He states that death penalty permanently incapacitates the offender from committing future crimes. He highlights that it is the most feared form of punishment and because of its finality, it could deter prospective murderers who are not deterred by long-term imprisonment. He also puts more weight on saving the lives of prospective victims rather than preserving the lives of convicted murderers who may re-offend. Based on their two controversial studies, they conclude that for each execution, five murders are prevented.
Conversely, one commutation results in five murders. While statistics appear to strengthen the argument in favor of death penalty, they are just numbers that do not support actual crime rates.
However, the strongest arguments are those that criticized the studies for their faulty methodologies, insufficient data and flawed assumptions Liptak, The studies attempt to link executions with murder rate changes over time. They ask whether executions made a difference in the crime rate at a given period. While this is a valid research question, studies fail to take into account other variables that have direct effect on crime rate such as the effectiveness of the judicial system, demographic changes, and economic conditions.
Critics add that the findings are skewed by data from a few jurisdictions, largely from Texas, hence, it is not representative of national data Liptak, With so few actual executions, the data is thin and conclusions derived from it are considered weak and misleading.
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: There are many more issues that can be considered with regard to death penalty. One can evaluate the racist argument, for instance, claiming that death penalty is more often imposed on Afro-Americans than European Americans and see how it relates to crime rate in the two groups.
Besides, ethical perspectives on this issue can be diverse and supported by many different theories. With the arguments presented above, however, it seems clear that there are many valid reasons in support of death penalty. On the contrary, anti-death penalty arguments need to be assessed critically, as, for instance, the religious argument.
Further research into the topic is necessary, with more authoritative studies on the deterrent effect of death penalty on the criminal rates, tracing various states in the US as well as evidence from other nations. It would also be interesting to examine the historical background of nations that have both capital punishment in their law codes and extremely low crime rate to see how death penalty affects crime rates.
On the more practical level, it is my deepest belief that currently capital punishment has to be preserved in order to protect potential victims. Any consideration of the crime rate cancellation would become viable if the crime rate at least for murders goes sharply down.
At present, however, capital punishment serves as an important barrier on the way of criminals ready to take another person's life. North Carolina Weslyan College. All Points Of View. Journal of Legal Studies, vol. Is Capital Punishment Morally Required? The Relevance of Life-Life Tradeoffs. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. State Executions, Deterrence and the Incidence of Murder.
Journal of Applied Economics, vol. Example Persuasive Paper on the Death Penalty Introduction Death penalty has been an inalienable part of human society and its legal system for centuries, regarded as a necessary deterrent to dangerous crimes and a way to liberate the community from dangerous criminals. Background The history of death penalty is almost as old as the history of mankind.
Argument Death penalty, in my view, has to be supported on the ground of just retribution for murder. Refutation Opponents of death penalty have given a number of arguments to support their position.
Conclusion There are many more issues that can be considered with regard to death penalty. We all live in a society with the same basic rights and guarantees. We have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness with equal opportunities.
This is the basis for our society. It is the foundation on which everything else is built upon. When someone willfully and flagrantly attacks this foundation by murdering another, robbing them of all they are, and all they will ever be, then that person can no longer be a part of this society.
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.
An argumentative essay about death penalty. The death penalty is the ultimate punishment. There is no harsher punishment than death itself.
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 .
The Death Penalty - The death penalty continues to be an issue of controversy and is an issue that will be debated in the United States for many years to come. This assignment instructed students to write a persuasive essay which argues for a specific viewpoint or a specific action to be taken on a societal issue. I argued for a specific stance to be taken on the issue of the death penalty. The audience for this essay is the opinion section of the.
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. Death Penalty Essay Is the Death Penalty a Deterrent to Future Crimes? The most heinous of crimes are subject to the highest form of punishment – death penalty.