The Deadly Compromise Analysis

1122 Words5 Pages
Aze Davis English 111 Professor Joe Taylor 30 September 2007 Deadly Compromise The “Deadly Compromise” written by author Joshua Green is about Capital Punishment, in regards to the Death Penalty. Green argues a pragmatic approach to solve the long debated conflict between the conservative and liberal points of view. Although this is a very convincing argument, it also states facts, that when considered should ultimately lead to the abolishment of the death penalty. Green uses a practical approach to solve some issues of the appellate court system such as pointing out some of the ways to repair the “machinery of death”(Ackley 377). He interjects that pragmatism should eclipse the battle by offering a compromise between the…show more content…
The question that should be asked is “what about the innocent that do not get off death row”. This point is proven in Greens essay in regards to the laws in Virginia. Virginia has a twenty-one day rule that states, twenty-one days after a trial that no new evidence can be entered into the case (Ackley 372). This is a fine rule to speed up the process, but what about justice. This rule excludes any evidence including DNA, even if the evidence would exonerates the prisoner from death row and prove their innocence. It seems there are only two ways to get off death row one is to prove your innocence, which is clearly negated by this twenty-one day rule in Virginia, the other is to be exonerated or granted clemency by the…show more content…
What gives us the right to put a dollar amount on a human life? Many feel we are overstepping our bounds and rights as humans. You may hear many numbers about the cost of housing a prisoner; although, consensus is that it is more expensive to prosecute a death penalty case and house the prisoner that will be executed than it is to simply house an inmate for life without the possibility of parole. The cost of trying a death penalty case is said to be close to one million dollars in the majority of information regarding these cases. Imagine how much money would be saved if the death penalty was abolished. Would it not be much cheaper to give out life without parole and incorporate some type of factory work that would make the prisoners support their prison and all cost associated with housing them? More often than not, studies show that the death penalty is not an effective deterrent of crime, although many feel it to be an effective measure. Since the death penalty takes so long because it is rarely enforced and it tends to take years to carry out an execution, it is hard to draw conclusive evidence. There doesn’t seem to be any conclusive evidence showing that it is an effective deterrent of crime at least no more so than facing life in prison without the possibly of

More about The Deadly Compromise Analysis

Open Document