Capital punishment does not deter crime; instead it increases the murder rate and there is a chance of error. Therefore, capital punishment should not exist in today’s society because it is an unconstitutional punishment. Capital punishment it’s not necessary and it is also unfair. There is a chance of error, you can execute the wrong person and later on find them innocent. Even though some may argue that death penalty deters crime, studies have shown that it does not.
And who then gets to take the life of that person, and so on. Mahatma Gandhi who was the respected leader of the Indian Independence Movement once said “an eye for an eye would make the whole world blind”. Society’s views and opinions on capital punishment nowadays are mostly in favor of abolishing the death penalty, which outweighs those who have an opposing opinion and believe capital punishment is in fact morally correct. And the fact that 139 of the 196 countries of the world have abolished the death penalty really just confirms that it is an inhumane and inexcusable way of bringing justice to those who have broken laws and ethics. It has been proven to be cheaper for taxpayers and governments to sentence someone to life rather than to death row, which would provide more funding to go towards more useful things like education and foreign aid that may actually help the number of crimes being committed to decrease.
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.
Critical Analysis on “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate.” Dan Gardner’s publish, “The Missing Piece to the Gang-Violence Debate”, is strongly controversial in his position against increasing enforcement of drug laws, and boosting penalties for violators. He believes that you should actually limit enforcement and hardship of sentencing when it comes to drugs. Was his argument persuasive enough in the essay to actually influence his wishes into society? Personally, I don’t think so. Gardner’s ideas are too drastic and I believe he didn’t have enough support in his argument that his plans would actually decrease the murders in gang violence.
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.
His trivialized view of the rational nature of suicide is one that I do not think translates to the American situation. Dalrymple views the large number of attempted suicide as being promoted by what he terms “the boredom of self-absorption”. The post attempt treatment that the patient receives is credited, according to Dalrymple, for giving him a sense of vitality. He also sees the attempted suicides as a way in which people try to avoid certain situations, whether they are an upcoming court hearing or the start of a new job. For Dalrymple, the overdose is the easiest way to relieve the crisis in their lives.
Physician assisted suicide should not be legalized for the simple fact many would give up and take the easy way out. There is currently a pervasive assumption that if assisted suicide and/or voluntary euthanasia (AS/VE) were to legalized, then doctors would take responsibility for making the decision that these interventions were indicated, for prescribing the medication, and (in euthanasia) for administering it .Richard Huxable remarks “that homicide law encompasses various crimes, so prosecutors can choose charges to suit the circumstances. Yet one thing is clear: mercy killing is still killing, equally, murder is murder” Physician assisted suicide is nothing more than cold blooded
Although the author of this book is clearly against capital punishment, he explores all sides of the issue openly. After reading through this text I find it intriguing to examine the long term versus short term cost effects of the death penalty. Although, the cost of capital punishment is higher up front it is comparatively less expensive when compared to life in prison (prodeathpenalty.com). Costanzo states, “Capital cases are a nightmare for the entire justice system. Police chiefs recognize that death penalty cases are particularly burdensome in the early stages.
Shalom’s third point is that the death penalty is the same as imprisonment. He next pointed out that Michigan’s murder rate is lower than Illinois, even though Illinois uses the death penalty and Michigan has not in the last 150 years. Shalom’s fifth point on why the death penalty should be abolished was that capital punishment can easily cost twice as much as a lifetime imprisonment. His next point was that some people believe the victim’s family would have peace of mind knowing that justice has been served because the murderer has now been murdered. He later states that the government does not handle other crimes like they do by murdering a murderer.
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