why the death penalty should not be abolished essay

Why death penalty should not be abolished



	4
	825
	, , ,

Table of Contents

Introduction

The current state of sentencing was triggered by the changes in the law where the primary goal was to apply justice but in a manner tempered by mercy. As a result, the Federal Courts suspended all executions, and decades later, in 1976, most states had changed their statutes, conforming with the Supreme Court guidelines (McFarland, 2016). For nearly five decades, the reforms that ended the death penalty have made very little change in the level of crime. It has become very challenging to impose the death penalty despite the tremendous costs associated with capital trials and appeals. At the moment, there are thirty-two states in the country alongside the U.S military that still retain the right, and rightly so, to sentence people to death (McFarland, 2016). The death penalty is a just form of retribution for capital offenses, a deterrent, and means of preserving moral order in society, and therefore should not be abolished.

Arguments in Favor of the Death Penalty

Death penalties can help deter crime. In essence, the death penalty is a deterrent to capital crime, whereby a harsh punishment is required to discourage people from committing similar crimes. When the death penalty is applied, it serves three primary functions: general deterrence, specific deterrence, and retribution. General deterrence is a much broader message or threat sent to the people contemplating taking part in atrocious crimes (Andre and Velasquez, 2022). It cautions them against committing similar atrocities because they fear being subjected to such a harsh punishment. On the other hand, a specific deterrence speaks directly to a defendant and means that the individual will not be allowed to live to kill other people. Lastly, the penological argument of retribution is based on the principle that society’s ideals must be upheld by doing the right thing, which means punishing the person who commits a crime. The death penalty should be made available for the worst of offenders.

The death penalty is a just retribution for capital offenses. Retribution, in a broad sense, is a punishment imposed because it is deserved. It is founded on the principle that all guilty people should be punished, only the guilty deserve punishment, and the guilty should be punished based on the severity of the crime committed. As such, murderers and others committing heinous crimes are given the death penalty because they have earned it based on the severity of the offense. Andre and Velasquez (2022) argue that it is only suitable for people to be punished based on the severity of their crimes. Many states appreciate the vital role that capital punishment in the form of the death penalty can have in creating a just society. It is unsurprising that they still allow the practice within their borders. Some extreme crimes punishable by death include first-degree murder, felony murder, murder during a rape, terrorism, and hijacking an aircraft, among other heinous crimes (Venturi, 2016). The federal laws allow for the death penalty to be applied in similar offenses, like civil rights offenses that result in the death of people, murder of foreign and domestic officials, and treason, among others. Allowing the death penalty to be applied in such extreme crimes means that the punishment fits the crime, and such retribution serves justice for the murder victims and their loved ones.

Arguments in Favor of Abolishing the Death Penalty

On the contrary, opponents of the death penalty have argued that killing persons accused of crimes is inhumane and cruel. Moreover, they state that the death penalty fails to consider the complex social and economic factors that drive crime rates (Ilyin, 2019). Another argument is that some crimes are committed spontaneously and individuals do not plan on getting caught or think through the consequences of their actions. It has also been argued that the death sentence denies people the opportunity to reform. However, such arguments fail to factor in the cost incurred by correctional centers, the appeal process, and numerous other judicial and reformative processes (McFarland, 2016). Appeal cases in a study carried out in the State of Oklahoma that relied on 15 state studies showed that capital appeal was five or six times more than non-capital appeals (Oklahoma Death Penalty Review Commission, 2017).

Conclusions

The basic argument behind just laws and sentences is that natural justice is applied when people get punished for their wrongdoing. Also, it means they suffer in a way befitting their crimes. Indeed, each defendant should get what their crime deserves, and in the case of capital offenses such as murder, such crime deserve the death penalty. Also, by taking such extreme steps, the law enforcement and judicial arms could send a message that such crimes are abhorred and punishable by death and deter individuals, thus creating a safer society. Better attention must be paid to punishing offenses than putting a lot of resources into reforming individuals and using a long and expensive process to achieve the latter goal. It is only right to punish offenses and do so in proportion to the crimes.

why the death penalty should not be abolished essay

Andre, C and Velasquez, M. (2022, Jul. 7). ‘Capital Punishment: Our Duty or Our Doom.’ Santa Clara University. https://www.scu.edu/mcae/publications/iie/v1n3/capital.html
Ilyin, G. (2019). 5 Reasons Some People Think The World Needs the Death Penalty. Amnesty International. https://www.amnesty.org.au/5-reasons-some-people-think-the-world-needs-the-death-penalty/
McFarland, T. (2016). “The Death Penalty vs. Life Incarceration: A Financial Analysis,” Susquehanna University Political Review: Vol. 7 , Article 4. Available at: https://scholarlycommons.susqu.edu/supr/vol7/iss1/4
Oklahoma Death Penalty Review Commission (ODPRC). (2017). Appendix IB; An Analysis of the Economic Costs of Capital Punishment in Oklahoma. https://files.deathpenaltyinfo.org/legacy/files/pdf/Report-of-the-OK-Death-Penalty-Review-April-2017-a1b.pdf
Venturi, G.C. (2016). The Death Penalty. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313876668_The_Death_Penalty
Bill of Rights
Civil Disobedience
Drunk Driving
First Amendment
Forensic Science
Gang Violence
Human Rights
Identity Theft

10 Reasons Why The Death Penalty is Wrong

The death penalty is wrong because it disproportionately affects certain groups, inflicts physical and psychological torment, burdens taxpayers, and doesn’t deter or resolve the root causes of crime.

Over 70% of the countries in the world have abolished the death penalty , but it’s still used in places like China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. Public opinion is divided, but over the years, support for the death penalty has waned. Supporters say it’s a valuable crime deterrent while opponents argue it fails in this purpose. In this article, we’ll explore these claims, as well as other reasons why the death penalty is wrong.

#1. It’s inhumane #2. It inflicts psychological torment #3. It burdens taxpayers #4. It doesn’t deter crime #5. It doesn’t address the root causes of crime #6. It’s biased against people experiencing poverty #7. It’s disproportionately hurts people with disabilities #8. It has a racial bias #9. It’s used as a tool of authoritarianism #10. It’s irreversible

#1. It’s inhumane

Content warning: This paragraph includes descriptions of a botched execution

Methods of execution have included firing squads, hanging, the electric chair, and lethal injections. Are these punishments inhumane? Death penalty critics look to The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment , which is an international treaty intended to prevent actions considered inhumane. While the Convention doesn’t take a clear stance on the death penalty, many believe executions should be classified as cruel and inhumane. For those who believe executions can be performed “humanely,” there’s still the problem of botched executions. Research shows that 3% of executions between 1890-2010 in the US were botched. Lethal injection has the highest rate of error despite being the most common execution option. When injections go wrong, it can take a long time for a prisoner to die.

In 2014 in Oklahoma, Clayton Lockett was subjected to a botched execution. Things started poorly while the execution team hunted for a viable vein and realized they didn’t have the right needles . Then, it took at least 16 pokes to get an IV inserted. Lockett was in clear distress as the drugs began to enter his body, and the execution was halted. Lockett died of a heart attack 43 minutes after the first drug – midazolam – was administered. While it’s not clear if the drug can be blamed in Lockett’s case, sedatives like midazolam have played a role in several botched executions. Given these facts, the death penalty can easily be considered inhumane.

#2. It inflicts psychological torment

While the death penalty can cause severe physical pain, the time spent on death row can inflict psychological torment, as well. According to The Death Penalty Information Center, death-row prisoners in the United States typically spend over a decade waiting for their execution dates or for their death sentences to be overturned. During those agonizing years, prisoners are isolated, excluded from any employment or educational programs, and restricted from exercise or visitation. This can cause what some experts call “death row syndrome,” which makes prisoners suicidal and delusional. The prisoner is essentially tortured while on death row.

The death penalty doesn’t only affect death-row prisoners. Those working on death row suffer, too. In 2022, NPR released an investigation where they spoke with current and former executioners, lawyers, wardens, and other workers who had been involved with more than 200 executions. They reported “serious mental and physical repercussions.” Nearly everyone NPR spoke with no longer supported the death penalty. While some may still believe death is an appropriate punishment for certain crimes, society needs to consider the health of those tasked with carrying out that punishment.

#3. It burdens taxpayers with high costs

States use taxpayer money to fund executions. You may think death penalty sentences cost less than life imprisonment, but research shows that’s not true. According to data collected by Amnesty International, Kansas paid 70% more for a death penalty case than a comparable non-death penalty case. The median cost of a non-death penalty case (through the end of incarceration) is $740,000 while the median cost of a death penalty case through execution is a striking $1.26 million. Why is the death penalty so expensive? Legal and pre-trial fees, as well as the length of death penalty trials, the cost of appeals, and heightened security on death row all cost more than non-death penalty cases.

Many taxpayers have moral qualms about their taxes going to the death penalty, but there are tangible consequences, too. The money used for death penalty cases is being diverted from other measures such as mental health treatment, victim services, drug treatment programs, and more. Most people would prefer their taxes to pay for these types of services rather than long trials, appeals, and other death-penalty case activities.

#3. It doesn’t deter crime

Many people can admit the death penalty is not a perfect system, but if it deters crime, isn’t it worth keeping? That statement contains a big “if.” The Death Penalty Information Center has information showing that states without the death penalty have a consistently lower murder rate than states with the death penalty. Since 1990, the gap has increased. A 2020 analysis found that 9 out of 10 states with the highest pandemic murder rates were states with the death penalty. 8 out of the 11 states with the lowest pandemic murder rates had abolished the death penalty. Data like this suggests that the death penalty does not deter murder.

Why isn’t the threat of death enough to dissuade people from committing murder? The answer may lie in human psychology and the minds of those committing crimes. According to an article in Psychology Today, most offenders don’t behave rationally during a crime. Poor mental health is a common trigger. According to research, 43% of those in state prisons have a diagnosed mental disorder. When it comes to what’s known as “expressive crimes,” which are crimes driven by rage, depression, and drug or alcohol use, people are not thinking about the consequences they might face. The death penalty doesn’t factor into their decision-making.

#4. It doesn’t address the root causes of crime

The causes of crime are complex, but there’s little doubt that the death penalty fails to address them. Consider the United States, which experienced a post-2020 increase in violence. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, gun violence was a major contributor. The FBI found that guns were responsible for 77% of murders nationwide in 2020. In the same report, COVID-19 was frequently referenced as a factor as more people experienced disruptions to their jobs and social lives. Americans’ mental health suffered, as well, and while people with mental illness are more likely to be the victims of crime rather than perpetrators, certain illnesses (and a lack of treatment) are linked to criminal behavior.

The death penalty doesn’t address any of the possible roots of violent crime, including socioeconomic disruptions and mental health. Considering the cost of death penalty cases and their effect on the mental health of all those involved, one could argue that the death penalty contributes to conditions that lead to crime.

Want to learn more about the death penalty? Check out these articles .

#6. It’s biased against people experiencing poverty

The death penalty is not applied equally based on the crimes people commit. Certain groups are much more likely than others to receive a sentence. According to The International Federation of Human Rights, 95% of prisoners on death row in the United States come from “underprivileged backgrounds. ” This doesn’t mean people experiencing poverty have an inherent urge to commit crimes. The criminalization of poverty increases a person’s risk for arrest, while the high cost of education, mental health treatment, substance abuse treatment, and other assistance can push people into crime.

Once in the criminal justice system, those with money can pay for private lawyers, investigations, appeals, and other actions that help them avoid the death penalty. Those experiencing poverty have to rely on underfunded public defenders. Rather than punishing those who’ve committed the most severe crimes, the system punishes those with the fewest resources. If the death penalty disproportionately affects people experiencing poverty, it’s a deeply unfair and unjust system.

#7. It’s disproportionately hurting people with intellectual disabilities

People with intellectual disabilities face increased discrimination in the criminal justice system. They’re more likely to falsely confess to a crime , less equipped to work with lawyers, and more likely to experience harsh and violent treatment in prison. In the United States, jurisdictions using capital punishment are required to make sure that people with intellectual disabilities are not sentenced to death or executed. However, the standards for this determination are not consistent. According to The Innocence Project, at least 12 states use IQ scores to determine intellectual disability , a method many experts find problematic. Certain states also require clear evidence, while others only ask for a “preponderance of evidence.” This means a person could be considered intellectually disabled in one state and not in another.

Even if a person with intellectual disabilities is not ultimately killed by the state, the road to a new sentence is brutal. Raymond Riles, who was sent to death row in 1976, remained there for more than 45 years despite being repeatedly deemed mentally incompetent. In 2021, his death sentence was finally tossed and he was sentenced to life in prison. Riles’ story is just one of many where a person with intellectual disabilities is mistreated or executed.

What factor influences your opinion on the death penalty the most?

Whether or not it deters crime
Whether or not it causes physical or emotional pain
Whether or not it’s a waste of money
Whether or not it discriminates against certain groups
Whether or not it’s exploited by the state

View Results

#8. It has a racial bias

In the United States, racial discrepancies are the biggest concern for many death penalty critics. According to research, 35% of people executed in the last 40 years have been Black, despite the fact Black Americans only make up 13% of the general population. When researchers take a closer look, they discover patterns of discrimination based on race. Virginia in particular has been scrutinized for its history, which has roots in early capital punishment laws. White defendants could only be executed for first-degree murder, while a variety of non-homicide crimes could get enslaved Black defendants executed. Between 1900-1969, Virginia executed 73 Black men for non-homicide crimes , while 185 were executed for murder. In that same time frame, no white person was executed for a non-homicide crime while 46 were executed for murder. In 2021, Virginia abolished the death penalty, citing the state’s history of racial disparities.

There’s also racial bias regarding what crimes receive death penalty sentences. According to a 2003 study, prosecutors were more likely to seek the death penalty when the victim was white , while they were less likely to pursue that verdict if the victim was Black. Another study, this one from 2007, reflected similar findings. Nationally, mountains of research show racial bias in how the death penalty is applied.

#9. It’s used as a tool of authoritarianism

In theory, the death penalty is only meant to punish the most serious crimes, like murder. However, in places around the world, governments use executions freely and for non-lethal crimes. According to Amnesty International, recorded executions in 2022 hit their highest figure in five years . 883 people (which does not count the thousands possibly executed in China) were killed across 20 countries, which represents a 53% rise since 2021. Amnesty’s Secretary General says almost 40% of all known executions are for drug-related offenses, while in Iran, people were executed for protesting the regime. Because the governments still using the death penalty often hide their numbers, there are likely more executions not on the record.

It’s clear many governments inflicting the death penalty are not interested in justice, but rather in suppression and control. By using the death penalty arbitrarily, authorities set shifting definitions for what’s “unacceptable” in society and what’s an appropriate punishment. It makes citizens fearful and violates their human rights. As long the death penalty is legal, it has the potential to be abused for a government’s own purposes.

#10. It can’t be reversed in light of new evidence or errors

What makes the death penalty distinct from life in prison is that the judgment can’t be reversed if new evidence is discovered. It’s a disturbingly frequent occurrence. In 2000, Professor James Liebman from Columbia Law School released a study examining every capital conviction and appeal between 1973-1995. More than 90% of the states that gave death sentences had overall error rates of 52% or higher. 85% of states had error rates of 60% or higher. A more recent analysis from 2014 collected data from all death sentences between 1973-2004. They estimated that around 1 in 25 of those given a death sentence had likely been incorrectly convicted. While most of those who receive a death penalty sentence are eventually removed from death row to serve life imprisonment, innocent prisoners are never freed.

The Death Penalty Information Center maintains a database of exonerations , which means the person was acquitted or the charges were dismissed completely. Reasons include false confessions, insufficient evidence, perjury, official misconduct, and inadequate legal defense. Data like this exposes how flawed the criminal justice system is and how frequent errors are. It’s not a system we should trust with people’s lives.

The death penalty: a reading list

Interested in learning more about the death penalty? Here’s where to start:

Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption | Bryan Stevenson

This 2015 book (also made into a film) follows Bryan Stevenson as he establishes the Equal Justice Initiative. The book mostly focuses on Stevenson’s work for Water McMillian, a Black man sentenced to death for a crime he didn’t commit.

Dead Man Walking: The Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty That Sparked a National Debate | Helen Prejean

Written in 1994, this book follows a Roman Catholic nun as she learns about the death penalty in America, gets to know everyone touched by the system, and works through her beliefs.

Let the Lord Sort Them: The Rise and Fall of the Death Penalty | Maurice Chammah

In this award-winning 2022 book, Maurice Chammah tracks the story of capital punishment through stories of those with personal experience, like a prosecutor turned judge, a lawyer, executioners, and the prisoners living on death row. Chammah is a journalist and staff writer for The Marshall Project.

Right Here, Right Now: Life Stories from America’s Death Row | Ed. Lynden Harris

A collection of 99 first-person, anonymous accounts of men on death row in the United States, this 2021 book shines a light on the humanity of the people who’ve been sentenced to death. The book is organized into eight life stages from early childhood right to the moment a man faces his execution.

15 Political Issues We Must Address

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for LGBTQ+ Rights

16 Inspiring Civil Rights Leaders You Should Know

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Housing Rights

15 Examples of Gender Inequality in Everyday Life

11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger

15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai

12 Ways Poverty Affects Society

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Share full article

Supported by

student opinion

Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?

In its last six months, the United States government has put 13 prisoners to death. Do you think capital punishment should end?

By Nicole Daniels

Students in U.S. high schools can get free digital access to The New York Times until Sept. 1, 2021.

In July, the United States carried out its first federal execution in 17 years. Since then, the Trump administration has executed 13 inmates, more than three times as many as the federal government had in the previous six decades.

The death penalty has been abolished in 22 states and 106 countries, yet it is still legal at the federal level in the United States. Does your state or country allow the death penalty?

Do you believe governments should be allowed to execute people who have been convicted of crimes? Is it ever justified, such as for the most heinous crimes? Or are you universally opposed to capital punishment?

In “ ‘Expedited Spree of Executions’ Faced Little Supreme Court Scrutiny ,” Adam Liptak writes about the recent federal executions:

In 2015, a few months before he died, Justice Antonin Scalia said he w o uld not be surprised if the Supreme Court did away with the death penalty. These days, after President Trump’s appointment of three justices, liberal members of the court have lost all hope of abolishing capital punishment. In the face of an extraordinary run of federal executions over the past six months, they have been left to wonder whether the court is prepared to play any role in capital cases beyond hastening executions. Until July, there had been no federal executions in 17 years . Since then, the Trump administration has executed 13 inmates, more than three times as many as the federal government had put to death in the previous six decades.

