The Death Penalty Debate Essay

Senator for Utah Orrin Hatch once said, “Capital punishment is our society’s recognition of the sanctity of human life,” (Brainy Quote). While the arguments for both sides of the debate over the morality of the death penalty are vast, the bottom line is that the death penalty does not disregard human life, but rather it reveres it, as Hatch said. Morality is defined as, “The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct,” (The Free Dictionary). One who seeks to protect a person who has committed a heinous crime such as murder is arguably not in accords with what is right and wrong. Therefore, although killing is generally accepted as being wrong, the death penalty is sometimes the only solution to bring justice to a

     There are many reasons to both support and oppose the death penalty. Many people can feel very strongly about whether or not they approve of this method of punishment. I feel that the death penalty is wrong, and I believe that there is much support to back this up. I believe that the death penalty is wrong because it is not an effective deterrent, racially and economically bias, unreliable, expensive, and morally wrong of society.

Why is the death penalty used as a means of punishment for crime? Is this just a way to solve the nations growing problem of overcrowded prisons, or is justice really being served? Why do some view the taking of a life morally correct? These questions are discussed and debated upon in every state and national legislature throughout the country. Advantages and disadvantages for the death penalty exist, and many members of the United States, and individual State governments, have differing opinions. Yet it seems that the stronger arguments, and evidence such as cost effectiveness, should lead the common citizen to the opposition of Capital Punishment.

In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately

A society operates around communities of people who work together and do their part to form a functional place to live. Many people benefit from others throughout society without even knowing it. Society functions and benefits from people doing their part to keep our community safe and people benefit from society as well, but there is an exception. Criminals who have committed a crime that has placed them in prison for the rest of their life, without the possibility of parole, will never positively benefit society again, and this is why I feel so strongly about the death penalty being enforced more.

However, no individual has ever been able to present any credible evidence that supports the theory of deterrence. Decades of research across the country has failed to produce signs of a higher murder rate in states that have abolished the death penalty. The theory of deterrence assumes that a murderer is examining the costs and benefits of the anticipated criminal act and taking a moment to think rationally. In the United States, the death penalty is only handed down for about one out of every one hundred homicides. A murderer has a greater chance of being killed by the planned victim or in a confrontation with the police, and therefor has no reason to fear the death penalty if there is only a one in a hundred chance they will actually receive it (Jackson, Jackson, and Shapiro 33). Moreover, most homicides are unplanned, impulsive acts and to imply that a murderer is thinking calm and cooly outweighing their options in such an emotionally charged environment is simply idiotic.

Cruel and Unusual Punishment, according to merriam-webster.com, is a punishment that is very harsh and too severe for the crime. The Eighth Amendment prohibits the federal government from imposing or inflicting cruel and unusual punishment, stating that "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted." This meaning, the punishment should not be too severe. There are nineteen states without the death penalty, while thirty-one that still have it including California, Florida, and Texas. There have been cases, in these states, in which the criminal sentenced death suffered once administered the most common protocol to date used on death row which was lethal injection. One man, Charles

In the Eighth Amendment, there is a section called the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause. This states that the punishment for a crime can’t be inhumane and it must be fitting to the crime. For example, you can’t put someone to death for stealing an apple. Because of this Amendment the death penalty is heavily debated as a fitting and humane way of dealing with capital crimes.

Life is sacred. This is an ideal that the majority of people can agree upon to a certain extent. For this reason taking the life of another has always been considered the most deplorable of crimes, one worthy of the harshest available punishment. Thus arises one of the great moral dilemmas of our time. Should taking the life of one who has taken the life of others be considered an available punishment? Is a murderer's life any less sacred than the victim's is? Can capital punishment, the death penalty, execution, legal murder, or whatever a society wishes to call it, be morally justifiable? The underlying question in this issue is if any kind of killing, regardless of reason, can be accepted. In this

A man who spent nearly 25 years on death row for the kidnapping, rape and murder of a 15-year-old girl has been executed in Missouri.

The death penalty seems to be a very debatable subject. There are arguments and support for both sides of the debate, but which side is right? That is a tough question to ask. After reading the article in the textbook, two other articles, and looking at statistics, I seem to feel that the death penalty may not be the right answer.

The death penalty, or capital punishment, is the execution of an offender that is sentenced to death by a court of law for a criminal offense.  This type of punishment for inmates is involved in controversy over whether or not it is an acceptable form of punishment for criminals and also whether or not it is immoral.  There are many arguments for both sides of the debate, each making valid points and pointing out the flaws of the opposing position. Many religions are either for or against capital punishment, due to them either being against killing or for it.  The controversy surrounding the death penalty laws in the United States is made up of various arguments.  Other arguments surrounding the use of the death penalty include whether

In Florida, The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (Fins) states that as of January 1, 2009; Florida has 402 death row inmates, making it the state with the second highest number of death row inmates in the nation. The crimes that are punishable by death in Florida are first degree murder, felony murder, capital drug trafficking, and capital sexual battery. Currently, the methods of execution practiced are lethal injection and the electric chair. In lethal injection, there is a three drug combination which consists of Sodium Pentothal (an anesthetic), Pancuronium Bromide (a paralytic agent), and Potassium Chloride (stops the heart and causes death). In electrocution, the inmate is strapped down to a chair while various cycles of electrical currents differing in voltage and duration (500-2000 volts and up to 30 seconds) pass through the body damaging the internal organs and causing death.

The death penalty should be a last result action that is taken when one person is convicted of a crime involving the death of another person or living thing. The actions taken to kill someone on death row are horrific in, and to kill someone that didn't commit the crime is an appalling thing to do. DNA is an efficient way to prove the absolute guilt of an individual. The death penalty should not be enforced without the opportunity of a DNA test.

Prisons also cost a great deal of money to run and maintain and it is