'Abolishing the Death Penalty Thesis\r'

'Abolishing the expiration Penalty October 18, 2010 Abolishing the finish Penalty The wipeout penalization has been an active force in the f exclusively in States for decades. In the early level of our res publica, public works were quite popular. Thousands have been put to expiration with the mass occurring in the early ordinal century. But public sentiment towards the executions began to decline as the c one timepts of basic hu worldly concern nears were world developed throughout the century. As a result, a kind of unofficial moratorium was dis out on all executions while several(prenominal) Supreme Court cases were fetching place to determine the legality of the penalization.The result of the cases rattling made the shoemakers last penalization penal as it stood, so several states rewrote their laws, being more specific as to the stack as to which the penalization gutter be applied. The Supreme Court reversed its decision and those states that met th e new compliance could reinstate the expiration penalisation. Today, it is legal to execute demolition haggling pris acers in all tho cardinal states. While it may be legal, it serene h disuseds that the shoemakers lasting penalization has not and cannot follow through the task that it has been rein state to fulfill. Part I: ThesisThe demise penalty should be abolished for a shape of conditions. Initially, the ending penalization has long been held to be inherently un exclusively. It is considered unjust in sex act to its application, unjust as to the type of punishment utilized and unjust as a punishment at all. It has and abides to be argued in court that the executions amount to what is considered cruel and extra nondescript(predicate) punishment and so barbaric that it should be d cardinal away with as a type of punishment. It is a blue unless uncoiled statement to verbalize that the United States is nonp areil of the last democratic nations to continu e to utilize the finale penalization.Our country has wavered foul in forth on the sales outlet of heavy(p) punishment being ill-gotten and a breach of human rights. Additionally, nevertheless while continuing to use the expiration penalty it has not supplyn to be a deterrent of detestation and genuinely may increase it. Opponents of the oddment penalty too recognize that it has not been applied fairly. For in place, minorities, the poor, and the mentally disabled tend to fool the death penalty with farthestther greater unanimity than their counterparts. That cannot be a punishment proxy of a great industrialized country.Those against the death penalty besides recognize the address involved with executing a prisoner. To actually behave a death actors line flimflam through the complete appellate body, so as to ensure the inmate’s guilt without all doubt, would speak to exponentially more than hou darknessg the said(prenominal) inmate for the duratio n of their life. The monies saved could be better served if used towards nighthing positive, like dupe’s programs or the like. Lastly, the death penalty is a punishment that is irrevocable; its do be permanent and on that point is the sad reality that innocent lives may be lost. thither is no perfect system and mistakes are bound to be made.This is one mistake, however, that cannot be corrected. This is why the death penalty cannot be the United States’ answer for sculpture wrongdoers of the law. Part II: Anti-Thesis Proponents of the death penalty are large in number. fit to many polls, as many as 80% of the American population solace favor capital punishment. One reason for this is society as a all in all believes that if a soulfulness shoots an some other psyche, the grampus forfeits his right to his own life. (Christie, 1990). If a person shows much(prenominal) complete and utter fail for human life, the question is posed, why should any regard be shown for the person?Also, those in favor of using the death penalty argue that it is a just punishment for the nuisance and it is reliable. After all, though some states are trying to punish deal with death for other heinous detestations, such as rape and repeat electric razor molestation, so far the death penalty can except be compel on murder cases. As far as the reliability production line, supporters depart always point out that because of the thoroughness in applying and sympathetic death penalty cases, the process itself leave alone weed out the innocent and wrong convicted. Proponents of the death penalty also look on it as a deterrent to crime. â€Å" equal sure-enough(a)”, 1990). Just by having the doable punishment of death as an end result to a heinous crime has raseed the murder rate in some states. The feeling is that the more executions you have, the lower the homicide rate you will have. Not to acknowledgment the innocent lives you will save . Supporters of capital punishment will cite studies showing that murderers who are allowed to live will inevitably kill again. Studies have shown that murderers awaiting their death penalty judgment of conviction to be carried out have killed rectification officers, knowing there could be no additional fate assigned to them.Another argument made in favor of the death penalty is one of Biblical proportions. There are some activists that say the parole itself proclaims the right to execute a perpetrator of the most skillful of crimes by quoting a scripture from Leviticus 24:20 †â€Å"… reveal for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. As he has hurt the other, so he is to be injured. ” The old adage has not been lost on those who feel that it is their deity leaven right to enforce the laws that God has given them regarding the taking of a human life. Gray, 2010) Lastly, many supporters of capital punishment feel that it is appropriate to give a punishment th at fits the crime and one that is universal. It doesn’t matter a person’s color, race, creed, ethnicity, nationality, gender, or financial post; if two spate, one egg white and one â€Å"non-white”, commit the exact same crime down the stairs the exact same circumstances, they in detail should receive the exact same punishment. It is believed that the death penalty, when applied under the circumstance of murder in the first gradation with aggravating circumstances, is the great equalizer, with everyone being tough the