The article goes on to explain that Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissent on Friday as the Supreme Court cleared the way for the last execution of the Trump era, complaining that it had not sufficiently resolved legal questions that inmates had asked. The article continues:

If Justice Breyer sounded rueful, it was because he had just a few years ago held out hope that the court would reconsider the constitutionality of capital punishment. He had set out his arguments in a major dissent in 2015 , one that must have been on Justice Scalia’s mind when he made his comments a few months later. Justice Breyer wrote in that 46-page dissent that he considered it “highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment,” which bars cruel and unusual punishments. He said that death row exonerations were frequent, that death sentences were imposed arbitrarily and that the capital justice system was marred by racial discrimination. Justice Breyer added that there was little reason to think that the death penalty deterred crime and that long delays between sentences and executions might themselves violate the Eighth Amendment. Most of the country did not use the death penalty, he said, and the United States was an international outlier in embracing it. Justice Ginsburg, who died in September, had joined the dissent. The two other liberals — Justices Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — were undoubtedly sympathetic. And Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who held the decisive vote in many closely divided cases until his retirement in 2018, had written the majority opinions in several 5-to-4 decisions that imposed limits on the death penalty, including ones barring the execution of juvenile offenders and people convicted of crimes other than murder .

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

More results...

Proud recipient of the following awards:

Is the Death Penalty Justified or Should It Be Abolished?

is the death penalty justified or should it be abolished?

*Updated 2022

Throughout history, societies around the world have used the death penalty as a way to punish the most heinous crimes. while capital punishment is still practiced today, many countries have since abolished it. in fact, in 2019, california’s governor put a moratorium on the death penalty , stopping it indefinitely. in early 2022, he took further steps and ordered the dismantling of the state’s death row. given the moral complexities and depth of emotions involved, the death penalty remains a controversial debate the world over., the following are three arguments in support of the death penalty and three against it., arguments supporting the death penalty.

Prevents convicted killers from killing again

The death penalty guarantees that convicted murderers will never kill again. There have been countless cases where convicts sentenced to life in prison have murdered other inmates and/or prison guards. Convicts have also been known to successfully arrange murders from within prison, the most famous case being mobster Whitey Bulger , who apparently was killed by fellow inmates while incarcerated. There are also cases where convicts who have been released for parole after serving only part of their sentences – even life sentences – have murdered again after returning to society. A death sentence is the only irrevocable penalty that protects innocent lives.

Maintains justice

For most people, life is sacred, and innocent lives should be valued over the lives of killers. Innocent victims who have been murdered – and in some cases, tortured beforehand – had no choice in their untimely and cruel death or any opportunity to say goodbye to friends and family, prepare wills, or enjoy their last moments of life. Meanwhile, convicted murderers sentenced to life in prison – and even those on death row – are still able to learn, read, write , paint, find religion, watch TV, listen to music, maintain relationships, and even appeal their sentences.

To many, capital punishment symbolizes justice and is the only way to adequately express society’s revulsion of the murder of innocent lives. According to a 2021 Pew Research Center Poll, the majority of US adults ( 60% ) think that legal executions fit the crime of what convicted killers deserve. The death penalty is a way to restore society’s balance of justice – by showing that the most severe crimes are intolerable and will be punished in kind

Historically recognized

Historians and constitutional lawyers seem to agree that by the time the Founding Fathers wrote and signed the U.S. Constitution in 1787, and when the Bill of Rights were ratified and added in 1791, the death penalty was an acceptable and permissible form of punishment for premeditated murder. The Constitution’s 8 th and 14 th Amendments recognize the death penalty BUT under due process of the law. This means that certain legal requirements must first be fulfilled before any state executions can be legally carried out – even when pertaining to the cruelest, most cold-blooded murderer . While interpretations of the amendments pertaining to the death penalty have changed over the years, the Founding Fathers intended to allow for the death penalty from the very beginning and put in place a legal system to ensure due process.

Arguments against the Death Penalty

Not proven to deter crime

There’s no concrete evidence showing that the death penalty actually deters crime. Various studies comparing crime and murder rates in U.S. states that have the death penalty versus those that don’t found that the murder rate in non-death-penalty states has actually remained consistently lower over the years than in those states that have the death penalty. These findings suggest that capital punishment may not actually be a deterrent for crime.

The winds may be shifting regarding the public’s opinion about the death penalty. This is evident by the recent decision of a non-unanimous Florida jury to sentence the Parkland High School shooter to life in prison without parole instead of the death penalty . While the verdict shocked many, it also revealed mixed feelings about the death penalty, including among the families of the 17 Parkland victims and families of victims from other mass shootings.

More expensive than imprisonment

Contrary to popular belief, the death penalty is actually more expensive than keeping an inmate in prison, even for life. While the cost of the actual execution may be minimal, the overall costs surrounding a capital case (where the death penalty is a potential punishment) are enormously high. Sources say that defending a death penalty case can cost around four times higher than defending a case not seeking death. Even in cases where a guilty plea cancels out the need for a trial, seeking the death penalty costs almost twice as much as cases that don’t. And this is before factoring in appeals, which are more time-consuming and therefore cost more than life-sentence appeals, as well as higher prison costs for death-row inmates.

Does not bring closure

It seems logical that punishing a murderer, especially a mass murderer, or terrorist with the most severe punishment would bring closure and relief to victims’ families. However, the opposite may be true. Studies show that capital punishment does not bring comfort to those affected by violent and fatal crimes. In fact, punishing the perpetrator has been shown to make victims feel worse , as it forces them to think about the offender and the incident even more. Also, as capital cases can drag on for years due to endless court appeals, it can be difficult for victims’ families to heal, thus delaying closure.

The Bottom Line: The death penalty has been used to maintain the balance of justice throughout history, punishing violent criminals in the severest way to ensure they won’t kill again. On the other hand, with inconclusive evidence as to its deterrence of crime, the higher costs involved in pursuing capital cases, and the lack of relief and closure it brings to victims’ families, the death penalty is not justified. Where do you stand on this controversial issue?

OWN PERSPECTIVE

The Perspective on the United Nations (UN)

The organization is vital international relationships, but it has also experienced many failures over the years.

Do Protests work ?

Protests can do much to direct attention toward issues, but is attention enough to effect change ?

Should the US intervene militarily in foreign conflicts?

US intervention overseas is never ideal and usually complicated, but the alternatives may be worse.

Should Puerto Rico become the 51st state?

Welcoming the impoverished island into the U.S. has upsides and downsides.

The Perspective on Putin

As someone both popular and feared, does he deserve respect or suspicion?

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: plain evil or a necessary evil?

In August 1945, two Japanese cities became synonymous with nuclear destruction and the human aptitude for it.

The Perspective on George W. Bush

How will his legacy be remembered. Here are three arguments for and three against W.

Is Monogamy Natural?

Are humans able to live their whole life with a single partner?

The Perspective on Animal Testing

When, if ever, is it justified?

Does Conventional or Alternative Schooling Have More Impact?

The world is made up of so many different types of people, yet most get educated the same way.

Breast vs. Bottle: which is better for babies?

Should parents swear by the breast, or be fully content with bottle feedings?

the death penalty debate

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty

Click the buttons below to view arguments and testimony on each topic.

The death penalty deters future murders.

Retribution

A just society requires the taking of a life for a life.

The risk of executing the innocent precludes the use of the death penalty.

Arbitrariness & Discrimination

The death penalty is applied unfairly and should not be used.

Faculty Scholarship

‌the end of the death penalty.

‌‘Unintended consequences’ and the legacy of Furman v. Georgia

More than 50 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Furman v. Georgia that the death penalty was an unconstitutional violation of the Eighth Amendment ban against cruel and unusual punishment. With that, 629 people on death row nationwide had their capital sentences commuted, and the death penalty disappeared overnight.

“Furman was neither a tremendous success nor a terrible failure but a complicated story of unintended consequences and echoes of Furman continue to this day to have tremendous impact.” Carol Steiker

But Furman didn’t abolish capital punishment for very long. Four years later, Gregg v. Georgia and several companion cases made clear that governments could impose capital punishment under certain conditions. Those decisions were a response to the backlash sparked by Furman , which appeared to revive support for a practice that had been in sharp decline for years. Today, 27 states in the U.S., as well as the federal government, retain the death penalty, and as of April 2022, one source reported that there were 2,414 people on death row across the country. Despite what many would have predicted in 1972, when the Furman decision suggested the U.S. would become an international leader in eliminating the death penalty, today it’s the only Western democracy that still imposes it.

Still, while the death penalty persists in the U.S., it’s not exactly thriving. Indeed, it’s once again “withering” across the country, says Carol S. Steiker ’86 , the Henry J. Friendly Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, who has taught Capital Punishment in America at the school since 1993. Though Furman (and its subsequent overruling) helped fuel the death penalty’s revival, it also set in motion a long series of events that may ultimately eliminate capital punishment in the United States, Steiker says.

“ Furman was neither a tremendous success nor a terrible failure but a complicated story of unintended consequences and echoes of Furman continue to this day to have tremendous impact,” says Steiker, who is co-author, with her brother, Jordan Steiker ’88, of “Courting Death: The Supreme Court and Capital Punishment” (Harvard University Press, 2016) and co-editor, also with him, of “Comparative Capital Punishment” (Edward Elgar, 2019).

“ Furman was a remarkable intervention,” says Jordan Steiker, a professor at the law school at the University of Texas at Austin and co-director of its Capital Punishment Center. “Even though it was quite short-lived in suspending the death penalty in the U.S., it completely changed its course because it essentially inspired or required states to rethink how they were doing capital punishment. And ultimately, the practice of the death penalty changed substantially over time.”

Given the greatly heightened public attention to the power of the Supreme Court today, the 50th anniversary of Furman is an opportunity to reexamine not just the history of the death penalty but the appropriate role of the Court in American life, Carol Steiker and others believe.

“Right now a lot of people are wondering how much of a role we want the courts to play in deciding what rights are guaranteed by the Constitution, and Furman v. Georgia is a unique example of when the Court struck down a policy that was widely prevalent throughout the states for violating the Constitution,” says Gene Young Chang ’24, who has been studying the death penalty with Steiker since he was a freshman in her Harvard College course The American Death Penalty: Morality, Law, and Politics. Furman , he says, “teaches us things about the role of the courts in a democratic society, the scope of constitutional rights, and the proper method for defining those rights.”

Categorical abolition of the death penalty across the nation is unlikely without another Furman v. Georgia , “what you might call Furman II, which is obviously not forthcoming from this Court or anytime in the foreseeable future,” Carol Steiker says. Instead, the future of the death penalty, she says, is being played out at the local level, in “a kind of guerrilla war going on county by county, state by state, with the election of progressive prosecutors who do not seek the death penalty, state legislative activity, and state constitutional litigation under state constitutions.”

The final death knell for capital punishment will likely depend on a very different Supreme Court from the one we have today, she says. “But at that point,” given other trends in the country, “it may be more like a coup de grâce rather than what it was at the time of Furman .”

History of a ‘remarkable intervention’

In the 1960s, due to a campaign by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund to challenge its constitutionality in cases across the country, capital punishment was in decline. Indeed, no one was executed in the five years before Furman , as states waited to see what the high court would rule. In 1971, the Supreme Court rejected a due process challenge to capital punishment. But Furman , argued a year later, relied on the Eighth Amendment: The LDF team argued that the arbitrary application of capital punishment — jurors, often with no guidance, had complete discretion on when to impose it — was a cruel and unusual punishment.

”The Supreme Court intervention [in Furman] not only didn’t kill the death penalty but actually made it stronger when it was reinstated.” Carol Steiker

The Supreme Court agreed, 5-4, although the justices issued nine separate opinions, which was very unusual, as Carol Steiker notes. Justice Thurgood Marshall (for whom both Steikers later clerked) and Justice William J. Brennan Jr. LL.B. ’31 maintained that the death penalty was unconstitutional per se. Justice William O. Douglas was troubled by its discriminatory application, given overwhelming evidence that it was more often imposed on Black defendants, the poor, and the politically unpopular. Justices Potter Stewart and Byron White were troubled by its arbitrary application under state statutes, with Justice Stewart famously writing, “These death sentences are cruel and unusual in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual.” He concluded that the Constitution could not “permit this unique penalty to be so wantonly and so freakishly imposed.”

But abolitionists’ hopes didn’t last long. Soon after Furman, 35 states rewrote their laws to try to comply with the Court’s ruling. In 1976, in a group of consolidated cases known as Gregg v. Georgia , the Supreme Court held that the death penalty was not per se unconstitutional. It ruled the punishment could be revived if state laws provided an objective process for deciding when to apply it and gave sufficient discretion to juries to determine whether it was appropriate. However, mandatory death penalties were unconstitutional, it held, even though some states believed that mandatory penalties were necessary to eliminate sentencing discretion.

Furman created an enormous backlash, the Steikers explain, so that capital punishment — which was becoming less and less popular in public opinion — resurged. It became “more of a wedge issue, part of the tough-on-crime political strategy of [President Richard] Nixon, and political entrepreneurs exploited the resentment at the Supreme Court’s intervention in the death penalty,” says Jordan Steiker, who has frequently taught at Harvard Law School, most recently in 2018 as the Touroff-Glueck Visiting Professor of Law and Psychiatry. “In the short term, the death penalty became more vigorous, there were more death sentences, and by the 1990s, there were many more executions than we were having pre- Furman .”

At least initially, then, “the Supreme Court intervention [in Furman ] not only didn’t kill the death penalty but actually made it stronger when it was reinstated,” says Carol Steiker, something she sees as an “unintended and unforeseen consequence” of the case.

Birth of the capital defense bar

But there was another unforeseen consequence of Furman , one that Jordan Steiker describes as “probably more important and long-lasting” — the birth of a large and highly skilled capital defense bar.

With the resurrection of the death penalty, new, sophisticated institutions were created and staffed by passionate and skilled anti-capital lawyers: state offices for capital representation at the trial, appellate, and post-conviction levels; capital habeas corpus units within state and federal public defenders’ offices; and numerous non-governmental nonprofits, such as Bryan Stevenson ’85’s Equal Justice Initiative. Today, “we have a whole legion of much more focused and talented advocates working on behalf of people facing capital charges or sentenced to death,” says Jordan Steiker.

Capital litigation has become far more complex, and the costs have soared. This has helped persuade many local prosecutors to avoid seeking the death penalty.

With these developments, as well as the Supreme Court’s imposition of special procedural requirements for cases involving the death penalty, capital litigation has become far more complex, and the costs have soared. “The constitutional decisions post- Furman have not imposed the most rigorous scrutiny of capital practices,” says Jordan Steiker, “but they have produced institutional actors who have made the death penalty much less attractive as a practical matter because to do it reasonably well is just exorbitantly expensive.” This has helped persuade many local prosecutors to avoid seeking the death penalty and has led to an “extraordinary decline in capital proceedings,” he says.

The current Supreme Court has signaled greater willingness to affirm capital sentences than in the recent past, says Jordan Steiker, and some jurisdictions have embraced that signal. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals had scheduled nearly one execution a month between 2022 and 2024 (although at the request of the new attorney general, the pace has now been slowed to no more than one every 60 days). In Texas, on the other hand, two death sentences were imposed in 2022, which contrasts starkly with the 1990s, when Texas juries were handing out more than 40 a year, Jordan Steiker says. “The practice on the ground is withering in part because of the institutions built in response to Furman ,” he says.

Local prosecutors and state courts take over

Other factors besides cost have decreased the public’s appetite for the death penalty, including media attention to, and public awareness of, the number of innocent people sentenced to death. Since 1973, at least 190 people who were wrongly convicted and sentenced to death have been exonerated, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. For that and other reasons, including declining crime rates, there has been a dramatic decline in public support for the death penalty over the past 20 years. Though the 2021 Gallup poll found that 54% of respondents continued to support it, that is the lowest number in the annual poll since 1972.

Erica Medley LL.M. ’22 was a prosecutor in the U.S. Air Force before matriculating at HLS. When she was a schoolgirl, in Oregon, two of her friends were raped and murdered by a neighbor, Ward Weaver III. When Weaver received two life sentences, “It made no sense,” Medley recalls. “I thought he should have gotten the death penalty.” When Medley enrolled in Carol Steiker’s class on capital punishment in fall 2021, she was among the very few students who supported the death penalty, according to an informal online class poll.

But before the first class, Medley did a complete reversal sparked by reading the course materials. “I was so overwhelmed reading everything that I did a 180. It was that fast,” says Medley, who was persuaded by the evidence of the racially disparate impact of the death penalty, its exorbitant expense compared with that of prison sentences, the number of people on death row who turn out to be innocent, and the fact that no other peer nations still impose the penalty.

The shifting demographics of urban counties are also having an effect on the use of the death penalty across the country since such counties are often the only places that can afford to prosecute many capital cases, says Jordan Steiker. As these counties become less politically conservative, they are increasingly controlled by “less zealous prosecutors,” he says. Harris County, Texas, which includes Houston, and Dallas County were “longstanding conservative-controlled political entities, and now they’re not. Now many prosecutors run not on the death penalty but away from the death penalty. That’s a very significant shift.”

“We now have this odd dynamic, where courts, especially the Supreme Court, are pushing in the direction of deregulating, but there’s not much left in terms of capital punishment to deregulate.” Jordan Steiker

And, just as the resurgence of the death penalty in the 1980s and ’90s paralleled public reaction to a crime surge, a drop in death penalty cases mirrors what has generally been a long-term decline in the homicide rate, as well as public concerns about mass incarceration and racial inequities in the criminal justice system, says Carol Steiker, faculty sponsor of the Capital Punishment Clinic, through which Harvard Law students are placed in externships at capital defense organizations around the country.

And the past 16 years have seen a growing legislative trend toward abolishing the death penalty. In 2007, 38 states retained it; today, there are only 27. In 2021, Virginia, which has executed more people than any other state, became the first Southern state to abolish capital punishment. It was preceded by legislative repeals in Colorado, New Jersey, Illinois, and Connecticut, among other states. In Washington state, the Supreme Court found the death penalty unconstitutional under the state constitution because it was used in an arbitrary and racially biased manner.

