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. Supporters of this punishment argue that it serves as a deterrent to crime, and that justice is being served. My personal stance on the death penalty is that it is an outdated and ineffective punishment, serving no true benefit to society and causing more harm than good to society as a whole. When looking at the argument that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to others thinking about committing the same crime, we need only look to other countries around the world as examples to disprove this.
Throughout the world, we are able to see that, in those countries where there is no death penalty, murders and other violent crimes happen at a much lower rate than in the United States. It does seem counter-intuitive, but the evidence is clear. We can also clearly see that, in the United States, many people still commit these horrendous crimes, knowing full well that capital punishment exists.
In the heat of the moment, when a person is not thinking clearly and logically, the existence of the death penalty and the possibility that they could be facing this punishment does not typically cross their mind, and cause them to alter their behavior. We can see this in the consistent, and increasing, number of violent crimes being committed year after year in this country. There have also been widely publicised cases of wrongly convicted individuals, who were either put to death or were awaiting their punishment, that were revealed to be innocent.
The victim is naked and almost split in half due to a massive, deep gash running across his chest. People who commit such acts of violence deserve to die because they cause unbearable harm to the victims, their families, and the society. When the police do not catch the murders, the thought of the murders walking the streets has a dramatic effect on society in the form of anxiety, stress, and the limitations it imposes on the lifestyles and activities of those who are caused to now live in fear.
Even when caught and sentenced to life in prison, these violent criminals do not stop wreaking havoc on society. Life sentence prisoners have nothing to lose and therefore become lifelong jailhouse criminals posing a constant danger to the guards and other prison employees and to any unsuspecting bystanders they may encounter if they should ever escape. I therefore think that these people should be put to death because a world without them is much better than one with them roaming the streets or in jail causing constant fear and havoc.
Some would argue that putting to death is morally wrong and inhumane. But, I wonder what they would think if they were miraculously transported to the scene where the murders took place to see the terror and the pain that these violent offenders cause by raping children, torturing innocent people, and slaughtering their victims without mercy. 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 Sunday New York Times.
This publication has a wide readership. The largest percentage of readers are between the ages of 35 and 44, and the majority of readers have either a college degree or a graduate degree. This essay argues for a question of value. The death penalty is an issue that has the United States quite divided. While there are many supporters of it, there is also a large amount of opposition. Currently, there are thirty-three states in which the death penalty is legal and seventeen states that have abolished it Death Penalty Information Center.
I believe the death penalty should be legal throughout the nation. There are many reasons as to why I believe the death penalty should be legalized in all states, including deterrence, retribution, and morality; and because opposing arguments do not hold up, I will refute the ideas that the death penalty is unconstitutional, irrevocable mistakes are made, and that there is a disproportionality of race and income level. The use of capital punishment greatly deters citizens from committing crimes such as murder.
Ernest van den Haag, a professor at Fordham University, wrote about the issue of deterrence:. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts….
Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence.
This was due to other possible murderers being deterred from committing murder after realizing thatother criminals are executed for their crimes. Capital punishment also acts as a deterrent for recidivism the rate at which previously convicted criminals return to committing crimes after being released ; if the criminal is executed he has no opportunity to commit crimes again. Some may argue that there is not enough concrete evidence to use deterrence as an argument for the death penalty.
The reason some evidence may be inconclusive is that the death penalty often takes a while to be carried out; some prisoners sit on death row for years before being executed. This can influence the effectiveness of deterrence because punishments that are carried out swiftly are better examples to others.
Although the death penalty is already effective at deterring possible criminals, it would be even more effective if the legal process were carried out more quickly instead of having inmates on death row for years. The death penalty also carries out retribution justly. When someone commits a crime it disturbs the order of society; these crimes take away lives, peace, and liberties from society.
Giving the death penalty as a punishment simply restores order to society and adequately punishes the criminal for his wrongdoing. Retribution also serves justice for murder victims and their families. This lack of malice is proven in the simple definition of retribution: The death penalty puts the scales of justice back in balance after they were unfairly tipped towards the criminal.
The morality of the death penalty has been hotly debated for many years. Those opposed to the death penalty say that it is immoral for the government to take the life of a citizen under any circumstance. It is immoral to not properly punish a person who has committed such a horrendous crime.
The criminal is also executed humanely; in no way is he subjected to torture or any form of cruelty. All states that use the death penalty use lethal injection; the days of subjecting a prisoner to hanging or the electric chair are long gone in the US. Inmates are first given a large dose of an anesthetic so they do not feel any pain Bosner ; this proves that the process is made as humane as possible so the inmates do not physically suffer.
Although the issue of morality is very personal for many people, it is important to see the facts and realize that capital punishment does take morality into account and therefore is carried out in the best way possible. The eighth amendment to the United States Constitution prevents cruel and unusual punishment. Many opponents of capital punishment say that execution is cruel and unusual punishment and therefore violates the Constitution.
As was stated earlier, the recipient of the death penalty is treated humanely and is not tortured in any way, shape, or form. After the anesthetic is administered the person feels no pain; the only part of the process that could be considered painful is when the IV is inserted, but that is done in hospitals on a daily basis and no one is calling it unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld the death penalty as constitutional in cases they have presided over. In the case of Furman v. The Supreme Court has not found capital punishment to be unconstitutional, and therefore this argument for abolition is invalid. Another argument put forth by death penalty abolitionists is the possibility of executing an innocent person.
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.
Read the following argumentative essay sample and learn what arguments to use when writing a paper on a controversial topic about death penalty. Essay: Arguments against the Death Penalty. The racial and economic bias is not a valid argument against the death penalty. It is an argument against the courts and their unfair system of sentencing. No side was taken in this essay however the title clearly states that the essay should be on arguments against. Vote Up 1 Vote Down Reply.
The death penalty is something that many people do not have a clear decision on. Many people support the death penalty, while others wish for the death penalty to be abolished, and there are some that support the death penalty, but only in certain cases. My personal opinion on the death penalty is. 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.