Cuhuatemoc Hinricky Peraita, 25, an inmate who was serving life without parole for 3 murders was found guilty of killing a fellow inmate Recidivism. The killer was finally sentenced to electrocution.
However, if he had been sentenced to death right after the first murder, the other three could have been prevented.
The life of an inmate who died at the hands of Peraita is no less valuable than his own. In fact, I strongly believe that it could have been more valuable: Maybe that person was not guilty of such a heinous crime as murder? Unfortunately, there is too much evidence that certain individuals tend to commit murder while others are less prone to it. Death penalty would then free society from the return of such individuals.
Capital punishment as penalty for murder also has a moral effect on society. It signals to the criminals that murder is a serious crime the community feels strongly about. In fact, it creates the useful perception of human life as something so precious that taking it has no justification. Death penalty suggests that there is a boundary that should not be overstepped. This should send a message to society members that taking a person's property, however reprehensible, is not to be condemned via taking a life.
On the contrary, murder will not be tolerated, and people who have committed this crime should be removed from society as incapable of social living. Another common argument given in favour of death penalty is an economical consideration.
Comparisons differ depending on the bias of the people carrying out the comparison. However, these extra expenses have to be diminished through increasing the cost-efficiency of the legal system, and society that is spending huge amounts on legal services would benefit from such a reform. Just considering the cost of keeping a year-old inmate incarcerated till the end of one's life is startling and endorses the view that society has to select death penalty as a cheaper option.
Opponents of death penalty have given a number of arguments to support their position. In the first place, it is opposed by people on religious grounds. Representatives of various religious groups claim that only God can take a human life and human being are then not sanctioned to kill each other. However, in the Hebrew Scriptures there is evidence that Jews applied death penalty to criminals for selected types of crime. The couple was killed for lying about the size of the proceeds from the sale of a house in an effort to conceal part of their income.
Proceeding to the Christian Scriptures, one finds some evidence that was said to be indicative of Christ's opposition to death penalty questionable. Thus, there is a renowned episode with the female sinner John 8: Jesus was not in fact censuring the right to kill the woman according to the ancient law. Besides, there is evidence suggesting that this passage was not present in the original version of the Scripture and was later added by an unknown person Religious Tolerance.
Besides, the passage from Matthew 5: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment Thus, Christian intolerance of death penalty appears doubtful. To negate death first of all would mean the moratorium on wars that take lives of more people than death penalty.
The war casualties are often innocent peaceful people who just happened to be caught in the cross-fire, unlike recidivist criminals who end up on death row. Yet most Christian states prepare military doctrines and demonstrate to each other readiness to employ their military machine to kill people if necessary.
Still others are practicing war if it suits their political goals. How significantly will then abolition of death penalty forward the goal of living a Christian life? The same argument applies to the anti-death penalty claim that the legal system should not be allowed to execute because there is a possibility of a legal mistake that will result in the death of a wrong person NCWC. On these grounds, wars have to be forbidden in the first place since they keep killing people that are not to blame at all.
They either do their best fighting for their motherland in expectation of a heroic death or just, as mentioned before, get caught in cross-fire. Thus, any nation that does not exclude a war should not exclude death penalty that is a much more balanced mechanism. Besides, the legal system is unfortunately prone to mistakes, as are all social institutions, but this does not mean that they should not be used to carry out their functions. Most other penalties like imprisonment take a heavy toll on human life, yet they are applied to criminals, even if there is a threat of ruining a person's life by mistake.
Besides, returning to the incident in Alabama in the previous section, a person dying at the hands of an acknowledged murderer in prison is also a fatal mistake of the legal system. If the system rightfully recognized the capacity to continue killing in the criminal, his final victim would have saved his life. First, it is still preserved in many nations including the US that fits into many criteria of a civilized country. Besides, quite a few nations that have it in their penal codes like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Barbado, Bangladesh enjoy a relatively low crime rate.
This underscores that death penalty adequately serves the main purpose of the legal system: It has been proven that minorities and those with lower income levels are overrepresented on death row. This is not due to discrimination; this is due to the higher rate at which these groups commit crime ProCon. It has been argued that poverty breeds criminality; if this is true then it makes sense that those at a lower income level would more frequently be sentenced to execution than those at higher income levels ProCon.