“We now have this odd dynamic, where courts, especially the Supreme Court, are pushing in the direction of deregulating, but there’s not much left in terms of capital punishment to deregulate,” says Jordan Steiker.

“I think in the short term we’ll end up having more executions because of the Supreme Court’s reluctance to impede them, even though executions have been in as much of a decline as death sentences,” he adds. But with fewer capital sentences taking place, “death row has been shrinking considerably, and at some point we’ll have a death row that seems inconsequential as part of our criminal justice system.”

Furman’s ultimate impact?

In the end, then, was Furman a victory for those who brought the case? “That’s a good question,” says Jordan Steiker. “There’s one point of view that I’m sympathetic to, that says that Furman revived a practice that was dying on the ground, and had there been no intervention, we might not have had a revival and then a second decline.”

On the other hand, when Michael Meltsner, one of the lawyers on the LDF team who brought Furman , speaks to Carol Steiker’s capital punishment class each year, he emphasizes that there were 629 people on death row in 1972 whose lives were saved by Furman.

“So in that sense, it was a tremendous victory,” says Carol Steiker. “It was a reset moment.”

Modal Gallery

Gallery block modal gallery.

Sharing teaching and learning resources from the National Archives

Education Updates

Is the Death Penalty a Cruel and Unusual Punishment?

This post is part of our series on the Bill of Rights . We’re highlighting primary sources from our student workbook Putting the Bill of Rights to the Test , that helps students explore core concepts found within the Bill of Rights, and how they’ve impacted American history. This year marks the 225th anniversary of the ratification of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights. The National Archives is commemorating the occasion with exhibits, educational resources, and national conversations that examine the amendment process and struggles for rights in the United States.

America’s Founders witnessed a time when branding, ear cropping, drawing and quartering, and other methods of torture were commonplace. In order to safeguard citizens from excessive punishment the Eighth Amendment ensures individuals protection from cruel and unusual punishment.

Amendment VIII: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted .

But what is cruel and unusual punishment and who decides what is considered cruel and unusual? How can it be measured?

In 1900, eighteen people in Van Buren County, Arkansas, felt compelled to petition the government and express their disagreement with capital punishment. Both the group’s freedom of expression and right to petition the government are protected by the First Amendment, but the issue they raised directly relates to the Eighth Amendment.

For the petitioners, capital punishment or the death penalty, was simply murder. They felt individuals should not be put to death, but could be rehabilitated after much introspection and reflection. The petitioners’ goal was to have Congress abolish the death penalty and for America to take its place as a moral leader of the world.

Direct students to read the opening paragraphs of the petition. Ask them to carefully note the following:

What do the petitioners define capital punishment to be?
What do they hope will happen to capital punishment?
What do the petitioners believe is an alternative to the death penalty?

Begin a discussion by focusing on the language used in the petition. Ask the following questions:

What feelings are the petitioners hoping to evoke from the members of Congress by titling the petition “The Light of Truth”?
What do the petitioners believe to be “pure Justice” and how can it be obtained?
What do the petitioners mean when they use the word “Humanitarianism”?
What do you think the petitioners’ main influence is for writing this petition? Ask students to cite specific words or phrases from the text that support their argument.

Further the discussion by asking students to share their thoughts on the following:

What does cruel and unusual mean?
How is the cruelty of a punishment measured?
Who decides if a punishment is cruel and unusual?

Explain to students that the death penalty is still a hotly debated topic today for many reasons. Guide a class discussion, asking students to:

List the arguments used by both sides of the issue as to why capital punishment should or should not be abolished.
Conduct research to find out how many states have abolished the death penalty and how many states still use capital punishment. Is it still legal in the state of Arkansas or has it been abolished?

Conclude the class discussion by sharing the following phrase from the Fifth Amendment and asking these follow-up questions:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime,…nor be deprived of life , liberty, or property, without due process of law….

How should the Fifth and Eight Amendments be balanced?
Based on this, do you believe the Founders felt that capital punishment was an appropriate punishment as long as a person had received proper due process?

Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished Because Innocent People May Be Executed?

General reference (not clearly pro or con).

John Gramlich, Senior Writer and Editor at Pew Research Center, in a July 19, 2021 article, “10 Facts about the Death Penalty in the U.S.,” available at pewresearch.org, stated:

“A majority of Americans have concerns about the fairness of the death penalty and whether it serves as a deterrent against serious crime. More than half of U.S. adults (56%) say Black people are more likely than White people to be sentenced to death for committing similar crimes. About six-in-ten (63%) say the death penalty does not deter people from committing serious crimes, and nearly eight-in-ten (78%) say there is some risk that an innocent person will be executed.” July 19, 2021

Jared Olsen, JD, Wyoming State Representative (R), in a July 29, 2019 article, “I’m a Republican and I Oppose Restarting Federal Executions,” available at nytimes.com, stated:

“And let’s be honest: Few conservatives trust the government to get it right. Since 1973, 166 people on state death rows have been exonerated and freed. Conservatives are now in the vanguard of the movement to end the death penalty. A recent report by Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty showed a sharp increase in the number of state Republican lawmakers sponsoring repeal legislation; so far this year, such bills have been introduced in 11 states.” July 29, 2019

Ernie Chambers, JD, Nebraska State Senator, stated the following during an Apr. 16, 2015 floor debate in the Nebraska Legislature, available at legislature.ne.gov:

“I want to get as many votes as I can to abolish this death penalty… [O]ver 150 people in the last few years have been taken off death row because they were innocent. I know there are people who want to believe that no innocent person has ever been executed in this country. But when you have this many people conclusively proved by DNA evidence to be actually innocent, there is no escaping the conclusion that innocent people have been executed… There are cases where prosecutors withheld exculpatory information. They knew that there were bogus pieces of evidence introduced. They knew that there were defendants who were coerced into entering a guilty plea to a crime they had not committed.” Apr. 16, 2015

George Ryan, former Governor of Illinois, in a Dec. 27, 2000 speech aired on Democracy Now , in support of his decision to impose a state-wide moratorium on executions, stated:

“Like a lot of other elected officials, I believed that there were crimes that were so heinous – and I believe that today – that the death penalty sentence is the only proper societal response. I supported the death penalty when I was in the Illinois General Assembly. I spoke for the death penalty. I voted for the death penalty. And I believed in the death penalty… But since those days, a lot has happened to shake my faith in the death penalty system… I said that until I can be sure with moral certainty that no innocent person would be put to death, nobody would meet the fate as long as I was Governor… And I won’t sign off on any death sentences until I am absolutely certain that the individual, in fact, is guilty and all rights have been preserved and safeguarded… It was clear to me that when it came to the death penalty in Illinois there was no justice in the justice system. So on January the 31st, I told the citizens of Illinois that I was going to impose a moratorium, because of the grave concerns I had about the state’s shameful record of convicting innocent people and putting them on death row. I can’t support that system. And its administration, it’s proven to be very fraught with error, and it’s come awful close to the ultimate nightmare.” Dec. 27, 2000

The American Bar Association, on its website, accessed on Aug. 7, 2008, states the following reasons for support of a federal death penalty moratorium:

“Serious questions also have been raised about the fairness of the administration of the federal capital punishment system. On September, 12, 2000, the Department of Justice (DOJ) released a study of the federal death penalty that suggests the system is plagued by geographic disparities and ethnic bias. Fourteen of the 21 prisoners on federal death row at that time were from just three states – Texas, Virginia, and Missouri. The study also shows that prosecutors seek the death penalty much more often for Hispanic and African-American defendants. As of January 2002, 20 of the 24 prisoners on federal death row were African-American, Latino/a, or Asian. The ABA’s 1997 moratorium resolution applies to the federal government. Indeed, ABA Presidents have called upon the President of the United States to impose a moratorium on executions.” Aug. 7, 2008

Russ Feingold, JD, US Senator (D-WI), on April 26, 2000, introduced the “National Death Penalty Moratorium Act of 2000” to Congress where he stated:

“Since the reinstatement of the modern death penalty, 87 people have been freed from death row because they were later proven innocent. That is a demonstrated error rate of 1 innocent person for every 7 persons executed. When the consequences are life and death, we need to demand the same standard for our system of justice as we would for our airlines… It is time for the Congress to take the lead and declare once and for all that it is unacceptable to execute an innocent man or woman. It is a central pillar of our criminal justice system that it is better that many guilty people go free than that one innocent should suffer. Sadly, history has demonstrated that time and again, America has brought innocence itself to the bar and condemned it to die. That history now demonstrates that even in America, innocence itself has provided no security from the ultimate punishment… Let us reflect to ensure that we are being just. Let us pause to be certain we do not kill a single innocent person. This is really not too much to ask for a civilized society. I urge my colleagues to join me and my distinguished colleague, Senator Levin, in sponsoring the National Death Penalty Moratorium Act of 2000.” Apr. 26, 2000

The Board of Directors of the New York State Defenders Association, on July 25, 2002, adopted the following resolution regarding a moratorium on the death penalty:

“[M]any groups have identified serious flaws and omissions in fairness and consistency, finding that the [death penalty] system is not without risk to the innocent… WHEREAS, events subsequent to the enactment of New York’s death penalty law, including developments in DNA testing which have called into question evidence used to convict defendants sentenced to death, have demonstrated clearly that the death penalty has been imposed on innocent people… WHEREAS, in June 2000, a study entitled ‘A Broken System: Error Rates in Capital Cases 1973-1995,’ … determined that appellate review of death sentences had found reversible error in 68 percent of these sentences, that in 82 percent of the cases retried after reversal a death sentence was not issued, and that in 7 percent of the retried cases the defendant was found not guilty; and… WHEREAS, on January 31, 2000, the State of Illinois suspended executions because 13 people on death row were found to be actually innocent of the crimes for which they were convicted due, in part, to recent developments in DNA testing… IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED THAT the New York State Defenders Association calls upon the executive and legislative branches of New York State government to enact and adopt legislation imposing a moratorium on executions.” July 25, 2002

Nathan Diament, JD, Director of the Institute for Public Affairs of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, in a June 5, 2001 appearance at the Pew Forum’s event “Religious Reflections on the Death Penalty,” stated:

“For a state to be properly using capital punishment, it needs to be following those guidelines that are found in the Bible. There do need, in our mind, to be clear evidences of guilt. It is not for government to use for its own ends. It is not proper for some governments to victimize others for its own purposes. There is supposed to be justice involved in this, and we believe that that’s justice related to the way God calls for justice… Our greatest concern about capital punishment is the concern that’s been shared here and the concern that I think everyone shares. And that is the possibility that someone who’s innocent might be executed. We are not oblivious to that accusation, to that concern as being raised about capital punishment today. And so, in our resolution the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, Orthodox Union (OU) resolution is calling for a nation-wide moratorium on the death penalty.” June 5, 2001

The United Nations General Assembly, on Nov. 1, 2007, in an 104-54 vote to which the US was a primary opponent, adopted a non-legally binding moratorium on the death penalty:

“The General Assembly… Recalling also the resolutions on the question of the death penalty adopted over the past decade by the Commission on Human Rights in all consecutive sessions… in which the Commission called upon States that still maintain the death penalty to abolish it completely and, in the meantime, to establish a moratorium on executions… Considering that the use of the death penalty undermines human dignity, and convinced that a moratorium on the use of the death penalty contributes to the enhancement and progressive development of human rights, that there is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty’s deterrent value and that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the death penalty’s implementation is irreversible and irreparable, Welcoming the decisions taken by an increasing number of States to apply a moratorium on executions, followed in many cases by the abolition of the death penalty.” Nov. 1, 2007

Charles Stimson, JD, Acting Chief of Staff and Senior Legal Fellow of the Heritage Foundation, in a Dec. 20, 2019 article, “The Death Penalty Is Appropriate,” available at heritage.org, stated:

“Death penalty opponents, quite understandably, note that there have been a number of death row inmates who have been exonerated through groups like the Innocence Project. Sadly, mistakes can happen. Indeed mistakes can happen on both sides when it comes to the death penalty. However, acknowledging that mistakes can occasionally occur in capital cases does not render the death penalty unjust any more than imposing a sentence of incarceration for a term of years is not rendered unjust simply because mistakes occasionally occur in non-capital cases. Today, there are built-in checks and balances in the criminal justice system, from jury selection to the penalty phase to the appeals process that are designed to provide fair process for each defendant. The system is not perfect, and we must work to make it better for everyone involved. But we cannot forget the victims either. Genny Gonzales [murdered in 1995 at four years old] would be 28 years old this year. She never went to high school, attended college, or fell in love. She is gone. Her murderers richly deserve the death penalty, though justice won’t be complete until their sentence is carried out.” Dec. 20, 2019

Michele Hanisee, JD, Deputy District Attorney for the County of Los Angeles and President of the Association of District Attorneys, stated the following in her Sep. 27, 2016 article

“Those in support of abolishing the death penalty point to the possibility of an innocent person being executed… The innocent can take solace in knowing that a unanimous jury of 12 citizens must render the death verdict after an exhaustive trial where the accused murderer is represented by two highly competent attorneys and overseen by an independent judge who ensures a fair trial. Voters understand that the criminals on death row have been convicted of the most heinous crimes. Voters also realize that those left behind, grieving families throughout California and their loved ones, don’t deserve anything less than justice. Justice is a reformed, not eliminated death penalty.” Sep. 27, 2016

Ronald Eisenberg, JD, Deputy District Attorney for Philadelphia, Supervisor of the Law Division, in an article titled “‘Innocence’ and the Death Penalty,” for the Pennsylvania District Attorney’s Association Newsletter accessed on Aug. 4, 2008, stated:

“[T]he factual basis for the Illinois moratorium is even more suspect. Governor Ryan claims that, more than half the time, Illinois capital defendants were actually innocent: twelve men executed; thirteen freed. But in reality there have been 247 death-sentenced defendants in Illinois, not just 25. Of the thirteen ‘innocents,’ five were acquitted on retrials — which means not that they were really innocent, but that they were not proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. In the other eight cases, prosecutors dismissed charges without a retrial because of evidence problems. Only one of the thirteen has been clearly established as innocent. Questions about the Illinois moratorium, however, obscure a more fundamental problem with the moratorium movement: we already have a moratorium, in fact hundreds of them, in each and every death penalty case. Every capital verdict is held up for years, often for decades, while the case is studied and restudied and studied again in the courts, in all its individual detail. The only defendants who would benefit from a general moratorium are those whose appeals have been rejected every time — in other words, the capital murderers who least deserve more years of delay.” Aug. 4, 2008

Antonin Scalia, JD, Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court, in a concurring decision on June 26, 2006, in regards to the case of Kansas v. Michael Lee Marsh , wrote:

“Reversal of an erroneous conviction on appeal or on habeas, or the pardoning of an innocent condemnee through executive clemency, demonstrates not the failure of the system but its success. Those devices are part and parcel of the multiple assurances that are applied before a death sentence is carried out… Capital cases are given especially close scrutiny at every level, which is why in most cases many years elapse before the sentence is executed. And of course capital cases receive special attention in the application of executive clemency… As a consequence of the sensitivity of the criminal justice system to the due-process rights of defendants sentenced to death, almost two-thirds of all death sentences are overturned…. [T]hose ideologically driven to ferret out and proclaim a mistaken modern execution have not a single verifiable case to point to, whereas it is easy as pie to identify plainly guilty murderers who have been set free. The American people have determined that the good to be derived from capital punishment—in deterrence, and perhaps most of all in the meting out of condign justice for horrible crimes—outweighs the risk of error.” June 26, 2006

Steven D. Stewart, JD, Prosecuting Attorney for Clark County Indiana, in a message on the Clark County Prosecutor website accessed on Aug. 6, 2008, wrote:

“No system of justice can produce results which are 100% certain all the time. Mistakes will be made in any system which relies upon human testimony for proof. We should be vigilant to uncover and avoid such mistakes. Our system of justice rightfully demands a higher standard for death penalty cases. However, the risk of making a mistake with the extraordinary due process applied in death penalty cases is very small, and there is no credible evidence to show that any innocent persons have been executed at least since the death penalty was reactivated in 1976. The 100+ death row inmates ‘innocent’, ‘exonerated’ and released, as trumpeted by anti-death penalty activists, is a fraud. The actual number of factually innocent released death row inmates in closer to 40, and in any event should be considered in context of over 7,000 death sentences handed down since 1973. It stands as the most accurate judgment/sentence in any system of justice ever created. The inevitability of a mistake should not serve as grounds to eliminate the death penalty any more than the risk of having a fatal wreck should make automobiles illegal.” Aug. 6, 2008

Dudley Sharp, Resource Director of Justice for All, an organization advocating the use of the death penalty, in a July 2002 article for ProDeathPenalty.com titled “Innocence Issues: The Death Penalty,” wrote:

“Death penalty opponents claim that ‘Since 1973, 102 (now 114) people in 25 states have been released from death row with evidence of their innocence,’ That is a blatantly false claim… What is the real number of actual innocents released from death row? A review of the DPIC [Death Penalty Information Center] 102 case descriptions finds that only about 32 claim actual innocence, with alleged proof to support the claim. 12 of those 32 are DNA cases. That is 32 cases out of about 7,300 death sentences since 1973, or 0.4%… And there is no proof of an innocent executed within the US since 1900. Some supporters of a moratorium and death penalty opponents claim that a concern for innocents is why they want to halt executions. Yet, history and reason confirm that an end to executions will result in more innocents harmed and murdered… At least 8% of those on death row had committed one or more murders prior to the murder(s) which put them on death row, suggesting that with 7,300 sentenced to death, since 1973, that those sent to death row had murdered at least 600 additional innocents after we failed to properly restrain them after their previous murder(s)… It currently takes nearly 12 years to execute those sentenced to death. And some elected officials are debating a moratorium on executions. Yet, under all debated scenarios, halting executions will put more innocents at risk.” July 2002

Mark H. Creech, Reverend and Executive Director of the Christian Action League of North Carolina, Inc, in a Sep. 14, 2004 article for Renew America titled “North Carolina Death Penalty Moratorium: Is it Really about Fairness and Innocence?,” wrote:

“[T]he overwhelming majority of capital cases contain no credible evidence of innocence. In fact, most death row appeals are not even based on claims of factual innocence… The facts show the vast majority of death row releases are based on legal technicalities, not real innocence! Moreover, the entire contention about ‘innocence’ rests on the notion there is actually some evidence innocent people are being executed. This is nonsense! There is no such evidence anywhere – not even a single case of an innocent execution!… We are all aware living murderers injure, maim and kill again, in prison, after improper release, and after escape. Whether one believes in the effectiveness of capital punishment as a deterrent or not is irrelevant, one matter can’t be contested: the murderer who is executed will never kill again. Furthermore, it’s important to note that in some states where a moratorium was instituted, the murder rate increased. For instance, in Texas, an unofficial moratorium on executions was implemented during most of 1996 and early 1997… [T]he state appeared to have spared few, if any, condemned prisoners, while the citizens of Texas experienced an added loss of 90 innocent lives to homicide, over and above what would have been expected had no moratorium been in place.” Sep. 14, 2004

People who view this page may also like:

States with the Death Penalty and States with Death Penalty Bans
US Executions by Race, Crime, Method, Age, Gender, State, & Year
Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal?