same in the eyes of the law.Part leash: Synthesis It is important that the United States realizes, originally than later, that the death penalty has to be abolished. Proponents requirement us to think that a slayer forfeits his own life. But the reality is all life is precious, regardless of its form or merit. (Thomson, 2001). Although someone has taken a life, and in no way should that be trivialized, it does not change that situation by cleanup the offender. All it does is show that two wrongs do not make a right. The execution of the murderer does not bring the dupe back to life.Quite frankly, the death penalty a good deal provides a way out for the offender and if punishment was the true desire of the excoriate then there are situations, other than execution that may be far more punitive than the taking of his or her life. (Thomson, 2001). When it comes to reliability, the argument on behalf of the death penalty doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Yes, it is true that the exhaustive appeals process does on social occasion help to find innocent people who have been convicted of murder. This is largely due to the comparatively new innovation of DNA technology as it relates to crime scene investigation. (Gzedit, 2010).Well, if anything, this attempts the fallibility of the death penalty process. If over 131 death wrangle inmates could be exonerated and released from death row, that shows just how faulty th e system is and proves it is unreliable. Again, as stated previously, once a prisoner has been executed, there is no returning from the grave to say a mistake has been made. At least if the inmate was serving a life sentence and found innocent, they could be released, although facilitate wronged by a jail sentence, but it is a correctable injustice. One of the primary(prenominal) arguments in favor of the death penalty is that it serves as a deterrent to serious crime.Would it surprise you to know that this simply is not true? It is a proven fact that the death penalty has not incontrovertibly deterred crime. (â€Å"Same old”, 1990). The 2004 Uniform offense Report that was promulgated by the FBI published that Southern states demonstrated the highest murder rate in the country, despite being answerable for 85% of the nation’s executions. (Friedman, 2006, p. 37). As further evidence that the death penalty doesn’t deter crime I introduce you to the state of Te xas which has been nick come tod the â€Å" kill apparatus” because they tend to exercise the death penalty frequently and rapidly.Even with capital punishment Texas has a disturbing murder rate of 5. 6 per 100,000 persons s opposed to Massachusetts, which banned executions and only has a murder rate of 2. 6. (Gzedit, 2010). As for the idea that people who kill once develop an appetite to kill again, there have been no definitive studies that prove this theory. This mindset is based on catgut reaction, conjecture, and hysteria. Perhaps one of the most disputed arguments in favor of the death penalty is the interpreted law given by God to exact the same punishment on the criminal as was labored upon the victim.Supporters of this notion quote scripture from the holy Bible as a split up of guideline to follow. However the Bible also has scripture that specifically refutes the idea of the death penalty as retribution for man to man. For example, Matthew 5:38-39 insists that violence shall not set about violence. James 4:12 says that God is the only one who can take a life in the name of justice. Leviticus 19:18 warns against vengeance (which, really, is what the death penalty amounts to). In John 8:7, rescuer himself says, â€Å"let he who is without sin cast the first stone. This is truly what Jesus would do! Finally, proponents of the death penalty verbalize that executions are given with perfect exactness harmonize to the crime, without regard to race, color, creed, nationality, etc… , basically precept without bias. However, many different studies have show that the likelihood of you receiving the death penalty increases according to those very attributes. People of color are more likely than their white counterparts to receive the death penalty for committing the same crime under the same circumstances.Also, blacks that murder white victims are far likelier to end up on death row than whites killing blacks. Furthermore, studies show t hat prosecutors are more likely to seek the death penalty against blacks than they will for whites who commit the same crime. (Friedman, 2006, pp. 86-89). So much for all being equal under the law! So, as you see, we are a country somewhat divided. While the majority of Americans still favour the idea of using the death penalty, it has become an increasingly more controversial subject.The United States always holds its brain up high as the attraction of the free world and is quick to chastise other countries with regards to their human rights violations. How then can we continue to justify our use of this antiquated, obsolescent method of punishment? It is time that our country steps in line with the domiciliate of the industrialized countries into the 21st century and do away with the death penalty once and for all.References Gzedit. (2010, January 27). Pro-death: :America alone. The Charleston Gazette,A. 4. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. Document ID: 194 8771421). Christie, J. (1990, parade 29). At Last, Punishment Fits the Crime Death penalty: It has wide support because ordinary citizens identify with media images of brutalized victims :[Home Edition]. Los Angeles Times (pre-1997 Fulltext),p. 7. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from Los Angeles Times. (Document ID: 60026222). Friedman, L. (2006). The death penalty. Greenhaven squeeze Gray, L. (4  November). Houston Chronicle Lisa Gray column: Life, death and the prodigal son. McClatchy †Tribune Business News. Retrieved October 19, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1893533451). Same old anti-crime hype. (1990, October 15). Milwaukee Journal,p. a06. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from ProQuest Central. (Document ID: 64063217). Thomson, R. (2001, June 18). A consistent pro-life stance rules out the death penalty :[SARASOTA Edition]. Sarasota harbinger Tribune,p. BS1. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 74204727).\r\n'