Death Penalty: Pros and Cons,Gregg Vs Georgia Case Study
WebFeb 7, · Pros and Cons of Death Penalty. Twenty-nine states in the United States have legalized the death penalty. That means that twenty-one of our states are smart enough to keep it banned for the sense of our society now-a-days. Statistically, WebJan 8, · The death penalty is considered the harshest punishment for criminals. The idea of capital punishment was introduced into the legal system as a means to deter WebDeath penalty as a means of punishing crime and discouraging wrong behaviour has suffered opposition from various fronts. Religious leaders argue that it is morally wrong to WebApr 21, · In this essay, it will show the existence of the death penalty can be justified. Some of the biggest issues with the death penalty are: social safety, family members of WebMar 14, · Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty Essay. Death penalty has become one of the most controversial and debated issues in the United States and as a result the ... read more
Death penalty is one of the most controversial topic brought up in American politics. Within America, there are 31 states that carry out the death penalty and only 19 states that have abolished the practice. Many people are concerned whether or not the death penalty is beneficial to decreasing the amount of crime rates. Recently, the Supreme Court had a meeting to discuss the death penalty and if it went against the eight amendment. The eighth amendment states that it has banned cruel and unusual punishments but the death penalty is going against the idea. Compared to the late s the number of executions in America has decreased. In , there were only 28 executions with 48 new death sentences.
The death penalty is an ineffective and expensive way of dealing justice to the American people. It is easier and cheaper to send someone to prison for life than to have them face the death penalty and be executed. Capital punishment is an unnecessary punishment because criminals are already managed at prisons. The courts positions of the death penalty has changed over the years. For centuries societies have used death as the ultimate penalty for crime. In the 's, the court ruled against the death penalty as a "cruel and unusual punishment", which was forbidden by the eighth amendment of the Constitution.
By the 's the death penalty was again in wide use supported by the court and Congress, which continually expanded by legislation the crimes for which death would be an acceptable penalty. Britain has had a lengthy history with implementing the death penalty. The first known legal execution in the United States was in the colony of Virginia Reggie 1. Daniel Frank was executed for theft in Although this is the first recorded legal execution in Virginia, this was not the first execution in the United States. The first known use of the death penalty in the American colonies happened in , in the colony of Jamestown. During the Revolutionary War capital punishment was very.
The use of the death penalty in the United States has always been a controversial topic. The death penalty, also known as Capital Punishment, is a legal process where a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a heinous crime. The judicial decree that someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence, while the actual enforcement is an execution Bishop 1. Over the years, most of the world has abolished the death penalty. But the United States government, and a majority of its citizens, defend and support its continued use. There is evidence, however, that some attitudes about the death penalty are changing. The Death Penalty has been around since The death penalty is the execution of an offender sentenced to death after being convicted by a court of law of a criminal offense.
The term death penalty is sometimes used interchangeably with capital punishment, though imposition of the penalty is not always followed by execution because of the possibility of commutation to life imprisonment. During that time, there has been over 15, executions in America. Since decades have passed and the world has evolved, the death penalty has change by the uses of execution, which race is more likely to serve the death penalty, and the number of supporters. Essay Topics Writing. Home Page Research Benefits of the Death Penalty Essay. Benefits of the Death Penalty Essay Good Essays. Open Document. Have you ever thought about if the person next to you is a killer or a rapist? If he is, what would you want from the government if he had killed someone you know?
He should receive the death penalty! Murderers and rapists should be punished for the crimes they have committed and should pay the price for their wrongdoing. Having the death penalty in our society is humane; it helps the overcrowding problem and gives relief to the families of the victims, who had to go through an event such as murder. Without the death penalty, criminals would be more inclined to commit additional violent crimes. Fear of death discourages people from committing crimes. If capital punishment were carried out more it would prove to be the crime …show more content… The death penalty has been around since the time of Jesus Christ.
Executions have been recorded from the s to present times. From about , the executions by year increased in the US. It has been a steady increase up until the s; later the death penalty dropped to zero in the s and then again rose steadily. US citizens said that the death penalty was unconstitutional because it was believed that it was "cruel and unusual" punishment Kurtis In the s, the executions by year dropped between zero and one then started to rise again in the s. In the year , there were nearly one hundred executions in the US Biskupic On June 29, , the death penalty was suspended because the existing laws were no longer convincing. However, four years after this occurred, several cases came about in Georgia, Florida, and Texas where lawyers wanted the death penalty.