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

History of the Death Penalty
Top Pro & Con Quotes
Historical Timeline
Did You Know?
States with the Death Penalty, Death Penalty Bans, and Death Penalty Moratoriums
The ESPY List: US Executions 1608-2002
Federal Capital Offenses
Death Row Inmates
Critical Thinking Video Series: Thomas Edison Electrocutes Topsy the Elephant, Jan. 4, 1903

Cite This Page

Artificial Intelligence
Private Prisons
Space Colonization
Social Media
Death Penalty
School Uniforms
Video Games
Animal Testing
Gun Control
Banned Books
Teachers’ Corner

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

Argumentative Essay on Why Death Penalty Should Be Abolished in the US

Death penalty is one of the most controversial issues that have created endless debates in the US and all nations worldwide. The concept of capital punishment, sometimes known as the death penalty, is the notion that a criminal can be executed for the perpetrated crime. Murder and treason are two of the most common capital crimes. In certain nations, other crimes such as murder, drug trafficking, crime against humanity, and adultery have also been designated as capital offenses and committing such crimes results in death. There have been approximately 1400 executions since 1976 in the United States. In the USA, 18 states have abolished the death penalty, while 31 states have the death penalty applied, which means that people are killed due to capital crime convictions. Poor defense, class, and racism and some of the causes of wrongful conviction. Those underprivileged have inadequate money to defend themselves and, therefore, a high possibility of being subjected to such cruel convictions. The point is that the Death penalty should not be legalized in the US as it has no deterrent effect on crime, it allows the government to have the power to take human life, and perpetuates social injustices through discrimination, and hence the US government should use lifetime jail sentences instead.

Death penalty is cruel and is contrary to the right to life as stipulated in the US constitution. The US constitution was founded to safeguard its citizens’ life and right to liberty. The death penalty contravenes the right to life. According to Amnesty International, a human being is a right to life, and freedom from cruel and degrading treatment is inalienable. Therefore, the value of human life cannot be overstated, and it cannot be arbitrarily shortened (Capital punishment in the early 21st century, n.d.). Similarly, the death sentence sends a negative message to the general public. People in society believe that human life is worthless and that anyone who commits a horrific act such as murder deserves to die. Again, for many people, the phrase “An eye for an eye” justifies implementing the death sentence, yet it denotes revenge rather than justice (Nathanson, 2001). Death penalty executions can take years after a person is placed on death row. The individual on death row is subjected to an agonizingly long wait. Such suffering should not be inflicted on any living person. In addition, the execution of the criminal is a heinous crime (Death penalty should be abolished, 2019). The point is that every human life is precious and should be treated with respect.

The death penalty does not deter crime, and for this reason, it should be abolished. Even though the death penalty is not ideal, many people think that it is worth the cost if it deters prospective perpetrators. However, public opinion polls demonstrate that most people do not believe that capital punishment has this effect. More than 80 percent of all executions occur in the United States’ southern states, where homicide rates are greatest. The murder rate is significantly lower in states that do not have a death sentence. Even while other factors are at play, no studies demonstrate that the death penalty is deterrence. Most killings are not spontaneous, premeditated, and are committed out of passion. This explains why so many murderers who are convicted try to defend themselves by trying to justify how extreme provocation made them cause the crime. Most of them are not aware of the severe consequences. Research shows that the death penalty is useless and counterproductive, and it has zero impact on reducing crime. Therefore, the death penalty is cruel, inhuman, and does not prevent further crimes from happening; it should not be in existence, nor should it be implemented.

The death penalty should be abolished because it is racial and class discrimination when executing it. Even though it is in the constitution, it does not affect everyone. For instance, people of color, poor people, and mentally ill people often make up most of those sentenced to death. Poor defense is one of the most common reasons for unjust convictions. Poor people can only afford an inadequate defense team. A wealthy person has a higher chance of acquittal since they can afford to hire an adequate counsel. In 68 percent of all death sentence cases, it has been found guilty simply because of insufficient funds to hire a good defense team. According to Mental Health America, 5-10% of death row inmates suffer from serious mental diseases (Robert, 2016). As for racial groups, black people make up over 40 percent of the convicts given a death sentence despite making up just 13 percent of the US population. The minority groups receive the harshest penalty despite not committing the most crimes. Therefore, it is apparent that the legal system is prejudiced, and for this reason, the death penalty should be abolished in the US.

Since the death penalty imposes a high burden on the legal system and the government, it should be eliminated in the US. After a person is sentenced to death, an appeals procedure must begin. This is a lengthy procedure that may take several years to complete. To put it another way, if a person is on death row, the government uses the taxpayer’s money to cater to the prisoner’s living expenses, pay lawyers, and all the legal procedures involved. It is cheaper to keep a criminal in prison for the rest of her/his life than to put them on death row and execute them later. This is one of the most compelling arguments in favor of abolishing the death penalty.

The final reason why the death penalty is not worth it is that if new evidence comes to light, the death penalty cannot be reversed. Since the death sentence is irreversible, it differs from life in prison in that the decision cannot be overturned even if there is new evidence to justify that the victim was innocent. This is called crime error and is immense in the US today. There are several cases where a person is convicted and later found innocent. For instance, in the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, a parent convicted of arson and executed later, he was later found innocent (Dioso-Villa, 2013). This might mean that there can be errors and mistakes committed that can result in an innocent person being sent to his or her death when it comes to execution. There have been several situations in which convicted criminals have been vindicated of their crimes before they have been executed. The death sentence is an excessively harsh punishment in a culture where the judicial system cannot be depended upon to provide justice. This is possibly one of the most compelling arguments for why the death penalty should be abolished, as it has the potential to result in the execution of innocent individuals.

Even though the death penalty does not deter crime, some argue that it deters crime. For example, many individuals do not commit murder recklessly because they are terrified of being apprehended and condemned to death like the victims. People who support the death penalty feel that if the punishment for murder is that the perpetrator will be killed, they will refrain from committing the crime.(Death penalty should be abolished, 2019). Society is trained to learn a lesson from the victims, such as mob justice, where a mob ruthlessly kills a criminal. Nonetheless, this is not always the case; in places like California and Arizona, murder crimes are immense even though the law is imposed(Death penalty should be abolished, 2019). This demonstrates that the death sentence has no effect on crime reduction or deterrence in the real world.

Despite the fact that the death penalty goes against the right to life, others disagree and believe murderers should be executed. This argument is reasonable since the same pain is transferred to the murderer. For instance, it is a basic fact that when Osama Bin Laden killed thousands of people during the 911 attack, the American soldiers conducted an operation that killed Osama 10 years later. In this case, Americans were satisfied and felt that justice had been made. Barack Obama, the then-president, said that “justice had been made” (Osama bin Laden dead, 2016). Another argument favoring capital punishment is that it has been described in religious and biblical texts. According to God’s depiction, a murderer should be put to death if that is what the rule and laws are for humanity to obey.

To conclude, the death penalty should be abolished in the US. This essay has demonstrated that human life is precious, and therefore the death penalty is cruel and against the human right to life. That notwithstanding, the death sentence is worthless since it does little to prevent criminal activity. Even though the death penalty is still imposed, people continue to be victimized, and many of the perpetrators are not terrified of the brutal consequences. Furthermore, we have discovered that the death sentence is exceedingly expensive and maybe a significant financial burden on both the state and the taxpayers. Additionally, a death sentence is final and cannot be reversed even if the victim is innocent. No one is perfect, and for that reason, the legal system can have flaws that can subject innocent people to this cruel act. Again this essay has demonstrated that the legal system has prejudice. There are those that argue that death penalty preventive measure for most crimes. Therefore this cruel penalty is only imposed on certain groups of people, the poor, black people, and the mentally ill. These considerations lead to the conclusion that the death penalty should be abolished in the United States.

Capital punishment in the early 21st century . (n.d.). Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/capital-punishment/Capital-punishment-in-the-early-21st-century

Death penalty and people with mental illnesses . (n.d.). Mental Health America. https://www.mhanational.org/issues/position-statement-54-death-penalty-and-people-mental-illnesses

Death penalty should be abolished . (2019, August 22). Lush Fresh Handmade Cosmetics. https://www.lushusa.com/stories/article_the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished.html

Dioso-Villa, R. (2013). Scientific and Legal Developments in Fire and Arson Investigation Expertise in Texas v. Willingham. Minn. JL Sci. & Tech. , 14 , 817.

Nathanson, S. (2001). An eye for an eye: The immorality of punishing by death . Rowman & Littlefield.

Osama bin laden dead . (2016, December 15). whitehouse.gov. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden-dead

Robert T. Muller. (2016, October 19). The death penalty may not bring peace to victims’ families . Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/talking-about-trauma/201610/death-penalty-may-not-bring-peace-victims-families

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Related Essays

Race and ethnic relations, exegesis of carol hay’s main argument, budget statement for addressing college students’ food shortage, homeland security terrorism, death penalty in the uae and france, “the sixties” & beyond, popular essay topics.

American Dream
Artificial Intelligence
Black Lives Matter
Bullying Essay
Career Goals Essay
Causes of the Civil War
Child Abusing
Civil Rights Movement
Community Service
Cultural Identity
Cyber Bullying
Death Penalty
Depression Essay
Domestic Violence
Freedom of Speech
Global Warming
Gun Control
Human Trafficking
I Believe Essay
Immigration
Importance of Education
Israel and Palestine Conflict
Leadership Essay
Legalizing Marijuanas
Mental Health
National Honor Society
Police Brutality
Pollution Essay
Racism Essay
Romeo and Juliet
Same Sex Marriages
Social Media
The Great Gatsby
The Yellow Wallpaper
Time Management
To Kill a Mockingbird
Violent Video Games
What Makes You Unique
Why I Want to Be a Nurse
Send us an e-mail

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

Essay Database >
Essay Examples >
Essays Topics >
Essay on Death Penalty

Why The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished Essay Examples

Type of paper: Essay

Topic: Death Penalty , Capital Punishment , Social Issues , Death , Finance , Crime , Criminal Justice , Punishment

Words: 1800

Published: 01/08/2020

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished

It comes to no surprise that the issue of the death penalty continues to remain in social forums and even in legislative debates as the punishment continues to reign in several parts of the globe. Debates would often range from the alternative punishments that would not constitute to killing to the idea that criminals do not deserve such death. Of course, supporters to pushing for the death penalty refuted these debates as the mentality goes that if criminals of high profile are punished to their death; others would not try to commit acts to protect their life. However, criminals are becoming crafty and opponents see the continuation of capital punishment has lost its purpose. While this indeed may be the case nowadays, capital punishment through the death penalty should not be abolished as it serves as a powerful deterrent in circumventing the increase chances of capital crimes on being committed, as well as the assurance to victims and their families that they would feel safe upon administering such punishment to criminals found guilty of their crimes.

According to Walker and Bix (2008) capital punishment has undertaken various forms since the early civilizations – torture, burnt in the stake, guillotine or thrown overboard at sea –. However, some thoughts of removing capital punishment, especially death penalty, had also taken some. Capital punishment is mostly done to criminals who have committed severe crimes or capital crimes. It is most often that crimes such as rape, murder, treason, drug and human trafficking and denouncement of religion are already acts that can constitute to the death penalty. In the United States, death penalty had been enforced until 1960 when the US Supreme Court started revising the Constitution’s Fifth, Eight and Fourteenth Amendments. Opponents to capital punishment have often cited that it is unconstitutional, given the decisions done to defendants in terms of their physical, mental, and social status. In the United States, for example, the three known cases in 1972- Furman v. Georgia, Jackson v. Georgia and Branch v. Texas – showcased the irregularities in deciding if a defendant is to be punished through the death penalty. When the Supreme Court reviewed all three cases, each case referred to defendants accused of capital crimes. The Furman v. Georgia case’s defendant is charged with murder while the two other cases involved rape charges. In the first case, it had been seen that Furman was indeed responsible for the death of one of the Georgian residents he intentionally or unintentionally killed. In all three cases, all defendants were charged to death and ironically enough, all of them were black, illiterate, and poor. For the Branch v. Texas case, the defendant had been declared mentally deficient. These three examples, supporters to abolishment concur, showcases that judges tend to showcase bias over putting up the charges to the death penalty.

Supporters to abolish the death penalty or capital punishment also see it as an ineffective way to stop and deter crime. Supporters of abolishment have expressed concern with the fact that judges could be biased with their decision in carrying out their decisions. They suggest that there are better means to punish criminals and offenders and at the same time, protect the society. . Kronenwetter (2001) argued that there is little evidence to showcase that death penalty does deter crime and convince criminals to forgo their activities. In 1804, Sir James Stephen noted that death penalty’s capacity to deter crime is questionable as it is difficult to prove. It is also argued by abolitionist to death penalty that murderers or criminals do not think rationally enough that would stop themselves from their crime despite the penalty. Most crimes nowadays are also done through the bout of emotions or feelings such as passion, rage, frustration, or fear. This prevents criminals from understanding the gravity of their crime. In recent studies, US states who use death penalty – Texas, Florida, Georgia, and Virginia – all have high cases of murder rates despite the punishment. Texas alone had executed murderers for every 6,385 residents. Florida has one per 9,952, Georgia had one per 8,997, and 11,249 residents per one murder in Virginia . Siegel (2009) noted that death penalty is also considered morally wrong by religions and ethics as opponents to death penalty have argued that “social vengeance by death is a primitive way of revenge, which stands in the way of moral progress”. The Catholic Church had condemned capital punishment despite the other religious leaders acceptance to the policy.

However, supporters to continuing capital punishment or the death penalty have stressed out that capital punishment can benefit society and at the same time, foster safety for the people. Siegel (2009) noted that death penalty is actually morally correct. In the United States, for example, while the Constitution stated that “cruel and unusual punishments” is forbidden, that does not constitute also to death penalty. Capital punishment was widely used by the time the Constitution was drafted by the founding fathers. The founding fathers themselves intended to allow states the power to use death penalty. Although it may be cruel enough for those who will be facing it, it was not an unusual recourse for punishment. Supporters of death penalty also see that death penalty is just punishment as it is proportional to the crime committed by the criminals. Since the criminal justice system enables justices and law enforcers to justify the punishments that could be given to every criminal, it should be seen fair that the most serious punishments would be sanctioned to those who have committed the gravest crimes. While some would argue that it is morally inappropriate to sentence someone to death despite the crimes he has committed, it can be refuted that one should not forget the treatment done to the victim before claiming the punishment was done out of pretense.

Another argument used by supporters to vouch for death penalty is the fact that it showcases the will of the people regarding how punishments must be done to society’s worst offenders. Studies have been done, such as that of Alexis Durham, that majority of the public or 95% would call for death penalty for the criminal if the said criminal had committed the most heinous crime in the book. The public, according to the Durham study, also note that if criminals take the lives of innocent people, they forfeit their lives once they are taken by law enforcers. It is also believed by the majority of the public that death penalty is capable of administering control and less costly than life imprisonment. Some would even support death penalty given the crime that the criminal has committed. There is also the unlikely chance of error when death penalty is administered. Supporters firmly argue that the law itself assures criminals that they will not be easily executed upon given just trial and the fact that they cannot be judged based with bias. While there have been chances that capital punishment had been given to innocent people in the past, the current system now makes it impossible to execute the innocent. In the United States, federal courts have the just order to scrutinize all death penalty charges to ensure that the defendant is truly guilty and deserves the punishment given.

Finally, capital punishment through the death penalty is capable of deterring criminals and also providing victims the sense of justice and retribution, fostering the feeling of safety. According to Clear, Cole and Reisig (2008) proponents to the death penalty ensures that the punishment becomes a powerful deterrent to stop criminals from committing violent crimes. In addition to this, death penalty’s retention in any given country is crucial to ensuring safety as levels of committed capital crimes continues to increase each month. They also argue that giving a criminal just a life sentence for their capital crimes, especially if the criminal committed murder or rape, this diminishes the victim’s self-worth. Families would argue that their family or friend died or got harassed without reason. Live victims can also foster feelings of isolation, fear and even self-pity as they may see themselves tarnished and violated. The arguments have also been supported by the argument that there is still a possibility that the offender could still instill fear to the victim even while in incarceration and once he is out through parole. Siegel adds that victims and families tend to experience justice and alleviation from the psychological trauma induced by crimes done to their families especially when the criminal is sentenced to death . It is also noted by scholars such as Walter Berns and Joseph Bessette that the death penalty itself is done in an arbitrary and capricious manner since the time of the Furman case, allowing the criminal justice system of any nation to filter criminals and reserve the punishment to the worst criminals . Abolishment of the death penalty or capital punishment entirely may indeed stress moral sentiments regarding life and the controversies as to how it is given to criminals and effectiveness. It may also be true that there are instances that the death penalty’s methods of killing can be unethical, or unacceptable to the conservatives. However, one must stop and think: why would others see it right to continue with the death penalty given the arguments presented by opponents? Is it just because of the constitution? A moral obligation stated by religion? In a personal perspective, death penalty may have its flaws, especially in how it is done and the arguments that contradict its use. Once one looks further, however, it could be seen that people call for death penalty because it would make them feel safe from the people who have done such morally inacceptable crimes to others. It is also a given that if a person hears a criminal commit something heinous to another, may it be a family member, friend or others, the person can call for the return or the administering of death penalty to the criminal to reinforce justice.

