capable to have an impact on citizens beyond the immediate act it authorizes.
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. But giving a convicted murderer life imprisonment could still result in death by their hands