This set new laws in these states and later the Supreme Court decided that the death penalty was constitutional under the Eighth Amendment Biskupic The very first legal executions came in the United States was during the Revolutionary War against Great Britain. British soldiers hung the first person to die by the death penalty, Nathan Hale, for espionage Foley The reason that I have included this history is to prove that if something has been working, why stop. Get Access. Decent Essays. Gregg Vs Georgia Case Study Words 3 Pages. Gregg Vs Georgia Case Study. Read More. Imagine a person sitting alone for his entire life in a small room — the torture is real, just like the victims would have felt.
Also, solitary confinement would be more helpful in making them realise the grave crimes they committed before they die. Moreover, death is an inevitable part of life and the criminals too will have to die one day, so sentencing them to death would only make society free of inhuman criminals but it would fail to make the criminals realise that the acts they committed deserve worse than death. Capital punishment makes sure that people involved in any act of heinous crime like, war, crime, murder, sexual violence, espionage, human trafficking or treason must face the punishment above their heads and make efforts to stop it.
Why do they deserve it? Retributivists also think that the severity of punishment should match the severity of the crime. So, just as it is wrong to over-punish someone executing someone for stealing a pair of shoes , it cannot be right to under-punish someone giving him a community service order for murder. If you are a retributivist, you might support the death penalty because you think that certain or all murderers and perhaps other criminals deserve to suffer death for their crimes. Depending on how you think about death, however, you might oppose the death penalty on the grounds and basis that it is disproportionately harsh — perhaps you think that no matter what someone has done, she does not deserve to die for it.
On the other hand, you might oppose the death penalty on the grounds that it is disproportionately light. Many people who opposed the recent death sentence for the Boston bombers did so on the grounds that life in a maximum-security prison would be a worse punishment — and so more fitting — than death. Death penalty is a just punishment for crimes committed against the rights to life, freedom and safety of people — It is the right of an individual to live and survive peacefully and be free from danger and harm. Unfortunately, heinous crimes like murder, rape and assault are committed by perpetrators who have no regard for life and property of others.
People who are for capital punishment also talk about free will wherein an individual is given the right to do things in his or her own volition and he or she is responsible for his or her own fate. It deters would-be criminals to commit felonies- Advocates of death penalty cite examples on how imposing the death sentence or abolishing it have affected crime rate. On the other hand, fewer crimes were committed with the increase in number of inmates in the death row who were executed each year. Proponents say that these figures clearly indicate the efficacy of capital punishment on deterring crimes. The absence of death penalty leads to crime rate increase — As reported by time magazine, an estimated 2,, people in the United States have been victims of crimes, from assault to murder.
With insufficient laws to address this problem or the lack of teeth in these laws, criminals become careless and bolder to commit heinous crimes because of the leniency and flexibility in punishments and loop holes in the justice system. For these reasons, there is a quintessential need for death penalty. It is only constitutional and does not violate any rights — The main reason of controversy linked with capital punishment is the pain that the criminal goes through during the process of execution. However, more humane methods have already been adopted to make the process as painless and easy as possible. The pain is almost non-existent as a drug is used to put the criminal in a coma like state before execution.
Therefore, no rights are being violated by carrying out capital punishment and it is no form of torture. Death penalty burdens the government exchequer less as opposed to life imprisonment without parole — Proponents say despite expenses incurred by the government from imposing capital punishment, death penalty is still cheaper compared to the costs of life without parole. Although there is no contention that the cost of the former is high, life imprisonment is accumulatively higher given the expenses for food, health care and other costs of sustaining the lives of incarcerated individuals serving life. The death penalty removes dangerous people like serial killers from society to make it a safer place. Take the latest example of IAS Officer Kinjal Singh.
How she fought such a long battle of 31 years to get justice for his father, whose murderers were roaming free. If justice is not provided by the government, innocent people are left hopeless and frustrated. Therefore, for government and law of a nation, the key responsibility is to preserve the rights and freedom of its people. Possibly, capital punishment is the way to go. The death penalty gives the victims family a sense of closure which helps them to get on with their lives. Anything can happen to it at any moment. Plus statistics demonstrate that most of such criminals are usually extremely violent in nature.
And so, not just public, the criminal is also dangerous to his fellow prisoners. For police and government, it is not a good idea to put the safety of all prisoners under danger. Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Saudi Arabia. The country performed at least executions in the year , at least executions in the year , and at least executions in the year and China in late 20th century. Mohammad Azmal Amir Kasab, who was a Pakistani national, earned himself five death penalties and equal number of life imprisonments for multiple crimes in the country. Some of the major crimes which he and his associates committed on Indian soil were waging war and committing a murder of number of persons, attempt to murder with common intention, criminal conspiracy, and abetment, abduction for robbery, dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt and causing explosions.