Clear, T., Cole, G., & Reisig, M. (2008). American Corrections. Belmont: Thomson Higher Education. Kronenwetter, M. (2001). Capital Punishment: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO. Siegel, L. (2009). Introduction to Criminal Justice. Belmont: Cengage Learning. Walker, I., & Bix, B. (2008). The Death Penalty. Edina: ABDO Publishing Company.

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 2471

This paper is created by writer with

ID 281214011

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Meter research papers, john deere case studies, vietnam war course work, iraq course work, starbucks course work, parenting course work, industrialization course work, sculpture course work, award course work, athletes course work, telephone no literature review examples, racism in us essay sample, htc corporation report examples, individual cultural diversity issue and its relevance to workplace dynamics essay sample, kant case study example, koppen climate classification system essay examples, free book review about steve jobs, chief characteristics of postmodernism as described by lyotard and jameson essay samples, essay on following are the influences on business buyers, example of research paper on consumer models and and understanding of the manager 039 s problems, good example of research paper on effect of communication on interpersonal relations, good research paper on leadership interview project, berkleys position essay, good essay about decision analysis, good example of healthcare ethics essay, creative writing on social justice leader, marketing essays examples, laminar and turbulent pipe flow report, article review on chinese art and literature, quot essays, almon essays, scholars essays, air quality essays, proposals essays, new kind essays, third world countries essays, tourism sector essays, hacking essays, higher learning essays, institutions of higher learning essays, pertaining essays, headaches essays, rights movement essays.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

(Yes) Nicole Smith – An Argument in Favor of Capital Punishment

(no) stephen nathanson – why we should put the death penalty to rest, my evaluation, my opinions of the arguments, works cited.

The death penalty involves condemning a criminal to death due to a horrendous crime (Roberts-Cady 185). Its existence in the criminal justice system remains is a subject of contention. Stephen Nathanson advances an argument against the death penalty in his article, Why We Should Put the Death Penalty to Rest, by refuting the moral and legal grounds upon which its proponents base their arguments. In a separate article, An Argument in Favor of Capital Punishment, Nicole Smith shows that despite the mounting opposition towards the death penalty, there is reason to keep it in the penal code. These two articles form the core of this essay since its main concern is to determine which one of the two arguments is stronger.

The gist of Nicole Smith’s (Smith par. 1-8) argument is that the death penalty or capital punishment is necessary because it deters murder, thereby saving the victims’ families and friends the pain of losing loved ones. She further argues that in cases where a murder has occurred, the death penalty serves justice to the victim’s loved ones.

Smith’s position on the killing of innocent individuals is apparent. She esteems human life and strongly argues against the killing of innocent individuals. She argues that since victims die and are oblivious of what transpires afterwards, the point of concern is the agony that their loved ones undergo. According to Smith, these people deserve nothing less than retribution. Smith quotes a famous biblical expression, “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”, to support her argument (par. 2). Since the criminal takes away human life, the only punishment that is commensurate with such an act is to take their life as well. Although she recognizes that the criminal justice system may sometimes err and convict innocent people, she downplays such possibilities on grounds that the error margin is negligible.

Nathanson for his part presents two major arguments in support of his position. Firstly, he argues that the death penalty violates the same values it is supposed to promote (Nathanson 124). For instance, if a criminal receives a death sentence, the only circumstance under which the conviction can be justified, is when the justice system determines beyond any doubt that the convicted individual is the perpetrator of the said crime. Unfortunately, sometimes the system captures and convicts innocent individuals. According to Nathanson (124), the execution of just one innocent individual due to lapses within the justice system contradicts the value of justice.

Secondly, Nathanson refutes the claims that the death penalty preserves human life. Murderers are guilty of killing and so is the justice system when it sentences an individual to death (124). The ideal of respect for human life denies anyone authority over another person’s life under whatever circumstances. Therefore, even if one is guilty of murder, their life is equally important because they are also human. Executing such a person over claims of respect for the life of the victim is inconsistent with the principle of respect for human life.

I esteem ethics and I believe that matters of life and death, such as those presented in these arguments can only be evaluated adequately by the use of relevant ethical theories. The ethical theories that can best evaluate this issue include utilitarianism and Kantian ethics. In utilitarianism, the merit of an action is evaluated by its consequences. From this perspective, Smith’s argument seems plausible because she places emphasis on the effects of murder on the victim’s loved ones. To strengthen the argument further, she adds that it serves the greater good to execute a criminal to avoid the recurrence of murder cases by the same individual. Therefore, if a single individual is executed to save an entire society from pain, suffering, and mayhem such as that caused by serial killers; it is understandable (Berns and Bessette 1).

However, according to Kantian ethics, although it is wrong to kill, executing one person in an attempt to pay for the death of another is not plausible. Executing a criminal to pay for another death is tantamount to assuming that two wrongs can make a right (Gray 257). This assumption does not make sense at all. This position is consistent with Nathanson’s argument that executing a criminal for whatever reason is inconsistent with the belief in the sanctity of life. It is therefore hypocritical to assume that the criminal’s life is of less value in comparison to the victim’s life.

Additionally, the criminal justice system is notorious for some unforgivable lapses that often lead to the incarceration of innocent people (Nathanson 124). Even if only one out of every a thousand convicts is innocent, the system cannot claim to serve justice. The life of that single innocent individual is precious. Moreover, even the 999 who are rightfully convicted do not deserve to die. Their lives are equally important and should be protected by the same system.

While Smith’s argument seems plausible at the superficial level, it is not entirely ethical. It is equally unethical for a criminal to kill an innocent victim, but the idea of punishing murder by death is certainly outdated and has no place in modern society. Human society has advanced in many ways and has abandoned the wisdom of its ancient ancestors, which did not seem to make sense. It would, therefore, be plausible to apply the same standard to the death penalty debate. Even the bible, which is the source of the principle, cautions against it in the second testament. Therefore, using such a principle as the basis for dispensing capital punishment cannot be right by any standards.

Nathanson’s argument is, therefore, more endearing because it shows that no matter the angle of perception, the death penalty remains unreasonable. He points out an important issue in the debate about the death penalty by arguing that both sides cite justice and respect for human life as the values they seek to promote in their arguments. Then he proceeds to show that the death penalty does not serve justice in all cases and is therefore wrong.

He also shows beyond doubt that the death penalty undermines the sanctity of life. Therefore, it’s being part of the penal code allows some unscrupulous individuals to use it for their selfish gain. As such, it should be abolished altogether. Countries that do not have the death penalty, such as Britain have much lower murder cases compared to the U.S. Therefore, proponents of the death penalty, such as Smith, who claims that its removal will cause a rise in murder cases have no ground to make such claims.

In conclusion, both arguments seem to appeal to the sense of reason. However, based on one underlying belief, the distinction can be made as to which argument is more plausible. Although there are circumstances, under which I believe in utilitarianism, in this case, Kantian ethics carry the day. Nathanson’s arguments sound more reasonable to me because I believe that no human being has authority over the life of another whatsoever. Since no element of bias is identifiable in both arguments, my position is that the death penalty should be abolished.

Berns, Walter and Joseph Bessette. “Why the Death Penalty is Fair.” Wall Street Journal , Eastern edition ed.: 1. 1998. ProQuest. Web.

Gray, James P. “Essay: Facing Facts on the Death Penalty.” Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 44.3 (2011): 255-264. Academic Search Complete . Web.

Nathanson, Stephen. “Why We Should Put the Death Penalty to Rest.” Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics 15 (2005): 124.

Roberts-Cady, Sarah. “Against Retributive Justifications of the Death Penalty.” Journal of Social Philosophy 41.2 (2010): 185-193. Academic Search Complete . Web.

Smith, Nicole. An Argument in Favor of Capital Punishment. Article Myriad. 2011. Web.

“Marriage Story” Film Analysis
Fitzgerald’s “Hero” in “Tender Is the Night”
Components of the disorder found in O.J. Simpson’s personality.
Christopher Buckley’s “Supreme Courtship”
Social Injustices in U.S Courts
The Use of the Exclusionary Rule
The History of San Quentin State Prison
Problem Analysis in the Criminal Justice System
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, January 28). Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished. https://ivypanda.com/essays/death-penalty-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/

"Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished." IvyPanda , 28 Jan. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/death-penalty-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished'. 28 January.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished." January 28, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/death-penalty-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/.

1. IvyPanda . "Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished." January 28, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/death-penalty-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished." January 28, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/death-penalty-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/.

ESSAY SAUCE

FOR STUDENTS : ALL THE INGREDIENTS OF A GOOD ESSAY

Essay: Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished?

Essay details and download:.

Subject area(s): Law essays
Reading time: 4 minutes
Price: Free download
Published: 16 June 2012*
File format: Text
Words: 1,079 (approx)
Number of pages: 5 (approx)
Tags: Death penalty essays

Text preview of this essay:

This page of the essay has 1,079 words. Download the full version above.

Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished?

History of Death Penalty The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammaurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes. The death penalty was also part of the Fourteenth Century B.C.’s Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C.’s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C.’s Roman law of the Twelve Tablets.

Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement. In the Tenth Century A.D., hanging became the usual method of execution in Britain. This report will give argument against death penalty while supporting the abolishment movements of death penalty, David (2010)

Should the death penalty be abolished? Death penalty is a severe and irreversible punishment that raises controversy around the world. In order to discuss the valuable existence of the death penalty, it is might make sense to bring two questions must; whether there is strong reason to implement the death penalty; and whether the death penalty is a suitable method to solve the problem. There are many arguments for and against the death penalty, Sanger and Unah (2012).

First and foremost, death sentence does not make sense it is more of barbaric to deal with murder morally nothing make us better when we kill those who kill. It insincere. Also it is an easy way out for the criminals. It would rather have then suffer in jail for the rest of their life without parole. More so, murders do not fear death so this kind of penalty is not a restrictive. In fact it is cheaper to keep an inmate in prison for life without parole than it is to kill. It does not make sense to spend millions of money on a morally questionable act that has shown no signs of determent, Martin and Michael (2013)

Secondly, death penalty should be abolished. Every year, thousands of people are put on death row for a crime they didn’t even commit. There’s no way of knowing if they actually did or not. Is it worth the risk? It can be seen as a cruel and unusual punishment, which goes against one of our amendments in the Constitution. Crime will always be a part of the world and there will be better ways to handle it. In the United States only it is estimated that total prosecution and defense costs to the state and counties equal $9 million per year. (Gross, Samuel, 2006)

Death penalty is a human rights violation. With the death penalty, you are deliberately deciding punishment by death for a criminal. This is the same concept as eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. It violates human rights by the government forcing the death of a human. Death by capital punishment is not justice meaning not giving them what is rightfully theirs. I fully support imprisonment instead. God says that we shall not decide the length of another human’s life according to the 10 Commandments. In conclusion, the death penalty is killing. (Stephen and Bright, 2010)

Furthermore, it is barbaric, over expensive and innocents often die If you trade an eye for an eye the whole world will be blind – literally, what gives the justice system the right to take the priceless human life? Thousands of people in the world history have been acquitted after death. The death sentence is incredibly expensive and a waste of information on killers and how they operate as well. Advocates of the death sentence seem to tend to appeal to the emotions but at the end of the day this biblical type of revenge that seems so popular is never satisfying, it is just another death among thousands. Poor quality defense leaves many to death sentence, a study at Columbia University found that 68% of all death penalty cases were reversed on appeal, with inadequate defense as one of the main reasons requiring reversal.

Moreover, it is cruel and unusual punishment. We cannot justify killing someone if we are punctuating it by saying killing is wrong. From a young age we teach our children that two wrongs do not make a right, yet the death penalty is trying to do exactly that. Costs are also prohibitive. It costs more to have someone go through the death penalty process than to keep him in jail for the rest of his life. For there is a better way to help the families of murder victims, families of murder victims undergo severe trauma and loss which no one should minimize. However, executions do not help these people heal nor do they end their pain; the extended process prior to executions prolongs the agony of the family. Families of murder victims would benefit far more if the funds now being used for the costly process of executions were diverted to counseling and other assistance. (Baldus, David. 2008)

Mentally ill people are executed, one out of every ten who has been executed in the United States since 1977 is mentally ill, according to Amnesty International and the National Association on Mental Illness. Many mentally ill defendants are unable to participate in their trials in any meaningful way and appear unengaged, cold, and unfeeling before the jury. Some have been forcibly medicated in order to make them competent to be executed. Although the U.S. Supreme Court has decreed that people with ‘mental retardation’ may not be executed, many countries has not yet passed a law banning the execution of the mentally ill.

Suppose death sentence should only really be used for crimes such as 9/11 and people like Bin Laden or the Yorkshire Ripper. But otherwise it should not be brought back and it should be banned in the world for an indefinite time. Police should use guns if needed, if they were dealing with a gun crime. Or in other words, suppose that we should get rid of them altogether. (Martin and Michael, 2009)

Lastly basing with biblical facts, the Bible does not allow people to be killed when we read through the Bible, killing people is a sin. In Old Testament times, it is mentioned that anyone who commits adultery should be stoned to death, as religious societies we disagree with death sentence. We have witnessed so many people have been killed wrongly. The real criminal is not killed though.

...(download the rest of the essay above)

Discover more:

Death penalty essays

Recommended for you

Examine Pros & Cons of Death Penalty in US Criminal Justice System
Death penalty perspectives – deterrence and morality
The death penalty through history

About this essay:

If you use part of this page in your own work, you need to provide a citation, as follows:

Essay Sauce, Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished? . Available from:<https://www.essaysauce.com/law-essays/should-death-penalty-abolished/> [Accessed 20-06-24].

These Law essays have been submitted to us by students in order to help you with your studies.

* This essay may have been previously published on Essay.uk.com at an earlier date.

Rethinking Justice: why the Death Penalty should be Abolished

This essay about the reasons to abolish the death penalty discusses the ethical, practical, and financial implications of capital punishment. It argues that the irreversible nature of the death penalty, coupled with the risk of executing innocent people, raises serious moral concerns. The essay also points out the lack of evidence supporting the death penalty as a crime deterrent and highlights the biases in its application, which disproportionately affect minorities and those of lower socio-economic status. Additionally, it notes the higher costs of death penalty cases compared to life imprisonment. Finally, the essay emphasizes a shift in global norms, with a growing number of countries abolishing the death penalty in favor of more humane approaches to justice. This reflects a broader move toward upholding human rights and fostering a fair and equitable justice system.

How it works

The death penalty has always been a hot-button issue, sparking debates that cut deep into our moral and ethical fibers. But as society evolves, so too should our justice system. There are several powerful, human-centered reasons why the death penalty feels like an outdated relic in today’s legal landscape.

Let’s start with the moral quandary it presents. Taking a life, under any circumstance, raises a multitude of ethical questions. One of the most troubling aspects of capital punishment is the chilling possibility of executing an innocent person.

Since 1973, over 185 individuals on death row in the United States were exonerated. This isn’t just a statistic; it’s a glaring reminder of how irreversible and final the death penalty is. Mistakes in other areas of justice can often be rectified, but there is no undoing an execution.

Then there’s the argument about whether the death penalty actually deters crime. The evidence here is shaky at best. Numerous studies have shown that harsh penalties like execution do not effectively prevent crime more than life imprisonment. If deterrence is the goal, the death penalty misses the mark, which begs the question: why keep it?

Bias in the death penalty’s application adds another layer of concern. The system shows troubling disparities, particularly with racial biases and socioeconomic status influencing outcomes. Defendants accused of killing white victims are disproportionately sentenced to death, which speaks volumes about the prejudices skulking through the corridors of our courts. This isn’t just unfair; it’s a fundamentally flawed system that perpetuates inequality.

Financially, the death penalty doesn’t make much sense either. It’s far more expensive to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. This is due to the lengthy and complex legal process required in capital cases, designed to minimize errors. Every dollar spent here is a dollar that could be used more effectively elsewhere within the criminal justice system.

Globally, the trend is also moving away from capital punishment, with over two-thirds of countries having abolished it in law or in practice. This global shift isn’t just about being progressive; it’s about adhering to international human rights standards that recognize the death penalty as a violation of the right to life.

In the end, abolishing the death penalty isn’t just about eliminating a punishment option. It’s about building a justice system that reflects our values of fairness, redemption, and humanity. It’s about acknowledging that the state shouldn’t sanction the irreversible act of taking a life. Moving away from the death penalty would signal a commitment to these values and contribute to a more equitable society.

So, as we ponder the path forward, let’s consider a justice system that upholds life and offers chances for redemption. That’s the kind of progress that aligns with our collective growth as a compassionate society.

Cite this page

Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished. (2024, May 12). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/

"Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished." PapersOwl.com , 12 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/ [Accessed: 20 Jun. 2024]

"Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished." PapersOwl.com, May 12, 2024. Accessed June 20, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/

"Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished," PapersOwl.com , 12-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/. [Accessed: 20-Jun-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Sample details

Death Penalty

Death Penalty Should not be Abolished

Grammar mistakes

Redundant words

Readability

Capital punishment is not as immoral as how conservatives claim it to be. Heinous and amoral crimes have become undeniably rife in our materialistic and worldly society, and a punishment of death would only appear as a very significant and large sacrifice to take for granted before committing the most heinous and conscienceless acts. In assessing the morality of capital punishment, the society must also assess whether the lives lost and destroyed by such brutal crimes are less immoral for such kind of punishment. Thus, as conservatives wish for capital punishment’s abolishment, the continuous degradation of our society’s morality just gives people enough reason why it must be retained.

