According to him, 99% would rather be imprisoned for life than sentenced to the death penalty. Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, as cited in Haags argument says, "Some men, probably, abstain from murder because they fear that if they committed murder they would be hanged. Hundreds of thousands abstain from it because they regard it with horror. One great reason why they regard it with horror is that murderers are hanged”. 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.
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.
The two individuals that are on opposite sides of the death penalty are Edward Koch and David Bruck. The mayor Edward Koch believes that the death penalty is necessity for todays society. David Koch is saying that the death penalty is another form of murder. If someone were to kill another person, the authorities have all the rights to sentence them to death and to guarantee such a horrific crime would not happen again. Mayor Edward Koch claims that to help the penalty for murder would be a huge insult to the victims, other than David Bruck correctly argues that justice is not served by creating another victim accountable for the things that he or she have done.
A death sentence brings finality to a horrible chapter in the lives of these family members. It would mean that the family members of the victim could then end all sadness of the crime committed and try to forget about it as best they can and know that justice has been served to the defendant. If it wasn’t for the various types of punishment there wouldn’t be a way to deter people from committing crime. The death penalty creates another form of crime deterrent. Prison time is an effective deterrent to a point, with some people more time is needed.
Pohnpei are type of people who are afraid of death if they will hear a prisoner is going to be killed because he or she commits crime. They will surely change because they will be afraid of dying. This will make Pohnpei a very peaceful state. According to Roxanne Rodriquez, author of the book, A Legal Research Guide, stated that these convicted murderers deserve to die (42). The last reason Pohnpei must have death penalty is for the safety for the citizens.
I feel it adversely is shown and sought out to enhance the value of human life by demonstrating the old saying “an eye for an eye.” If government were to lower the penalty of murder it would portray that the victims’ loss of life was less significant than that of the murderer. Some opponents feel that a life sentence in prison is a far worse punishment than death. If this is true, then why do so many convicted prisoners put on death row try to appeal and get a lesser sentence? These prisoners who committed the same act outside prison walls are now facing death with no alternative, as their victim had, and aren’t ready to answer to the consequences. In the case of Stephanie Benton, I saw this with my own eyes.
He walked because they said he felt threaten from the argument he had started. They seem to fail to realize you can’t prove self-defense if one party is dead. So many people are misusing this law that the government has written to justify a situation. Third, stand your ground law should be outlawed because of the inability of common individuals to make life and death decisions. I have researched a few stories behind the stand your ground law and its amazing how so many people have got away with murder.
A lot of people have died because of police officers and the reasons are clear, it is due to criminal activities they have undertaken and then refuse arrest which later causes a spark to ignite between the authorities and the civilians. Other times it is proved that police men just take advantage of their rights and brutally use force against citizens. Are police officers considered fair or brutal towards people? No one can deny that police officers have abused of their authority specially in big cities. Amadou
Instead of arresting people for simple things as weed possessions why are they not arresting this people that are committing murders? Even when the NOPD do arrest some of these criminals most get off or get little time with parole. Should this be acceptable? No it shouldn’t that why New Orleans is one of the top cities for murders. This needs to get put into control.
Death Penalty is a Crime To use a lethal injection, electrocution, or gas to murder someone is a crime. This is what law enforcer’s use for the death penalty, also called capital punishment. Death penalty is wrong, and making someone suffer by causing them pain is not a good way for a punishment. The death penalty is racist; also some people that received the penalty were innocent. Our country’s money is being wasted on death penalties.