The case for keeping a terrorist alive after conviction is based on flawed human reasoning. While it is always possible for a terrorist to repent and change his ways, what we have actually seen in the real world is that terrorists are highly motivated and believe in a cause that they think is worth killing for — and dying for, if necessary. This is what makes a terrorist kept alive in prison a greater danger than one sent to the gallows. The hijack of Indian Airlines shook the country to a great extent. To end the hijack and secure the release of passengers, we released three terrorists — Maulana Masood Azhar, who later went on to create the anti-India Jaish-e-Mohammed, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh who kidnapped and killed western journalist Daniel Pearl , and Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar, who was said to be training jehadi elements in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir.
The fact is the hijack was organized precisely to get these terrorists released. The mistake was not just in the handling of the hijack, but in keeping such inhuman people around at all who can destroy anything at anytime. Keeping terrorists alive is not an act of humanity or rationality for that matter, rather an invitation to further acts of inhumanity by their friends and partners. There is thus a strong case for ensuring quick convictions and awarding them the death penalty and seeking justice. Thus, whether capital punishment should be abolished or not is an ongoing debate. If death penalty is abolished, people will commit most heinous crimes without any fear of grave punishment.
Also, this would encourage other people to commit crimes. But at the same time, if an innocent individual gets killed due to unfair trial, which has happened in few cases, there would be no way to bring that person back to life. Thus, the capital punishment can or cannot be abolished in a country depending upon the situations prevailing in that country. Death Penalty: Pros and Cons. com, Jun 06, Accessed February 7, com , Jun Thus, the authors would try to make a balanced study of the pros and cons of capital punishment. Introduction Capital punishment also known as death penalty is the awarding of death sentence to a person who commits a heinous crime.
Number of people victimised by the crime — If a large number of people are killed or affected by the crime, awarding of death penalty is justified. For instance, a bomb blast or ethnic cleansing or other such crime where there are a lot of affected people.
Through this paper, the authors would like to analyze the merits and demerits of capital punishment and also the position of capital punishment in India and other nations. Firstly, authors will explain the meaning ,nature and definition of death penalty. Then, authors will analyze position of capital punishment in Indian nation, important case laws related to it and the reports of Law Commission with regard to capital punishment. In next section, authors will analyze the reasons for abolition of death penalty and what could be the alternative way of punishing the inhuman criminals instead of capital punishment.
The authors would thereafter discuss why capital punishment should not be abolished and the concept of retribution. The authors would describe the position of capital punishment in Saudi Arabia. At the end, the authors would discuss the case of Mohammad Azmal Kasab. Capital punishment also known as death penalty is the awarding of death sentence to a person who commits a heinous crime. Capital punishment is awarded by the state rather than an individual and it is a legal process. The term capital punishment was earlier used to refer to beheading which was one of the forms of awarding death penalty in olden times.
The mode of carrying out capital punishment is hanging the accused until death. Section 53 of Indian Penal Code prescribes death penalty as one of the punishments for crimes committed. Death penalty is also prescribed as a punishment under section of the Indian Penal Code which says that a person can be awarded with life imprisonment or death penalty if he commits murder. The constitutionality of capital punishment was challenges in this case as it went against the provisions of the constitution and denied the accused every chance of reforming himself. In another landmark case of Machchi Singh v. In this case, the appellant accused Machchi Singh alongwith some of his accomplices launched attacks in five villages of Punjab following a conflict with one man by the name of Amar Singh.
Manner in which the crime is committed — The crime should be committed in an extremely brutal manner in which no person having least sense of sympathy would commit it. In another case of Mithu v. In its 36th report, the Law Commission of India considered the constitutionality of awarding death sentence and made an in-depth study of the pros and cons of awarding capital punishment. After considering all the relevant factors, it recommended that India should continue with capital punishment as it could be risky for the country to abolish it, with so much diversity and vast population and where there is a lot of difference between societal upbringing, education etc.
of the people. However, the 20th law commission , headed by Justice A. Shah, recommended that death penalty should be awarded only in case of terrorism and under no other circumstance. It, however, said that it should not be abolished with immediate effect but slowly and gradually so that it comes to a complete end in near future. The commission was of the view that capital punishment did not have deterrent impact and therefore it would be better to abolish it. However, it was needed in cases of terrorism so that there is no threat to the nation with regard to its security and integrity. In the recent years, there is an increase in the number of people demanding to abolish capital punishment. The advocates of this school of thought have put forth various reasons of why capital punishment is not required which are as follows:.