In evaluating the real underlying principle of every fair society, it must be known that “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” shall always relate to equal rights (Cauthen). Alongside this statement comes the obligation of the members of the society to respect and honor other’s freedom to live a life in peace and order. However, the modern world opens doors to a lot of luxuries, materialism, and greed as the standard of living continues to ascend. More and more people are being conquered by such lavish, material possessions that abuse, harassment, and several crimes are ruthlessly committed just to go over other people and acquire unparalleled power and wealth. Lives, morality, and peace are being taken away everyday without the littlest piece of conscience as the heinous crimes are being committed. Such criminals never feel the struggle of each victim to fight for his or her life in the urge to fulfill an evil objective. The society nowadays is never blinded by these stories. The media has been able to expose how immorality tries to lead every greedy and selfish motive to heinous and conscienceless acts.

ready to help you now

Without paying upfront

Hence, having such brutal stories where innocent lives are taken, people must evaluate the objective of the capital punishment. Each person, whether good or bad, whether God-fearing or, values his or her life above every possession he or she may have. Having the intention of such a heavy and significant retribution posts how well and how deep the society values life and morality. The society values life and morality well enough that it has to create a substantial and just punishment to counter the pitiless acts of killings and brutal crimes that the worldly and greedy man is prone to commit. No one who values his or her own life would take capital punishment for granted. Thus, anyone who fears the brutal pains of death shall also fear taking one’s innocent breath away. It will still take a long journey before the society can think of a better substitute and compromise aside from capital punishment. However, as long as people fear death, they will also fear killing others as death awaits the act. Thus, there will be no reason why capital punishment must be deterred in a death-fearing society.

Cauthen, Kenneth. “Capital Punishment.” Essays on Theology by Kenneth Cauthen. 12 June 2007. 16 January 2009 <http://www.frontiernet.net/~kenc/cappun.htm>.

Cite this page

https://graduateway.com/death-penalty-should-not-be-abolished/

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers

Check more samples on your topics

Why must death penalty be abolished.

The arguments about death penalty has been and will always be controversial. The main issue that surrounds death penalty, the dispute between the supporters and those against the capital punishment is whether or not it must be abolished. Those in favor of the capital punishment argue that death penalty is the best way of

Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished

Capital punishment is the execution, as a punishment for a person convicted of committing a heinous crime against humanity. Crimes that are known as capital crimes or capital offences enforce capital punishment; crimes against humanity, drug trafficking resulting in loss of life, terrorism, murder, kidnapping resulting loss of life, etc. are considered capital offences. In

The Death Penalty Should be Abolished

Various state officials were sued from Charles Warner and three others because of the use of a drug, the sedative midazolam. This drug played a part in three long and apparently painful executions last year (2014) stated Liptak. Why was a long process, well this drug would help prisoners become unconscious before they would had

Should the Death Death Penalty Be Legal? Sample

In 2011 43 people received capital penalty and in 2010 46 people were besides killed because of capital penalty. Now in the twelvemonth 2012 there are 3. 146 decease row inmates waiting to be executed. A Gallic philosopher. Albert Camus one time said “Capital penalty is the most premeditated of murders” . Do you believe

The Death of the Death Penalty

Is The Death Penalty Effective

“Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement.” (Tolkien, 1954) Majority of America have their own strong beliefs as to whether capital punishment should remain in todays society. Those who oppose the death penalty

Death to the Death Penalty

The death penalty has been around as far back as the Bible times. Perhaps even later. It hasn’t been until the last century or so that its ethicality has been questioned. As of now, every single country in Europe except Belarus has abolished the death penalty and this is actually a prerequisite to enter the

Evaluate the Claim That the Use of Imprisonment Should Be Reduced or Abolished

Evaluate the claim that the use of imprisonment should be reduced or abolished. Imprisonment is the harshest sanction that can be used by the courts when deemed necessary in punishing those who partake in criminal offences in this present day. When imprisonment first developed in the sixteenth and seventeenth century it was initially a place

Beauty Contest Should Be Abolished

Beauty pageant

While some argue for the cancellation of beauty contests, I personally disagree with this notion. Despite the negative aspects associated with them, I believe that beauty contests should not be abolished entirely. These competitions not only entertain people but also contribute to the economy and provide role models for others to inspire them in their

Exam Should Be Abolished

Essays Database

Examination

The sound of the burst of a loud cracker cuts into the silence of a bright sunny morning, this sound is followed by a chorus of "WHAAOOO" by hundreds of kids. This scene is repeated every year on the last day of school, signaling the end of exams. Naturally, children are officially banned from carrying

Hi, my name is Amy 👋

In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

The last days of death row in California: ‘We are not allowed to be human here’

The state government has been transferring the death row population in the infamous san quentin prison to dozens of penitentiaries across california. el país visited kevin cooper, who has been awaiting execution for 39 years for a crime he maintains he didn’t commit.

One day, in May of 1985, Kevin Cooper first set foot on death row at San Quentin State Prison, in the San Francisco Bay. Three weeks ago — 39 years later — he left one of the oldest, most famous and most feared prisons in the United States. He was heading to his new home: California Health Care Facility, Stockton (CHCF). While it has the name of a hospital, it’s actually a penitentiary.

His death sentence still weighs on him, but the change, he admits, “has been like going from hell to some sort of heaven.” Cooper is no longer required to be handcuffed and escorted whenever he’s outside the cell in which he’s serving time for a crime he maintains he didn’t commit. He has double the square footage that he had in San Quentin, as well as a window through which he can see the sky. Even his blood pressure has gone down. But the best thing, he tells EL PAÍS — in a phone call that, every so often, is interrupted by an automated voice that warns that the conversation is being recorded — is that, in the new prison, he has access to ice.

Cooper is one of 636 people on death row in California, 20 of whom are women. Of the 27 states with capital punishment , California has the largest population in the country. And not so much because California is the most populated state: rather, it’s because judges continue to sentence people to death, but they’re not killed. The last execution took place in 2006. In fact, after the U.S. Supreme Court reintroduced capital punishment in 1976, only 13 people have been executed in California.

Logic would dictate that a blue state like this should have already abolished the death penalty. However, when the issue was put forth on the ballot in 2016, 53.15% of Californians voted against repealing capital punishment. On the same ballot, another initiative was approved: Proposition 66, which was drafted to reduce prison costs and speed up the appeals system for those who await their fate for decades. It will also require the condemned work and pay restitution to the victim’s families. In 2023, Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom — perhaps his party’s next candidate for the White House— announced that he would dismantle the death row in San Quentin, and that its population would be distributed to other prisons throughout California, as long as they have a lethal-electric fence.

Vista aérea de la prisión de San Quintín, en la bahía de San Francisco.

The program began in 2020, with about 100 incarcerated people who transferred voluntarily. Four months ago, the transfer of the rest began. The process is now about to conclude. As of June 7, there were still 38 men at San Quentin, according to “the inmate locator” presumably in the hospital. The next phase of the plan involves converting San Quentin — an institution made famous in pop culture because Johnny Cash once played there (and because it was home to murderer Charles Manson ) — into a “Nordic-inspired” rehabilitation center.

Many death row inhabitants suggested three preferred destinations, which the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) could take into account based on a points system, involving factors such as behavior. Cooper was granted his wish to go to Stockton: it’s about 85 miles from San Francisco , meaning that it will deter some of his visitors from going there as frequently. But it could have been worse: they could have sent him to the southern tip of California.

His preference for Stockton — which is something like a medicalized prison — is explained by his back problems, after so many years of playing basketball in the prison yard. He also has arthritis in his right knee, which he hopes will be treated at the new facility.

A month before his transfer, Cooper received EL PAÍS on death row. Outside, a radiant April sun bathed one of the most beautiful enclaves in the San Francisco Bay. “Welcome to the infamous San Quentin Prison,” he said. “In here, we’re not allowed to be human; we’re victims of a modern-day lynching.”

The prison’s visiting area is divided into a dozen barred cages, giving the place the feel of a factory farm. At the entrance, there are a handful of vending machines that only accept quarters and dollar bills, as well as a microwave in which visitors heat up newly-purchased dishes for their loved ones. The day that EL PAÍS came by, the place was full. All the visitors were women. A mother said that she’d been going every week to see her son for the past 29 years. There were also activists, wives and partners, including a woman who had traveled from Europe.

The uncertainty about these transfers — regarding both location and timing — caused anxiety to spread on death row. Many balked at the prospect of changing years of routines (even if terrible), some were concerned about being celled with someone else after decades of being single celled, while others hoped that the change might be for the better. In late April, a man was found dead in his San Quentin cell shortly before his transfer. Apparently, he committed suicide.

On the morning of the visit by EL PAÍS, the man who has been on death row in California the longest — a 66-year-old Native American named Douglas “Chief” Stankewitz — summed up the paradox. He said through the bars of his cage, while chatting with his friend Colleen Hicks: “I’m worried about how the other inmates are going to receive us. What have they told them about us? I’m also worried about how the administration will behave… Their ability to punish us knows no limits,” he sighed, during his conversation with EL PAÍS.

“On the other hand, I’m excited,” Stankewitz shrugged. “They’ve told me that I’ll be able to pet dogs and [maybe] learn computer science.”

He has spent the past 46 years behind bars for the murder of a woman. His sentence was commuted in 2019 from the death penalty to life imprisonment — without the possibility of parole — in light of the irregularities that plagued his two trials. He’s currently waiting for a judge to decide on a habeas corpus petition, which could allow for his release.

Alexandra Cock, of his legal team, expressed in a telephone conversation the hope that this will be the case, although with a caution shared by those who have been working on cases like that for a long time: it is better not to trust too much to avoid another disappointment. “The judge made it difficult for us to present our case for wrongful conviction for years,” Cock said, “but recently, I think his attitude has changed. And honestly, I find it hard to believe that he doesn’t agree with us. The arguments we have presented are very powerful. And the evidence points to his exoneration.”

Keith Doolin is another person recently transferred. He’s been on death row for 28 of his 51 years — “illegally imprisoned,” he interjected — convicted of killing two sex workers in Fresno after receiving ineffectual counsel from his appointed trial lawyer. What worried him most about the move was that he would lose his most precious asset — a typewriter — which he uses to work on his case. He was also worried that he would be sent even further away from his mother, Donna Larsen.

The machine — and the rest of his possessions — arrived safely. “Now, I see mountains, trees and animals from my cell: deer, Canadian geese and a family of hummingbirds that have built their nest in my window,” he says, from his new destination California State Prison, Sacramento. As for his mother, her commute to visit him is only about an hour longer (with good traffic).

In a telephone conversation with EL PAÍS, Larsen — who enrolled in law school when her son was convicted, so that she could prove that he’s as “innocent as a newborn” — explains that she’s been closely following all of the inmate transfers, beyond just her son’s. After speaking with many of those transferred, she believes that, “in general, the balance has been good.” Larsen is an institution among relatives of California death row prisoners. In her eighties, she says that many of them call her “grandma.”

On the day of his interview in San Quentin, Kevin Cooper said that the transfer didn’t bother him. “I’m too old to worry about anything. If I survived this hell, I can handle anything. A prison is always a prison.” A guard had brought him in handcuffs from the East Block, the five-story yellow building that houses death row. There, he lived in a 48-square-foot space without windows. He had a sink, a toilet and a metal bed. Whenever he wanted to write, he would remove the mattress, to use the structure as a desk.

Kevin Cooper, en el corredor de la muerte de San Quintín, el pasado 26 de abril, durante su entrevista con EL PAÍS, en una imagen tomada por un funcionario de prisiones.

Cooper entered the cell within the visiting room. From the outside, guards removed his handcuffs, before locking the cage.

To access San Quentin, clothing of certain colors isn’t permitted. Mobile phones, cameras and recorders are also prohibited. As a result, in the middle of the conversation — which lasted just over two hours — a prison official took a picture of Cooper for this newspaper.

Cooper spoke about many things while eating reheated spicy chicken wings. He discussed the solace he has found in books and art: his paintings are pleas against the death penalty and racism, although the new prison has taken away his brushes. He mentioned the emotional shields he has developed over the decades. “I have no friends in here: loneliness is my oldest companion,” he said quietly.

When asked about the first thing he would do if he were ever to be released, he replied: “As someone oppressed, I would join a demonstration. For example, in favor of the Palestinian people.”

Above all, during his conversation with EL PAÍS, Cooper, 66, reviewed his life. It was split in two by a fateful night in June of 1983, when Doug and Peggy Ryen, their 10-year-old daughter Jessica and an 11-year-old friend who was spending the night were murdered with knives, axes and an ice pick. They were killed at their house in the wealthy neighborhood of Chino Hills, near Los Angeles. Josh — the youngest son — survived, despite his throat having been slit.

In his first statement to the police, eight-year-old Josh Ryen indicated that three white people were responsible for the massacre and later suggested they were Latino . Initially, when Cooper’s photograph came on the TV, Ryen specifically said that it was not him. Later on, however, his perceptions changed.

Cooper — a 25-year-old Black man with a criminal record — had hidden in an empty house just over 150 yards away from the Ryens’ residence. This was after he had walked out through a hole in the fence of a minimum-security prison where he was serving time for robbery. “That was the worst decision of my life,” he recalls.

He spent two nights in that abandoned house. From there, he unsuccessfully called a couple of female friends to lend him money. He claims that he continued on his way to Mexico before the murders. When the police learned that a fugitive was on the loose in the area, officers — pressed to solve a case that horrified the country — abandoned the rest of their leads and decided that Cooper was the culprit. That same year, the sheriff in charge of the investigation was up for re-election. It took him just four days to close the case.

The suspect was, at the time, on the run in Tijuana. “When I saw on TV that they were looking for me, I was scared by the way they talked about me,” he remembers. Cooper and his supporters — including activists from Amnesty International — have been questioning the investigation for the past four decades. In an initial search, the police didn’t find any incriminating evidence in the empty house. But the next day, they did: a green button from a prison uniform (it was later learned that the suspect was wearing a brown jacket), as well as the sheath of an axe.

Blood and cigarette butts

The Ryen station wagon — found about 50 miles from the crime scene — had traces of blood on three of its four seats. However, the jury that found Cooper guilty didn’t apparently consider the improbability of a single person having stained three seats, nor did the jurors wonder how he had managed to inflict 140 stab wounds on the victims single-handedly. In an initial search, police didn’t find any of the suspect’s fingerprints in the vehicle. But again, during the second check, the clues suddenly appeared: three cigarette butts of the same brand that Cooper smoked in the abandoned house.

In the summary of the case, there’s evidence of an astonishing phenomenon: those butts changed size over the years.

El fiscal del distrito de San Bernardino (izquierda) y el sheriff Floyd Tidwell presentan las fotografías de Kevin Cooper el 9 de junio de 1983.

Another thing that draws attention in a case full of shadows is the fact that a woman called the police saying that her boyfriend — a white man — had shown up on the night of the murders with overalls covered in blood. She later handed them over to San Bernardino Sheriff Department, but the deputy decided to destroy that piece of evidence. In 2004, Sheriff Floyd Tidwell — suspected of having built a corrupt network while he was the county’s police chief — pleaded guilty to keeping more than 530 guns confiscated by his officers over the years.

Cooper’s trial was held in San Diego, with protesters holding racist signs, and a stuffed gorilla hanging on a pole with a noose around its neck with signs reading “Hang Kevin.” He complains that his court-appointed attorney “didn’t do enough” and that he “wasn’t prepared for such a complex case.” The jury — made up of 11 white citizens and one Black— found him guilty and recommended the death penalty. Since then, he has exhausted all possible appeals.

In 2004, he was almost executed. With three hours and 42 minutes left before the lethal injection , the order came from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals — with jurisdiction over the Western United States — to stay the execution. “The day they almost killed me was one of the most unreal of my life, like watching a movie starring someone else,” Cooper recalls. “They asked me what I wanted my last dinner to be, but I refused to choose. It’s cruel: how do you make someone you’re going to kill eat a meal? I looked at the clock and also at the eyes of my executioners. When they found out [that my execution] was being postponed, I felt the anger on their faces.”

Shortly before that, a powerful law firm — Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe — began working on his case, pro bono. This is a constant in capital punishment cases in the United States. When the accused is being trapped in a judicial system — from which it’s almost impossible to escape from afterwards — the defense is often flawed. Hence, when the alternatives are exhausted, sometimes brilliant lawyers come in to do unpaid work.

René Kathawala, a lawyer at the firm, explains in a telephone interview from New York that they’ve been asking (without success) for the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department to hand over any files they have related to Cooper’s case. “It would shed light, for example, on why the other leads were discarded. Or about where the evidence collected at the Ryen house went. Or about the hypothesis that everything was due to settling scores [having to do with] a horse sales business. Kevin had no reason to kill that family,” he emphasizes.

Kim Kardashian’s visit

Since a federal appeals court stayed his execution, Cooper’s cause has gained prominent followers, including William A. Fletcher — a senior judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit — who wrote a 100-page dissenting opinion in 2009 that began with the following line: “The state of California may be about to execute an innocent man.”

Other visitors include Kim Kardashian — who visited Cooper in at San Quentin — or the influential New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, author of a detailed article on the case as an example of a “broken judicial system.” In it, he spoke with the parents of the murdered boy who was spending the night at the Ryens’ house — who have no doubts about Cooper’s guilt — and he opined that new DNA tests should be carried out.

These tests were ultimately authorized, but the results were of little use. It was once again proven that the hairs found on the victims’ hands were not those of the convicted person, but there was no way to link them to any other suspect. An orange towel yielded a complete DNA profile, although investigators never found the person it belonged to. And it wasn’t possible to extract enough genetic material from a tan T-shirt, because it was degraded after so much time had passed. An earlier examination identified drops of Cooper’s blood on that garment, as well as traces of a chemical preservative called EDTA, which is used to prevent samples in test tubes from spoiling. For those who defend Cooper’s innocence, this can only mean that the sheriff planted those remains.

In 2019, Gavin Newsom — the newly-elected governor of California — declared a moratorium on all death sentences. He also had San Quentin’s execution chamber — the infamous “green room” — dismantled. Doolin remembers that he saw the news on television in his jail cell. All the people on East Block spontaneously cheered.

The governor also ordered an “innocence investigation” into Cooper’s case by the international firm Morrison & Foerster, the results of which were published in January of 2023. The report concluded that the evidence of his guilt was “extensive and conclusive.” The 243-page text also said that there was no DNA evidence that “points to anyone else as being guilty.”

“That was one of the worst setbacks of my life,” Cooper laments.

Lara Bazelon, profesora de derecho de la Universidad de San Francisco y escritora, trabaja desinteresadamente en el caso del preso Kevin Cooper. La foto está tomada en el departamento de la universidad que dirige.

