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. Are you Gonna pay for them to be alive then? Please note that while we value your input, we cannot respond to every message.
Also, if you have a comment about a particular piece of work on this website, please go to the page where that work is displayed and post a comment on it.
Don't have an account? Sign up for one. Wrong email address or password! Summer Program Reviews College Reviews. Writers Workshop Regular Forums. Program Links Program Reviews. By Unknown, Unknown, Unknown. I like this 0. Notes on Music MAG. Based on a true Society MAG.
This article has comments. Email me when someone replies. I agree with you Gledis! Being in jail for your entire life, is a worse punishment that being killed. There are people that don't fear death, and I am one of them. If they are dead, they won't suffer but their family will. Well, in my country, there is no "prejudice" against blacks, and also, the sentence needs to be confirmed by the High Court the apex court in the state , and can be commuted by the president.
I live in India btw. Or being tortured until you lose your sanity. Whoa - just looked that up. That's very interesting - thank you!! Big daddy 5 said Actually it it costs a lot more money in the overalls of the death penalty including the legal proceedings than it does for someone serving a life sentence.
I'm definitely with you - I think that the death penalty should be minimized as much as possible. 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: 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.
The Death Penalty - Is the death penalty really a rational and effective way to respond to the crimes of certain prisoners. Thirty one percent of society believes we should not keep the death penalty, while others believe that the death penalty .
The death penalty, described in this sample argumentative essay, is a highly controversial practice in modern times. While many countries have outlawed it, some (like the United States) practice capital punishment on the state level/5(16).
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. English Task –Argumentative Essay The Death Penalty The argument of whether the death penalty is effective is an age-old and contentious issue.
Example academic essay: The Death Penalty. This essay shows many important features which commonly appear in essays. Should the death penalty be restored in the UK? The restoration of the death penalty for serious crimes is an issue of debate in the UK because of the recent rise in violent crime. The causes, effects and solutions to 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.