It goes against the constitution—Article 21 of the constitution of India guarantees right to life to every citizen of India. Capital punishment violates this right as it takes away the right to live from an individual. The advocates of abolishing death penalty believe that no crime can be so grave as to deny an individual the right to live and following such a practice in itself is inhuman. Also, it takes away from the accused the chance to reform and come out as a better individual. It is against basic human rights—According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations, right to life, liberty and security is a fundamental human right which no one has the right to take away.
It cannot be reversed once awarded—Capital punishment cannot be reversed by the State or anyone once given. There have been many instances in the USA where innocent people got executed by the State following unfair trials. There is always a risk of executing an innocent person attached to death penalty. It does not deter crime — Many countries who have not abolished capital punishment have done so to deter other people from committing heinous crimes but there has been no drop in the number of heinous crimes in these countries and there is no data to support the claim that death penalty really deters criminals.
Retribution cannot justify death penalty—There can be no justification for an inhuman and cruel act as death penalty. Revenge for the victim is no justification for awarding of death penalty as it is an outdated thing and we cannot get the victim back by sentencing another person to death. The authors agree with the view that there are some crimes which are so grave and heinous that if we let go of the criminal, it might pose a threat to the security of the entire society. Not only this, in some cases the way accused criminals act is so inhuman and beastly that words cannot describe the abhorrence of the act. In Nirbhaya Delhi gangrape case , the rapists went beyond all imagination of beastly behaviour and tortured the victim in a way that even the mention of the act sends chills down the spine.
While some people are of the view that death penalty is best suited for such cowards and beasts in the disguise of humans, the authors are of the view that such people, who are unfit to be termed as humans and have no empathy towards any other person whatsoever, should not be killed but should be kept in solitary confinement for their entire lives because death kills a person just once but solitary confinement for life would kill them everyday until death. Imagine being locked in a small room for just a day with no one around, without any person to talk to- real tough? Imagine a person sitting alone for his entire life in a small room — the torture is real, just like the victims would have felt.
Also, solitary confinement would be more helpful in making them realise the grave crimes they committed before they die. Moreover, death is an inevitable part of life and the criminals too will have to die one day, so sentencing them to death would only make society free of inhuman criminals but it would fail to make the criminals realise that the acts they committed deserve worse than death. Capital punishment makes sure that people involved in any act of heinous crime like, war, crime, murder, sexual violence, espionage, human trafficking or treason must face the punishment above their heads and make efforts to stop it. Why do they deserve it? Retributivists also think that the severity of punishment should match the severity of the crime.
So, just as it is wrong to over-punish someone executing someone for stealing a pair of shoes , it cannot be right to under-punish someone giving him a community service order for murder. If you are a retributivist, you might support the death penalty because you think that certain or all murderers and perhaps other criminals deserve to suffer death for their crimes. Depending on how you think about death, however, you might oppose the death penalty on the grounds and basis that it is disproportionately harsh — perhaps you think that no matter what someone has done, she does not deserve to die for it.
On the other hand, you might oppose the death penalty on the grounds that it is disproportionately light. Many people who opposed the recent death sentence for the Boston bombers did so on the grounds that life in a maximum-security prison would be a worse punishment — and so more fitting — than death. Death penalty is a just punishment for crimes committed against the rights to life, freedom and safety of people — It is the right of an individual to live and survive peacefully and be free from danger and harm. Unfortunately, heinous crimes like murder, rape and assault are committed by perpetrators who have no regard for life and property of others. People who are for capital punishment also talk about free will wherein an individual is given the right to do things in his or her own volition and he or she is responsible for his or her own fate.
It deters would-be criminals to commit felonies- Advocates of death penalty cite examples on how imposing the death sentence or abolishing it have affected crime rate. On the other hand, fewer crimes were committed with the increase in number of inmates in the death row who were executed each year. Proponents say that these figures clearly indicate the efficacy of capital punishment on deterring crimes. The absence of death penalty leads to crime rate increase — As reported by time magazine, an estimated 2,, people in the United States have been victims of crimes, from assault to murder. With insufficient laws to address this problem or the lack of teeth in these laws, criminals become careless and bolder to commit heinous crimes because of the leniency and flexibility in punishments and loop holes in the justice system.
For these reasons, there is a quintessential need for death penalty. It is only constitutional and does not violate any rights — The main reason of controversy linked with capital punishment is the pain that the criminal goes through during the process of execution. However, more humane methods have already been adopted to make the process as painless and easy as possible. The pain is almost non-existent as a drug is used to put the criminal in a coma like state before execution. Therefore, no rights are being violated by carrying out capital punishment and it is no form of torture. Death penalty burdens the government exchequer less as opposed to life imprisonment without parole — Proponents say despite expenses incurred by the government from imposing capital punishment, death penalty is still cheaper compared to the costs of life without parole.