“It was a superficial and absurd job, of deliberate incompetence,” Kathawala scoffs. “It seemed as if they wanted to ambush him. [The report] took us all by surprise, and not just because of the content. They published it on a Friday before Martin Luther King Day weekend. And they gave it to us 20 minutes before sending it to the media. So, the initial coverage — very extensive — was very damaging for Kevin. [Morrison & Foerster] relied only on the documents from the [previous] trials. They didn’t even subpoena those who participated in the investigation to testify.”

Since the report’s publication, the law firm has declined to publicly comment on its conclusions, or on the methodology that was utilized.

After this, there are only two last resorts for Cooper: that Newsom decides to exonerate him through an executive order (“unlikely,” Kathawala believes) or that the recently-approved Racial Justice Act — with retroactive effect — allows any conviction to be appealed if it can be demonstrated that there was some type of racial prejudice in the legal process.

A racist system

To try to prove that this is what happened to him, Cooper has had the help of professor and author Lara Bazelon for the past few months. She is the director of the Criminal Juvenile Justice and Racial Justice Clinics at the University of San Francisco. “I think Kevin fits neatly with what that law provides. There were many irregularities [in his case]. The main one is that the prosecutors always refused to share [the papers stemming from their investigation]. There’s no way of knowing how many Brady violations were committed, but it’s clear that there were many,” Bazelon tells EL PAÍS, in her office in San Francisco. The Brady doctrine emanates from a historic ruling by the Supreme Court in the 1960s: it obligates the prosecution to share any exculpatory information with the defense.

Statistics confirm that California’s capital punishment industry — which is estimated to have cost taxpayers $4 billion since its reintroduction in 1976 — disproportionately affects minorities . While only 5% of the state’s population is Black, more than a third of those who are sentenced to death are African-American. Black detainees are — according to Morgan Zamora, at the Oakland offices of the non-profit Ella Baker Center for Human Rights — between five and nine times more likely than other races to suffer this fate. In the case of Latinos, they are between three and six times more likely to be sentenced to death. Last year, California was the second state — after Florida — in the number of death sentences. All of these were handed down to Black and Latino defendants.

Morgan Zamora, coordinadora de política de prisiones del Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, fotografiada en Oakland, California, el pasado 25 de abril.

This past April, awareness of “systemic racism” led Jeff Rosen — the district attorney for Santa Clara, California — to overturn 15 death sentences in his county, which is located in the heart of Silicon Valley. He instead re-sentenced the 15 death sentenced men to life in prison, without the possibility of parole.

“It seems to me that it’s already a harsh enough punishment: spending your entire life behind bars and dying in there. And, please, don’t take me as someone who’s soft on crime,” Rosen explains, in his office in the city of Santa Clara. “After the murder of George Floyd [at the hands of a white police officer in 2020], I realized that something wasn’t right [with this system].”

His change of mind was also influenced by a visit he made to the National Lynching Memorial in Alabama. This opened his eyes, he says, to “the certainty of mass incarceration as a continuation of slavery and segregation,” as well as the suspicion that there’s something perverse about the system itself, which delays executions for decades. “If someone commits a horrible crime at age 25 and you don’t execute him or her until age 65, are they still the same person? I don’t think so.”

Rosen also warns that requiring capital trials to be decided by juries unintentionally contributes to racism. “To be accepted [on the jury], candidates have to make assurances that they feel morally capable of applying [the death penalty]. And who tends to overwhelmingly say ‘yes’? Conservative white men.”

Jeff Rosen, fiscal del distrito de Santa Clara (California), ha revocado al menos 15 condenas a pena de muerte.

Rosen isn’t the only district attorney to take the abolitionist path in California as of late. The day before he re-sentenced the 15 death penalties, District Attorney Pamela Price of Alameda County received a court order to review the 35 capital sentences in her jurisdiction, over suspicions of prosecutorial misconduct. Various prosecutors were accused of systematically excluding African-Americans and Jews in jury selection. And, this past April, several prominent legal and civil rights organizations filed an extraordinary writ petition at the Supreme Court of California, seeking to abolish the death penalty based on racial bias. Additionally, in January of 2024, the SB97 law came into force, drafted to simplify and accelerate the process of reviewing wrongful convictions.

Both Doolin and his mother have their hopes pinned on that option. “I trust that, upon reviewing the case, the judge will determine that I’m innocent and deserve to be released,” he says.

Natasha Minsker — an attorney and consultant on criminal justice reform and policy — feels that there’s a paradigm shift taking place. Is California witnessing the slow death of the death penalty? “I think so,” she says cautiously. “Although it’s also true that this agony has been going on for too long, about 10 years now,” she argues, in a telephone interview from Sacramento — the state capital — where she attempts to lobby legislators and the governor’s office in favor of reform.

Newsom could grant a universal pardon before leaving office (his second and final term will end in 2027). The state’s anti-death penalty activist community dreams about that possibility, although such a move may not bode well for his presidential aspirations. If he were to do it, this would mean that all those sentenced to death would no longer be condemned, but it wouldn’t imply the abolition of capital punishment: the law dictates that something like this can only come about through a popular referendum.

“I’m not giving up hope,” Minsker vows. “I know that the governor is very committed to ending the death penalty in California. I trust he will do everything he can before leaving office.”

According to this lawyer, the dismantling of San Quentin’s death row demonstrates Newsom’s commitment. And, if it’s true that the death penalty is dying in California, the East Block — with its tiny cells and nightmarish atmosphere — may soon serve as a chilling reminder of a past time. A memory of a place in a beautiful corner of the San Francisco Bay, where some men, as Cooper would say, were “not allowed to be human.”

Translated by Avik Jain Chatlani.

More information

Alabama uses experimental nitrogen gas method to kill death row inmate it already tried to execute in 2022

On death row with Keith LaMar, the prisoner who was brought back to life by jazz: ‘I’m not ready to die’

Archived in.

Gavin Newsom
San Francisco
Francés online
Inglés online
Italiano online
Alemán online
Crucigramas & Juegos

Especialízate en Project Management con esta maestría presencial en Madrid, España

	You might be using an unsupported or outdated browser. To get the best possible experience please use the latest version of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, or Microsoft Edge to view this website.

Death Penalty Laws By State 2024 Guide

Published: Jun 17, 2024, 12:34pm

U.s. states which have the death penalty, death penalty states with gubernatorial moratoria, u.s. states without the death penalty, recent developments with regards to death penalty across u.s., death penalty meaning, historical context, key factors influencing the use of the death penalty, frequently asked questions (faqs) about death penalty laws.

The death penalty is the most serious penalty reserved for the most serious crimes. The death penalty can be imposed only for capital offenses, including murder , treason, genocide or kidnapping of the president, a member of Congress or a Supreme Court justice.

The federal government can seek the death penalty when an appropriate federal crime has been committed, and state governments can as well. However, not every state allows the death penalty as a punishment. Some abolished it, and in others, it is still officially allowed, but the governor has placed a hold on executions.

This guide explains death penalty laws by state so you can better understand when and where this sentence is a possibility throughout the United States.

Here are the states in the U.S. that are currently applying the death penalty.

There are another six states where the death penalty is legal, but no executions are taking place because the governor has prohibited them by executive order or the attorney general has temporarily halted them. These states include:

Pennsylvania

Not all of these executive orders or halts were issued because of a philosophical or moral objection to capital punishment. In some states, logistical problems, such as issues with the process used to execute prisoners, justified the moratorium.

The federal government has also declared a hold on executions for federal crimes.

A total of 23 states and Washington, D.C., have abolished the death penalty, and executions will no longer take place there. These are the 23 states.

Executions occurred in just five states in 2023: Alabama, Florida, Texas, Missouri and Oklahoma. Defendants were sentenced to die in just seven states. A total of only 24 people were executed for their crimes over the year, making 2023 the ninth year when fewer than 30 people were put to death.

The year was also notable because it was the first time that the number of executions that took place exceeded the number of new death sentences imposed.

Executions have become less common as perspectives on the death penalty have shifted. Last year marked the first time that half of Americans indicated they believe the death penalty is generally administered unfairly. This is even though 53% of Americans continue to support the death penalty for murder, a number that has stayed largely consistent since 2017.

A growing number of states have been responding to these rising concerns, with the governors of four states acting in 2022 and 2023 alone to put a hold on executions. Those states are Arizona (2023), Pennsylvania (2023), Oregon (2022) and Tennessee (2022).

On July 1, 2021, the U.S. Attorney General also paused federal executions while investigations continued into the practice.

At the same time, some states have been moving to make their laws stricter and impose the death penalty more frequently, with both Tennessee and Florida passing laws in recent years authorizing the death penalty as a potential sentence for additional crimes, including certain sexual offenses against children. Tennessee took this action despite the moratorium on executions that was put in place in 2022 because of problems with the potential contamination of drugs used in executions.

With support for the death penalty largely divided along party lines and Republicans significantly more likely to favor the death penalty and believe it is fairly applied, the political makeup of a state may play a large role in determining if executions will occur there.

The death penalty is also called capital punishment. In jurisdictions that allow it, a defendant convicted of certain serious crimes can be sentenced to death as punishment for their offenses.

The state or federal government will carry out an execution when someone has been sentenced to death. A variety of methods have historically been used, including hanging, firing squad, lethal gas and electrocution.

However, lethal injection has become the preferred method of carrying out executions in the modern era.

The death penalty has been imposed as a penalty for most of human history, with the first established laws dating back to the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon in the 18th century BCE.

In the United States, the origin of the death penalty can be traced to British colonists who came to the New World from a society where the death penalty had a long history. The first recorded execution in the new colonies took place in 1608 when Captain George Kendall was sentenced to death for being a spy.

While laws varied among the original U.S. colonies, the death penalty was commonly applied for even minor offenses in Colonial America, including for crimes such as striking a parent or stealing grapes. However, there were objectors even during these times, and American intellectuals began to persuade politicians to impose limits. As early as 1794, Pennsylvania outlawed the death penalty except for those convicted of first-degree murder.

Throughout much of the 19th century, states began to limit the number of capital offenses that defendants could be sentenced to death for committing. Many also abolished mandatory death sentencing and made executions private events in correctional facilities, away from the public eye.

However, the tide began to turn in the early part of the 1900s as first the electric chairs and then cyanide gas came into favor, and criminologists argued that the death penalty was a necessary crime-fighting measure. The 1930s saw more executions than any other decade, averaging 167 deaths annually during that period.

The Supreme Court and the Death Penalty

By the 1950s, however, other countries began abolishing their death penalties, and legal challenges arose in the U.S. in the 1960s, culminating in a 1972 case, Furman v. Georgia. In that case, the Supreme Court held that Georgia’s laws, which gave total sentencing discretion to the jury without any guidance about how to use that discretion, resulted in arbitrary sentencing that violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

A total of 40 death penalty statutes were voided by the court’s decision, but 34 states rewrote their laws. In 1976, the Supreme Court upheld the death penalty as constitutional and allowed “guided discretion” statutes in three separate cases collectively referred to as the Gregg decision. The guided discretion statutes detail how aggravating and mitigating factors can be used to determine if a defendant should be sentenced to death.

Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the court went on to further limit circumstances when the death penalty was allowed, prohibiting it as a punishment for the rape of an adult woman who wasn’t killed (Coker v. Georgia) and prohibiting the execution of defendants with intellectual disabilities (Atkins v. Virginia).

However, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1994, applied the federal death penalty to as many as 60 crimes, including some not involving murder. The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), also signed by President Clinton, impacted states and the federal government and included reforms intended to speed up the time to execution.

In 2001, the first federal execution since 1988 took place, with two more federal executions occurring from 2001 to 2003. States began using new execution drugs in 2011 as problems came to light with the old processes. Many drug companies began objecting to the use of their products in lethal injections, though, and this problem persists to this day.

The use of the death penalty is impacted by many factors, including public perception as well as legal challenges.

Public Opinion

Public opinion on the death penalty in the U.S. is mixed, with Gallup polls showing 53% in favor of capital punishment for those convicted of murder, compared with 44% opposed. However, Republicans are significantly more likely to support the death penalty and believe it is fairly applied, so the death penalty has become a partisan issue.

Political divides help to explain why red states are expanding death penalty offenses and have been moving forward with more completed executions in recent years while many blue states have abolished capital punishment altogether or imposed a moratorium by executive order.

As the Supreme Court and many state courts have begun to take a more favorable view of executions as a method of punishment, states have begun to use alternative methods of executing prisoners and may continue down the path of increasing executions after years of a downward trend.

Legal Challenges

The constitutionality of the death penalty has been repeatedly challenged, with opponents arguing at various times that capital punishment could violate the Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.

In U.S. v. Jackson in 1968, the Supreme Court found unconstitutional a statute that allowed the death penalty to be imposed only if a jury recommended it because the Court found it encouraged defendants hoping to avoid the death penalty to waive the right to a trial by jury.

In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that a jury having total discretion in sentencing defendants to death violated the Eighth Amendment. Forty death penalty statutes were invalidated by this ruling.

States revised their statutes, with some making the death penalty mandatory after conviction for certain crimes. However, the court found mandatory sentencing unconstitutional in Woodson v. North Carolina. The court did allow guided sentencing in a series of three cases referred to collectively as Gregg v. Georgia.

In Gregg, the court also found the death penalty was constitutional under the Eighth Amendment, allowed for a separate penalty phase after guilt was determined and provided for automatic appellate reviews of sentencing. Many states adopted these principles into their death penalty statutes.

Since the Gregg case, the courts have imposed new limits on when the death penalty can be applied, prohibiting the execution of people with intellectual disabilities (Atkins v. Virginia in 2002), as well as prohibiting the execution of those who were minors when they committed a capital offense (Roper v. Simmons in 2005).

However, the court declared executions using lethal injections constitutional in 2006 in Baze v. Rees, which is how most executions today are carried out. In Bucklew v. Precythe in 2019, the court also held that the Eighth Amendment does not guarantee a painless death.

The Supreme Court has also become reluctant to intervene in death penalty cases, with Justice Neil Gorsuch indicating that “last-minute stays should be the extreme exception, not the norm.”

Further legal battles may soon follow, as Florida and Tennessee both passed laws imposing the death penalty for certain sexual offenses against children. This is in contradiction with past Supreme Court precedents barring the death penalty for offenses in which no life was taken.

International Perspectives

As of 2022, 55 countries still have the death penalty, with nine restricting its use to the most serious offenses. Of those 55, 23 had not used the death penalty for at least a decade.

The majority of executions occur in China, which executes thousands, and Iran, where over 500 were executed in 2022. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United States had the third, fourth and fifth most executions, respectively, with the U.S. executing 18 people in 2022.

Many countries have abolished the death penalty altogether, and several international treaties prohibit its use, including Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights, which the Council of Europe requires all new members to ratify.

The United Nations Human Rights Commission also passed a Resolution Supporting Worldwide Moratorium on Executions in 1999 over the objections of the U.S. and nine other countries, calling on countries to restrict the use of the death penalty. The resolution was adopted again in October of 2021.

The United Nations General Assembly has also repeatedly introduced a resolution for an international execution moratorium, with the United States voting no each time.

Which states still have the death penalty?

The following U.S. states still have the death penalty.

Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
South Dakota,

An additional six states still have statutes allowing capital punishment but executive orders from the governor have resulted in a hold or moratorium on executions.

When was the last execution in the United States?

Six executions have been carried out in the United States in 2024, as of June of this year.

How Is the decision to impose the death penalty made?

The death penalty can be imposed only on defendants who commit capital crimes such as murder or treason. Prosecutors can choose whether to seek the death penalty in a case where a defendant could be sentenced to die.

After a defendant has been found guilty in a death penalty case, the penalty phase of the trial begins, and the jury considers whether there were aggravating circumstances that make the crime more serious or mitigating circumstances that reduce the degree of moral culpability. The jury will make sentencing recommendations, with most states requiring the jury to vote unanimously that capital punishment is appropriate before the death penalty can be imposed.

Which states have abolished the death penalty?

The following states have abolished the death penalty:

Connecticut
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
North Dakota
Rhode Island
West Virginia

Is the death penalty applied equally across different demographics?

The death penalty is not applied equally across different demographics.

While Black and Hispanic individuals represent just 31% of the population, they account for 41.9% and 11.3% of death row inmates, respectively. The death penalty is more likely to be recommended for people of color who are found guilty of crimes, especially if the victim of the offense is white.

Are there international conventions against the death penalty?

There are many international conventions against the death penalty. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights limits the use of the death penalty to specific circumstances. The United Nations Human Rights Commission also passed the Resolution Supporting Worldwide Moratorium, while the United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly introduced a resolution for an international execution moratorium.

Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, NYC
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Las Vegas
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Los Angeles
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Houston
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, San Antonio
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Chicago
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Austin
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Columbus
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Dallas
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Fort Worth
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, San Jose
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, San Diego
Best Criminal Defense Lawyers, Jacksonville
Civil Vs. Criminal Cases
What Is Probable Cause?
What Is A Misdemeanor?
What Is Expungement?
What Is A Plea Bargain?
What Are Miranda Rights?
The Fourth Amendment
The Eighth Amendment
Hit-And-Run Laws
What Is An Indictment?
What Is Parole?
What Is Embezzlement?

What Is Felony Murder? Punishment, Types And Meaning

Best Criminal Defense Lawyers Atlanta, GA 2024

What Is Involuntary Manslaughter? Legal Definition And Basics

What Is Assault? Examples, Penalties And Defense

What Is Securities Fraud? Meaning, Elements And Punishments

What Is Obstruction of Justice? Punishment, Types And Meaning

Christy Bieber has a JD from UCLA School of Law and began her career as a college instructor and textbook author. She has been writing full time for over a decade with a focus on making financial and legal topics understandable and fun. Her work has appeared on Forbes, CNN Underscored Money, Investopedia, Credit Karma, The Balance, USA Today, and Yahoo Finance, among others.