It has also been proven that minorities are disproportionately poor, and therefore they would also be more likely to receive the death penalty.
Ernest van den Haag said it best:. The only relevant question is: Whether or not others deserved the same punishment, whatever the economic or racial group, have avoided execution is irrelevant. It does not matter what race or economic status a person is, if he is guilty he must receive the appropriate punishment, which in some cases may be the death penalty. Capital punishment can be a difficult topic to approach because people tend to have extreme views on it.
The death penalty is an asset to society; it deters potential criminals as well as serves retribution to criminals, and is in no way immoral. The arguments against the death penalty often do not hold up when examined more closely. It is important that the nation is united on this issue, rather than having some states use capital punishment while others do not. The death penalty can be an extremely useful tool in sentencing criminals that have committed some of the worst crimes known to society.
It is imperative that we begin to pass legislation making capital punishment legal throughout the United States so that justice can be served properly. The Case for Justice. Death Penalty Curricula for High School. Death Penalty Information Center. This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 24th, at 5: You can follow any comments to this entry through the RSS 2. You can leave a comment , or trackback from your own site. You must be logged in to post a comment. Ernest van den Haag, a professor at Fordham University, wrote about the issue of deterrence: Ernest van den Haag said it best: Works Cited Bosner, Kevin.
July 10, at 9: March 23, at March 1, at 9: January 5, at 6: December 1, at 1: December 1, at October 18, at Score Hero Hack Download. August 19, at 9: July 20, at 3: July 7, at July 1, at June 30, at 8: June 30, at 7: June 26, at 8: June 14, at 8: June 10, at 8: League Of Legends Hack Ip. The only method that completely separates cold blooded murderers from our society is the death penalty. As the 20th century comes to a close, it is evident that our justice system is in need of reform.
This reform will shape the future of our country, and we cannot jump to quick solutions such as the elimination of the death penalty.
As of now, the majority of American supports the death penalty as an effective solution of punishment. Why not execute them and save society the cost of their keep? However, it seems obvious to some Americans that the death penalty is a just and proper way to handle convicted murderers. Whatever henious crime one does,we are not uncivilised and barbaric to take the lives of others.
If we ought to give them death sentence as punishment,then what distinguishes us from the criminals? If insecurity is the major issue behind demanding capital punishment,then the best solution is framing the punishment in such a way that the culprit would never be a threat to the society,not hanging to death.
The death penalty is funded by the taxes we pay to the government. The title is Arguments against the Death Penalty yet the author spent the whole time counterclaiming any arguments brought up rather than explaining the logistics behind the arguments. No side was taken in this essay however the title clearly states that the essay should be on arguments against.
Are you Gonna pay for them to be alive then? We are wasting money that could be spent helping the homeless or retired vetrans. Arguments against the Death Penalty. Schoolworkhelper Editorial Team https: If we've helped you, please help us feed and educate a child by uploading your old homework!
The death penalty is the punishment of execution, carried out legally against an individual convicted of a capital crime. Those who support the death penalty might argue that it is just, and deters further murders, while others against it may argue that it is inhumane and it doesn’t solve any core problems in that person’s life.
English Task –Argumentative Essay The Death Penalty The argument of whether the death penalty is effective is an age-old and contentious issue. Many people believe that “an eye for an eye” mentality is barbaric and goes against basic human morals. Others are of the opinion that it .
Essay Death Penalty. in , states that have the death penalty had the same or higher murder rates as those that don’t. However, some of the lowest crime rates on the planet belong to China, a country to which the death penalty is hardly a stranger. An argumentative essay about death penalty. The death penalty is the ultimate punishment. There is no harsher punishment than death itself.
Nov 20, · 3. Argumentative Essay About Death Penalty The Absurdity of the Death Penalty - Words. of the Death Penalty Over twelve hundred men and women have been killed in the United States as a result of capital punishment. There are over three . The Death Penalty, Argumentative Essay Sample October 21, Gloria Kopp Writing Samples 8 The majority of Americans have a clear and strong stance when it comes to the death penalty, no matter which side of the debate they sit on.