Although there is no contention that the cost of the former is high, life imprisonment is accumulatively higher given the expenses for food, health care and other costs of sustaining the lives of incarcerated individuals serving life. The death penalty removes dangerous people like serial killers from society to make it a safer place. Take the latest example of IAS Officer Kinjal Singh. How she fought such a long battle of 31 years to get justice for his father, whose murderers were roaming free. If justice is not provided by the government, innocent people are left hopeless and frustrated. Therefore, for government and law of a nation, the key responsibility is to preserve the rights and freedom of its people.
Possibly, capital punishment is the way to go. The death penalty gives the victims family a sense of closure which helps them to get on with their lives. Anything can happen to it at any moment. Plus statistics demonstrate that most of such criminals are usually extremely violent in nature. And so, not just public, the criminal is also dangerous to his fellow prisoners. For police and government, it is not a good idea to put the safety of all prisoners under danger. Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Saudi Arabia. The country performed at least executions in the year , at least executions in the year , and at least executions in the year and China in late 20th century.
Mohammad Azmal Amir Kasab, who was a Pakistani national, earned himself five death penalties and equal number of life imprisonments for multiple crimes in the country. Some of the major crimes which he and his associates committed on Indian soil were waging war and committing a murder of number of persons, attempt to murder with common intention, criminal conspiracy, and abetment, abduction for robbery, dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt and causing explosions. The case for keeping a terrorist alive after conviction is based on flawed human reasoning.
While it is always possible for a terrorist to repent and change his ways, what we have actually seen in the real world is that terrorists are highly motivated and believe in a cause that they think is worth killing for — and dying for, if necessary. This is what makes a terrorist kept alive in prison a greater danger than one sent to the gallows. The hijack of Indian Airlines shook the country to a great extent. To end the hijack and secure the release of passengers, we released three terrorists — Maulana Masood Azhar, who later went on to create the anti-India Jaish-e-Mohammed, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh who kidnapped and killed western journalist Daniel Pearl , and Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar, who was said to be training jehadi elements in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir.
The fact is the hijack was organized precisely to get these terrorists released. The mistake was not just in the handling of the hijack, but in keeping such inhuman people around at all who can destroy anything at anytime. Keeping terrorists alive is not an act of humanity or rationality for that matter, rather an invitation to further acts of inhumanity by their friends and partners. There is thus a strong case for ensuring quick convictions and awarding them the death penalty and seeking justice. Thus, whether capital punishment should be abolished or not is an ongoing debate. If death penalty is abolished, people will commit most heinous crimes without any fear of grave punishment.
Also, this would encourage other people to commit crimes. But at the same time, if an innocent individual gets killed due to unfair trial, which has happened in few cases, there would be no way to bring that person back to life.
Benefits of the Death Penalty Essay,Pros and Cons of Death Penalty
WebFeb 2, · Statistics have shown that the states that use the death penalty have a higher crime rate than those with out it. The chance that a person who has been convicted of WebIn this essay, we will discuss both sides of the argument by looking at the death penalty pros and cons. We will begin by examining the reasons why some people believe that WebJan 8, · The death penalty is considered the harshest punishment for criminals. The idea of capital punishment was introduced into the legal system as a means to deter WebJun 6, · Death Penalty: Pros and Cons. Through this paper, the authors would like to analyze the merits and demerits of capital punishment and also the position of capital WebDeath penalty as a means of punishing crime and discouraging wrong behaviour has suffered opposition from various fronts. Religious leaders argue that it is morally wrong to WebApr 21, · In this essay, it will show the existence of the death penalty can be justified. Some of the biggest issues with the death penalty are: social safety, family members of ... read more
Plus statistics demonstrate that most of such criminals are usually extremely violent in nature. These statutes require a two-stage trial procedure, in which the jury first determines guilt or innocence and then chooses imprisonment or death in the light of aggravating or mitigating circumstances. Check it out! Topic Death Penalty Level High School Pages 2 Words Rating 4. htm l; Kevin Johnson, Lawsuit Seeks to Block Imports of Key Execution Drug , USA Today, Feb.
Abolishing The Death Penalty In The United States. Words: Pages: 4 For my contemporary paper, I have selected a continuously debated subject, the matter of death penalty and whether it is humane. It is morally wrong and will be the doom of America, The [ Don Cabana, who supervised several executions in Missouri and Mississippi reflects on his mood just prior to witnessing an execution in death penalty pros and cons essay gas chamber:. For police and government, it is not a good idea to put the safety of all prisoners under danger. In this quote, Nelson Mandela highlights that the way prisoners are being treated will tell you about its government.
No comments:
Post a Comment