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Death Penalty — Should the Death Penalty be Abolished

Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished

Categories: Corporal Punishment Death Penalty

About this sample

Words: 967 |

Updated: 13 November, 2023

Words: 967 | Pages: 2 | 5 min read

Video Version

Capital punishment,Prison,Lethal injection,Crime,Murder,Death penalty

Death Penalty Essay: Hook Examples

A Startling Statistic: Did you know that in the last decade, over 170 countries have abolished the death penalty or no longer practice it? It’s time for us to question why we haven’t joined this global trend.
A Personal Story: As I stood witness to an execution, I couldn’t help but wonder if this act of state-sanctioned killing truly serves justice. Let me share my experience that led me to believe the death penalty should be abolished.
An Ethical Dilemma: When we look into the eyes of a society that condemns murder but practices it in return, we confront a moral paradox. Is it time for us to reevaluate our stance on the death penalty?
A Historical Perspective: Throughout history, societies have evolved, discarding practices that no longer align with their values. Is it not time for us to evolve beyond the death penalty, which has roots in a less enlightened era?
An Expert Opinion: Renowned legal scholar Bryan Stevenson once said, “The opposite of poverty is not wealth; it’s justice.” Let’s explore why abolishing the death penalty is a crucial step toward achieving true justice in our society.
Radelet, M. L., & Borg, M. J. (2000). The changing nature of death penalty debates. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 43-61. (https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.43)
Hood, R. (2009). Abolition of the death penalty: China in world perspective. City UHKL Rev., 1, 1. (https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ciunhok1&div=3&id=&page=)
Bedau, H. A., & Cassell, P. G. (Eds.). (2005). Debating the death penalty: Should America have capital punishment? The experts on both sides make their case. Oxford University Press. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/14624745070090030505)
Koenig, T. H., & Rustad, M. L. (2011). Deciding Whether the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished. Suffolk University Law Review, 44, 193. (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1673468)
Mathias, M. D. (2013). The sacralization of the individual: Human rights and the abolition of the death penalty. American Journal of Sociology, 118(5), 1246-1283 (https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/669507)

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

5 pages / 2452 words

1 pages / 609 words

3 pages / 1282 words

3 pages / 1531 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished Essay

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Death Penalty

On November 28, 1942, history was made in Louisiana as Toni Jo Henry became the first woman to be executed in the state. This landmark event not only sparked public outrage and debate, but it also shed light on the complex [...]

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, has been a contentious issue in the United States for decades. The history of the death penalty in the US is fraught with controversy, and its current state continues to be a subject of [...]

Richard Hickock, a convicted murderer, left a lasting impression on society with his infamous last words. As he faced the ultimate consequence for his heinous crimes, his final utterances became a subject of intrigue and [...]

Death and justice are two concepts that have been the subject of extensive debate throughout history. In his thought-provoking essay "Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life," Edward I. Koch delves into the [...]

How many times have you been somewhere and heard a teen arguing with their parent saying, “Why are you treating me like such a kid?” We all know teens want to be treated like adults when it comes to responsibilities and [...]

I believe the death penalty should be legal throughout the nation. Discussing the death penalty pros and cons, there are many reasons as to why I think the death penalty should be legalized in all states, including deterrence, [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Election 2024
Entertainment
Newsletters
Photography
Personal Finance
AP Investigations
AP Buyline Personal Finance
AP Buyline Shopping
Press Releases
Israel-Hamas War
Russia-Ukraine War
Global elections
Asia Pacific
Latin America
Middle East
Election Results
Delegate Tracker
AP & Elections
Auto Racing
2024 Paris Olympic Games
Movie reviews
Book reviews
Personal finance
Financial Markets
Business Highlights
Financial wellness
Artificial Intelligence
Social Media

Missouri governor turns down clemency for inmate facing execution on Tuesday

This photo, provided by Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty, shows inmate David Hosier, Friday, June 7, 2024, at Potosi Correctional Center in Potosi, Missouri. Hosier is scheduled to be executed Tuesday, June 11, 2024, for the deaths of a Jefferson City couple in 2009, but he has long questioned how he could be convicted on circumstantial evidence. (Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty via AP)

Elyse Max, co-director of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty, displays petitions asking Missouri Gov. Mike Parson to grant clemency to death row inmate David Hosier on Thursday, June 6, 2024, outside the governor’s office in the state Capitol, Jefferson City, Missouri. Behind Max, to the right, is the Rev. Jeff Hood, spiritual advisor for inmate David Hosier. The person to the left is not identified. (AP Photo/David Lieb)

Copy Link copied

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Missouri Gov. Mike Parson on Monday turned down a clemency request for condemned inmate David Hosier , a move that likely clears the way for his execution.

Hosier, 69, faces lethal injection Tuesday for the 2009 deaths of a Jefferson City couple, Angela and Rodney Gilpin. Randy Dampf, a Jefferson City police officer at the time of the killings and now an investigator for the county prosecutor, said Hosier had a romantic relationship with Angela Gilpin and was angry with her for breaking it off.

“Ms. Angela Gilpin had her life stolen by David Hosier because he could not accept it when she ended their romantic involvement. He displays no remorse for his senseless violence,” Parson, a Republican and a former county sheriff who has overseen 10 executions since taking office in 2018, said in a statement. “For these heinous acts, Hosier earned maximum punishment under the law.”

Larry Komp, a federal public defender and one of Hosier’s attorneys, said no court appeals are pending.

Hosier, in an earlier phone interview with The Associated Press, had expressed displeasure with his lawyers’ clemency petition, which focused on the trauma of his Indiana State Police sergeant father being killed in the line of duty when Hosier was 16. Hosier thought it should have focused on the lack of fingerprints, DNA or eyewitnesses tying him to the Gilpins’ deaths. Glen Hosier was shot to death by a murder suspect in 1971 after entering a home.

FILE - Toronto police officers comfort a man at the scene of a shooting in Toronto, Monday, June 17, 2024. The gunman in the fatal shooting believed the two victims had defrauded his family, his wife said Wednesday, June 19, 2024 as court records indicate the family was suing the pair after losing more than CDN $1 million in an alleged investment scam. (Arlyn McAdorey/The Canadian Press via AP, file)

“They did exactly the opposite of what I wanted them to do,” Hosier said of the clemency petition. “I told them I didn’t want the ‘boo-hoo, woe is me.’ All that stuff happened 53 years ago, OK? It has nothing to do with why I’m sitting here right now.”

Komp called Parson’s decision disappointing.

“It sends the wrong message to execute and marginalize a veteran and an individual harmed by the tragedy of his father being killed in the line of duty, which spun his life into a different direction,” Komp said in an email. “The context of his life history with the paucity of evidence related to his guilt makes this a compounding of tragedies, nothing is gained by killing him.”

Hosier spent four years in active duty in the Navy and later worked as a firefighter and EMT in Jefferson City. He acknowledged his 2009 affair with Angela Gilpin and that she ended it and reconciled with her husband. In September 2009, they were shot to death near the doorway of their apartment.

Detective Jason Miles said Hosier made numerous comments to other people threatening to harm Angela Gilpin in the days before the killings.

After the shootings, police found an application for a protective order in Angela Gilpin’s purse, and another document in which she expressed fear that Hosier might shoot her and her husband.

Hosier was an immediate suspect, but police couldn’t find him. They used cellphone data to track him to Oklahoma. A chase ensued when an Oklahoma officer tried to stop Hosier’s car. When he got out, he told the officers, “Shoot me, and get it over with,” court records show.

Officers found 15 guns, a bulletproof vest, 400 rounds of ammunition and other weapons in Hosier’s car. The weapons included a submachine gun made from a kit that investigators maintain was used in the killings, though tests on it were inconclusive.

A note was found in the front seat of Hosier’s vehicle. “If you are going with someone do not lie to them,” it read in part. “Be honest with them if there is something wrong. If you do not this could happen to YOU!!”

Hosier said he wasn’t fleeing to Oklahoma but was simply on a long drive to clear his mind. He had the guns because he likes to hunt, he said. He didn’t recall a note in the car.

Hosier wheezed at times when he spoke to AP, and his voice was weak. In mid-May, he was taken from the prison to a hospital — a rare move for death row inmates. He was diagnosed with atrial fibrillation. He said he’s on medication but continues to feel poorly.

The Missouri Supreme Court upheld his conviction in 2019.

The execution would be the second in Missouri this year. Brian Dorsey was executed in April for killing his cousin and her husband in 2006.

IMAGES

Speech on Capital Punishment Should Not Be Abolished Free Essay Example
Death Penalty Persuasive Essay
⇉Death Penalty Should not be Abolished Essay Example
Death Penalty Should be Abolished Essay Example
The Death Penalty should not be Abolished by Erica Madrid on Prezi
Death Penalty Argumentative Essay

COMMENTS

Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments
Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments. 1. Legality. The United States is one of 55 countries globally with a legal death penalty, according to Amnesty International. As of Mar. 24, 2021, within the US, 27 states had a legal death penalty (though 3 of those states had a moratorium on the punishment's use).
Should the Death Penalty Be Legal?: [Essay Example], 649 words
The legality of the death penalty remains one of the most contentious issues in modern society. As a form of capital punishment, it is intended to serve as the ultimate deterrent against heinous crimes such as murder and terrorism. Proponents argue that the death penalty delivers justice, provides closure to victims' families, and deters ...
Why death penalty should not be abolished
The death penalty is a just retribution for capital offenses. Retribution, in a broad sense, is a punishment imposed because it is deserved. It is founded on the principle that all guilty people should be punished, only the guilty deserve punishment, and the guilty should be punished based on the severity of the crime committed.
10 Reasons Why The Death Penalty is Wrong
Supporters say it's a valuable crime deterrent while opponents argue it fails in this purpose. In this article, we'll explore these claims, as well as other reasons why the death penalty is wrong. #1. It's inhumane. #2. It inflicts psychological torment. #3. It burdens taxpayers. #4.
Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?
Most of the country did not use the death penalty, he said, and the United States was an international outlier in embracing it. Justice Ginsburg, who died in September, had joined the dissent.
Is the Death Penalty Justified or Should It Be Abolished?
A death sentence is the only irrevocable penalty that protects innocent lives. Maintains justice. For most people, life is sacred, and innocent lives should be valued over the lives of killers. Innocent victims who have been murdered - and in some cases, tortured beforehand - had no choice in their untimely and cruel death or any ...
Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty
Arbitrariness & Discrimination. The death penalty is applied unfairly and should not be used. The Death Penalty Information Center is a non-profit organization serving the media and the public with analysis and information about capital punishment.….
‌The End of the Death Penalty?
Feb 14, 2023. By Elaine McArdle. More than 50 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Furman v. Georgia that the death penalty was an unconstitutional violation of the Eighth Amendment ban against cruel and unusual punishment. With that, 629 people on death row nationwide had their capital sentences commuted, and the death penalty disappeared ...
Death Penalty: Arguments For and Against Essay
Arguments against Death Penalty. The first argument against the lethal sentence is a lack of deterrence among criminals. According to Amnesty International Australia (2019), there is no evidence that the prospect of death prevents potential perpetrators. Furthermore, some authorities state that the lethal sentence does not decline the number of ...
Abolishing The Death Penalty: a Persuasive Call for Justice
Many states have abolished the death penalty and have resorted to life sentences, which would be more humanely correct. What other reasons would it take to completely prove with facts that taking someone's life is completely unacceptable, especially by a governing body. There are many examples stated in the reading of why the death penalty has ...
Is the Death Penalty a Cruel and Unusual Punishment?
For the petitioners, capital punishment or the death penalty, was simply murder. They felt individuals should not be put to death, but could be rehabilitated after much introspection and reflection. The petitioners' goal was to have Congress abolish the death penalty and for America to take its place as a moral leader of the world.
Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished Because Innocent People May Be
Recalling also the resolutions on the question of the death penalty adopted over the past decade by the Commission on Human Rights in all consecutive sessions… in which the Commission called upon States that still maintain the death penalty to abolish it completely and, in the meantime, to establish a moratorium on executions…
The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished By Bruce Fein
In his article "The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished," Fein states: "The death penalty is an awesome punishment. It should be applied sparingly to the most egregious and shocking crimes committed by the most unrepentant and callous offenders." The main essence of Fein's argument embodies ideals that strongly advocate the death penalty.
Argumentative Essay on Why Death Penalty Should Be Abolished in the US
The death penalty does not deter crime, and for this reason, it should be abolished. Even though the death penalty is not ideal, many people think that it is worth the cost if it deters prospective perpetrators. However, public opinion polls demonstrate that most people do not believe that capital punishment has this effect.
Why The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished Essay Examples
The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished. It comes to no surprise that the issue of the death penalty continues to remain in social forums and even in legislative debates as the punishment continues to reign in several parts of the globe. Debates would often range from the alternative punishments that would not constitute to killing to the ...
Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished Essay
The gist of Nicole Smith's (Smith par. 1-8) argument is that the death penalty or capital punishment is necessary because it deters murder, thereby saving the victims' families and friends the pain of losing loved ones. She further argues that in cases where a murder has occurred, the death penalty serves justice to the victim's loved ones.
The Death Penalty should be Abolished
This essay about the abolition of the death penalty articulates a compelling case against capital punishment, grounded in moral, legal, and practical arguments. It stresses that the death penalty conflicts with the intrinsic dignity of human life, perpetuates violence, and is fraught with racial and socioeconomic biases.
Essay: Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished?
Death penalty is a human rights violation. With the death penalty, you are deliberately deciding punishment by death for a criminal. This is the same concept as eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. It violates human rights by the government forcing the death of a human. Death by capital punishment is not justice meaning not giving them what is ...
Capital Punishment Should Not Be Abolished
The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished, written by Bruce Fein, is about Fein's viewpoints and arguments that death penalty abolitionists are unpersuasive and do not stand up to close scrutiny. He also points out that some crimes are so morally abhorrent and despicable that only the death penalty is adequate punishment for them.
Rethinking Justice: why the Death Penalty should be Abolished
This essay about the reasons to abolish the death penalty discusses the ethical, practical, and financial implications of capital punishment. It argues that the irreversible nature of the death penalty, coupled with the risk of executing innocent people, raises serious moral concerns.
Why Death Penalty Should Be Abolished in The Us
In conclusion, the death penalty should be abolished in the US due to its ineffectiveness, high costs, and violation of human rights. The evidence presented in this essay highlights the urgent need for a more humane and just criminal justice system that does not rely on the death penalty. By abolishing the death penalty, the US can align itself ...
⇉Death Penalty Should not be Abolished Essay Example
Death Penalty Should not be Abolished. Essay's Score: C. Capital punishment is not as immoral as how conservatives claim it to be. Heinous and amoral crimes have become undeniably rife in our materialistic and worldly society, and a punishment of death would only appear as a very significant and large sacrifice to take for granted before ...
Death penalty in California: The last days of death row in California
Logic would dictate that a blue state like this should have already abolished the death penalty. However, when the issue was put forth on the ballot in 2016, 53.15% of Californians voted against repealing capital punishment. ... [the papers stemming from their investigation]. There's no way of knowing how many Brady violations were committed ...
Death Penalty Laws By State 2024 Guide
Many countries have abolished the death penalty altogether, and several international treaties prohibit its use, including Protocol No. 6 to the European Convention on Human Rights, which the ...
Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished
Death penalty should be abolished. This essay shows many arguments against death penalty and concludes that abolishing the death penalty is the right choice because it will send a deeper meaning telling people that death is not a way to resolve the issue. There is always another way to save someone's life. Terminating the death penalty is one ...
Missouri governor turns down clemency for inmate facing execution on
Elyse Max, co-director of Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty, displays petitions asking Missouri Gov. Mike Parson to grant clemency to death row inmate David Hosier on Thursday, June 6, 2024, outside the governor's office in the state Capitol, Jefferson City, Missouri. Behind Max, to the right, is the Rev. Jeff Hood, spiritual advisor ...

Why death penalty should not be abolished

Introduction

Arguments in Favor of the Death Penalty

Arguments in Favor of Abolishing the Death Penalty

Conclusions

10 Reasons Why The Death Penalty is Wrong

#1. It’s inhumane

#2. It inflicts psychological torment

#3. It burdens taxpayers with high costs

#3. It doesn’t deter crime

#4. It doesn’t address the root causes of crime

#6. It’s biased against people experiencing poverty

#7. It’s disproportionately hurting people with intellectual disabilities

#8. It has a racial bias

#9. It’s used as a tool of authoritarianism

#10. It can’t be reversed in light of new evidence or errors

The death penalty: a reading list

Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption | Bryan Stevenson

Dead Man Walking: The Eyewitness Account of the Death Penalty That Sparked a National Debate | Helen Prejean

Let the Lord Sort Them: The Rise and Fall of the Death Penalty | Maurice Chammah

Right Here, Right Now: Life Stories from America’s Death Row | Ed. Lynden Harris

You may also like

15 Political Issues We Must Address

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for LGBTQ+ Rights

16 Inspiring Civil Rights Leaders You Should Know

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Housing Rights

15 Examples of Gender Inequality in Everyday Life

11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger

15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai

12 Ways Poverty Affects Society

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?

Proud recipient of the following awards:

Is the Death Penalty Justified or Should It Be Abolished?

*Updated 2022

Arguments against the Death Penalty

The Perspective on the United Nations (UN)

Do Protests work ?

Should the US intervene militarily in foreign conflicts?

Should Puerto Rico become the 51st state?

The Perspective on Putin

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: plain evil or a necessary evil?

The Perspective on George W. Bush

Is Monogamy Natural?

The Perspective on Animal Testing

Does Conventional or Alternative Schooling Have More Impact?

Breast vs. Bottle: which is better for babies?

the death penalty debate

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty

Retribution

Arbitrariness & Discrimination

Faculty Scholarship

History of a ‘remarkable intervention’

Birth of the capital defense bar

Local prosecutors and state courts take over

Furman’s ultimate impact?

Modal Gallery

Is the Death Penalty a Cruel and Unusual Punishment?

Share this:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished Because Innocent People May Be Executed?

People who view this page may also like:

Cite This Page

Argumentative Essay on Why Death Penalty Should Be Abolished in the US

Cite This Work

Related Essays

Why The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished Essay Examples

The Death Penalty Should Not Be Abolished

Cite this page

Other Pages

Death Penalty: Why the Death Penalty Should be Abolished Essay

(Yes) Nicole Smith ­– An Argument in Favor of Capital Punishment

Essay: Should The Death Penalty Be Abolished?

Text preview of this essay:

Discover more:

Recommended for you

About this essay:

(Yes) Nicole Smith – An Argument in Favor of Capital Punishment