Prison time is an effective deterrent to a point, with some people more time is needed. Prosecutors should have the option of using a variety of punishments in order to minimize crime. The most fundamental principle of justice is that the punishment should fit the crime. When someone plans and brutally murders another person, it would seem that justice would be better served if they too were killed as they had planned to kill another human being. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims and this should be altered.
“Along with Troy Davis hundreds of people have been wrongfully convicted and executed in the United States” (David A. Love 1). Think about it if the person that faced the death penalty wasn’t guilty you took an innocent life. There are just some things that people shouldn’t have the ability to do, and sentencing someone to a death is one of them. “Since 1976-2010 there have been approximately 1,226 executions”.
Of course it wouldn’t completely stop the crimes, they will always happen. Another common reason in favor of it is the fact “that America has voted to execute people, then America should be able to see or hear what they have chosen.” (2) This makes sense as well. Because we are allowed to vote on whether or not a criminal is guilty enough to be killed, then maybe we should also be allowed to see it happen. On a slight tangent, if we
In contrast to Scalia I think he has good points but he needs a better argument than the judical system has faults. Scalia is for the death penalty. She thinks about the victims in the crimes. She agrees that there is a lot of pian done to the victims however she is not considering all the pain the prisoners will go threw also. This “cocktail” is not just a shot and that’s it, she should know that already.
Others may think the exclusionary rule should not be used to enforce the Fourth Amendment. They feel at times it is necessary for the exclusionary rule to not be used. I can understand their position because they are looking at putting the accused defendant behind bars and make sure they are punished to the fullest. At times without the exclusionary rule, the case in court can succeed and get the result the prosecution and maybe even what the public want. Sometimes people feel the defendant has too many rights and has more benefits, which could help them get away with criminal activity.
Lethal Injection For thousands of years, many governments have punished people convicted of certain crimes by putting them to death, using various means to accomplish this. The death penalty is considered by many to be the ultimate form of punishment for those who have committed society's most heinous crimes, including rape and murder. As times have changed, so have the methods of execution. The idea of someone being put to death is not a pleasant one. About 74 of the world's countries and 38 American states have a death penalty (although the vast majority of executions in 2004 took place in China, Iran, Vietnam and the United States), so this unpleasant topic is bound to come up.
Death Penalty Nearly half of Americans say that the death penalty is not imposed often enough (Newport). Yet the number of executions in America continues to drop. There was about half the number of executions in 2009 than 1999 (Thornburgh). Some say that the death penalty should not be used at all because we are not sure if the person is guilty. In fact, the death penalty needs to be imposed more often because it prevents the murders of innocent people, and the punishment should fit the crime.
He was wrongfully convicted when he was 16 years old and served 20 years in prison before proving his innocence. That mistake took two decades from him, but it took Carlos DeLuna's life. Proof of Carlos' innocence has only come out now, 29 years after the crime and two decades after he was executed, because of the painstaking work of professors and students at The Columbia Human Rights Law Review. Doubts always existed in Carlos' case, but it took 29 years and what some are calling the most comprehensive criminal investigation in U.S. Carlos DeLuna's case is proof that these kinds of cases are not isolated; they are the inevitable result of an imperfect system. As long as we have a death penalty, we risk executing innocent people like Carlos
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.
Many, if not all, would agree. However, as death is permanent and non-revocable this fundamental principle fails to apply to Capital Punishment. In the United states alone, 140 people were wrongfully sentenced to death since 1973. One may argue that with improved technology this is no longer an issue. However, the 140 man-long list clearly indicates otherwise.