Should Death Penalty Be Abolished Essay

Why Capital Punishment Should Be Abolished

One of the most controversial practices, not just in the US but all over the world, is capital punishment. Capital punishment – or the death penalty – is the idea that a criminal can be put to death for the crimes that he or she has committed. Some of the capital crimes include murder and treason; however, in some countries, other crimes, such as blasphemy, drug smuggling, as well as adultery, have been considered as capital crimes and people have been executed for committing such crimes. Currently, 31 states in the US have the death penalty, that is, people who are convicted of capital crimes in these states can be sent to their deaths, whereas 18 states have abolished it. The thing to note is that death penalty is something that should be abolished across all the states, as it is cruel, pointless (that is, it does not deter crime), it can be extremely expensive for the government and the justice system, and it can result in the death of innocent people.

The death penalty is a cruel punishment and it works to go against the idea of the right of people to live. A human life is extremely precious and it is not something that can be taken away like that. The thing to note is that many people want to install the death penalty because of the adage “an eye for an eye,” but that only means revenge and not justice (Celizic). When a person is put on death row, it can take several years until the death penalty is actually carried out. This long wait that the person on death row has to endure can be extremely cruel. No human being should be made to go through such torture. Other than that, the act of killing the convict is also a cruel act. Two wrongs do not make a right. If the murderer is being punished for killing, how can killing that murderer – the same act that the murderer is being punished for – be considered moral and right?

Many people tend to argue against this and they say that murderers deserve to die. This is because they talk about how the murderer took the life of a person and now his or her life must be taken away from the murderer as well. Other than that, the main argument for this is that such a punishment is depicted through Biblical and religious views. If God has depicted that a murderer should be killed, then it is the right thing and that is the rule and law that the humans should follow as well.

Another argument for the abolishment of the death penalty is that it does not deter crime. It is something that can be seen as an “an empty threat… no reasonable criminal should be deterred by it” (Levitt and Dubner 93) and that “if the death penalty were assessed to anyone carrying an illegal gun, and if the penalty were actually enforced, gun crimes would surely plunge” (Levitt and Dubner 94). The thing to note is that most of the homicides that occur are crimes of passion. This means that they occur in the heat of the moment and are not premeditated. This is why the murderers that are caught tend to talk about how they got so angry and impassioned in the moment that they did not think about the consequences of their actions at all. This is why the death penalty should be abolished because it does not work as a deterrent and it is useless. Research has shown that the death penalty is not only useless in itself but that it is counterproductive to achieving its goals. It does not reduce crime at all (Nagin and Pepper 33).

Those that are for the death penalty argue that it does work to deter crime. For instance, many people do not go out and murder and kill others because they are afraid that they might get caught and would be sent to their deaths as well. The proponents of the death penalty believe that people are not going to commit murders if the punishment for the murder was that they were going to get executed. Nevertheless, this is something that is not as easy to contend, as there are many states, such as California and Arizona, where the death penalty is imposed, yet the number of murders continue to rise. This shows that the death penalty does not actually reduce crimes or deters them.

The death penalty also has to be abolished because it costs the taxpayers a lot of money and it can be a great burden on the governments as well as the criminal justice system (Breyer 112). The thing to note is that after a person has been given the death penalty, a long appeals process has to be started. This is a process that can take years. This means that during this time, the government not only has to bear the cost of the prisoner living on death row, but at the same time, has to cover the cost of lawyers, judges, courts, as well as other legal aspects and fees. Overall, it has been found that it would be much less expensive to keep a convict in jail for the rest of his or her life than to put that person on death row and execute that person. This is another very important reason why the death penalty should be abolished because it is extremely expensive for the government and the people.

However, many people argue against this. They talk about how it is going to be much more expensive to keep the prisoners in jail for the rest of their lives. This is because the prisoners are going to receive food, as well as medical services while the criminal is in jail (Derrida 12). The costs of keeping the criminals alive and in jail are going to be much more because the more criminals are going to be in jail, the more jails the government would have to build. Thus, the counterargument here is that it is much less expensive for the state and the criminal justice system to execute a person accused of capital crime than to keep him alive for the rest of his or her life in prison.

Finally, we find that the criminal justice system is not perfect. This can mean that there can be errors and mistakes made that can end up sending an innocent person to his or her death with regards to execution. Several cases have emerged over the past many years in which convicts have been exonerated of their crimes before they have been executed (e.g. Tolson). Despite losing a large chunk of their lives living behind bars, such people have been lucky, as there have been several cases in which people have already been executed and it has been later found that they were innocent, such as the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, a father who was convicted or arson and killing his own children, later executed, after which evidence came out that he was innocent and he never started the fire (Dioso-Villa 817). This is perhaps one of the most important reasons why the death penalty must be abolished, as it can lead to innocent people being put to their deaths. Even if one innocent person is put to death because of wrongful conviction, it should be enough to put doubts into the system and result in the death penalty being abolished.

The counterarguments that people have for this is that even though the death penalty might mistakenly put an innocent person to death, it does more good by being in place, which is why according to the ethical theory of utilitarianism, it achieves the correct and moral end. In this regard, such people tend to view the wrongful executions of innocent people as collateral damage. They talk about how such things might occur, but they are the costs that we have to pay for keeping the people at bay and to stop them from committing capital crimes.

Thus, we find that the death penalty should be abolished across all the states in the US. As noted herein, we find that the death penalty is something that is very cruel, as it is taking the life of a human being, and human lives are extremely precious. Other than that, we find that the death penalty is pointless, as it does not work to deter crime. People continue to murder each other despite knowing that the death penalty is in effect and many people do not think of the consequences when they murder their victims. Furthermore, we find that the death penalty is extremely expensive and it can be a great burden on the state as well as the taxpayers. Finally, we find that the death penalty is being administered in an imperfect system where an innocent person can be (and several have been) sent to their deaths through executions. It is for all these reasons that the death penalty should be abolished across all the states.

Works Cited

Breyer, Steven. Against the Death Penalty. Brookings Institution Press, 2016.

Celizic, Mike. “Somer’s mom: Death penalty would be ‘fair’.” MSNBC. March 29, 2010. Web. November 7, 2016.

Derrida, Jacques. The death penalty. Vol. 1. University of Chicago Press, 2013.

Dioso-Villa, Rachel. "Scientific and Legal Developments in Fire and Arson Investigation

Expertise in Texas v. Willingham." Minn. JL Sci. & Tech. 14 (2013): 817.

Levitt, Steven D. and Dubner, S. J. Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the

Hidden Side of Everything. Harper Collins: New York, 20015, pg. 93-94.

Nagin, Daniel S., and John V. Pepper, eds. Deterrence and the death penalty. National

Academies Press, 2012.

Tolson, Mike. “Texas sets man free from death row,” Houston Chronicle. October 27,

2010. Web. November 7, 2016.

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.

Source: Essay UK -

Not what you're looking for?

If this essay isn't quite what you're looking for, why not order your own custom Law essay, dissertation or piece of coursework that answers your exact question? There are UK writers just like me on hand, waiting to help you. Each of us is qualified to a high level in our area of expertise, and we can write you a fully researched, fully referenced complete original answer to your essay question. Just complete our simple order form and you could have your customised Law work in your email box, in as little as 3 hours.

Linda Senior Lecturer in Economics, Essay UK Researcher Team.

0 thoughts on “Should Death Penalty Be Abolished Essay

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *