Abstract This paper looks briefly at some of the facets of the deathpenalty in the US and how one might make a decision about whether or not to support the deathpenalty. The paper discusses the perspectives of Republicans and Democrats and whether or not either side is entirely for or against the deathpenalty. The final conclusion in the paper, after briefly examining both sides of the arguments, is that the deathpenalty is illogical, unfair and racially and socially biased.
From the Paper "One of the most controversial topics in the US at any given time is that of whether or not to support the death penalty in a particular state. While some people may have extremely strong opinions on the matter, many are are often undecided or have conflicting viewpoints, being able to see valid points on both sides and are unable to make a definitive choice on the subject. This second group is exactly where I was when I started this paper topic. There were certain very serious crimes that seemed like they needed to be dealt with harshly, but I wondered if my emotions were outweighing my logic in those cases, and questioned whether or not any human had the right to decide the value of another person's life. The arguments I have discussed below are interesting and compelling in both cases, and have led me to lean more..."
Abstract This paper discusses the history of the deathpenalty in the United States, noting that it demonstrates a society that has been divided on the issue of executing criminals. The paper explains that opponents of the deathpenalty believe that as long as the process of the state committing executions exists there will be a violation of Constitutional laws intended to prevent cruel and unusual punishment. The paper also discusses the contention of those in favor of the deathpenalty that the punishment for a criminal act should fit the crime and that there are some crimes that are so horrendous that the deathpenalty is the only just punishment. Additionally, the paper points out that, although the debate has created periods in the nation's history in which executions have passed through a moratorium, most states in modern society continue to pass laws that provide for state executions, with the rate of modern executions climbing each year.
Abstract This paper examines the deathpenalty as it pertains to juveniles and discusses the importance of the issue. The writer cites several recent juvenile deathpenalty cases heard by the Supreme Court and provides analysis into their issues. The writer then provides a well reasoned conclusion and proposal regarding the deathpenalty as it pertains to juveniles.
Outline:
Introduction
The Juvenile DeathPenalty Debate
Pros and Cons
Cons
Conclusion
References
From the Paper "In recent years Americans have watched in horror as teenagers committed more grisly crimes than ever before. Shooting sprees at high schools, acting as a sniper on the freeway and murdering neighbors for the sake of a few dollars worth of jewelry are just some of the juvenile cases that have received national attention. The American judicial system is faced with the task of punishing the teenagers who commit these crimes, while at the same time trying to remain fair to the United States Constitution. Over the past few decades, juvenile defendants convicted of various violent crimes have been sentenced to death. This has created heated debates in many sectors of the public as well as the legal profession. Should juveniles be put to death? That is the question that has haunted society for decades. The Supreme Court recently ruled that using the death penalty for a juvenile is no different than using it on a mentally retarded individual and should be considered cruel and inhumane punishment. Though the decision has been made and juveniles convicted of previously capital punishment cases will now serve life in prison the debate rages on about the correctness of that decision. Some believe that juveniles do not have the mental or emotional capability to understand the seriousness or the consequence of their crime. "
Abstract In this paper, the writer discusses the deathpenalty, including specific major players. The writer looks at the opinions that the liberals and conservatives have on the issue. This paper discusses what the legislative, executive, and judicial branch are doing regarding the deathpenalty. The writer lists pros and cons provided by conservative and liberal groups regarding the deathpenalty.
From the Paper "The Supreme Court representing the judicial branch ruled that the death penalty is legal in America. In the Court struck down the capital punishment statutes of states ruling that the ways the States carried out the death penalty violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The Court emphasized that the way executions were conducted was unconstitutional, not the concept of execution itself. Zamgba Browne writes in the 'New York Amsterdam News' that Jesse Jackson applauded the Supreme Court decision to ban the execution ... "
Abstract This paper is about the deathpenalty and how the deathpenalty should be abolished in the United States. The paper argues that the deathpenalty is unfair and handed down arbitrarily to lower economic non-white groups. The paper poses many philosophical questions about the justice system and attempts to answer some of them.
From the Paper "Outline The death penalty should be abolished in the United States as it is a barbaric practice that is dehumanizing, is not an effective deterrent to crime and is parceled out unequally and arbitrarily as according to race, geographic location and economic status. Summary One subject of many heated debates is the United States' practice of the death penalty. The United States is the only country of its kind that still utilizes capital punishment--the institutionalized killing of certain prisoners. The topic is multi-faceted, as it brings up many theoretical questions, such as: What is the purpose of jail and justice? How do we treat people? To what category do we place criminals? These types of questions should be a threat to the system itself. The death penalty is a practice which should not be utilized in the United States for several reasons. "
Abstract This paper takes a look at the history of the debate for and against the deathpenalty. Included is a discussion on whether or not the deathpenalty is it too harsh.
From the Paper "Should there be a death penalty? Is the death penalty to harsh of a punishment? Some may disagree; some may say that the death penalty is not harsh enough. Most don?t even take the time to think about it. As of right now thirty-eight states have the death penalty. Almost seven hundred fifty people have been executed since the reinstitution of the death penalty. The death penalty can range in age; you could be as young as eighteen years old or as old as ninety to be sentenced with it. There are many different ways of execution. Some are gas chambers, hangings, electrocutions, and the most popular one being lethal injection."
Abstract This paper is an argument in favor of the deathpenalty. It uses several different sources to support the author's argument that the deathpenalty saves lives, and does not unjustly take the life of someone who has committed a violent crime.
From the paper:
"Execution is forever. So is murder. Therefore, execution is the appropriate punishment for the murder of an innocent victim. If we apply the "Golden Rule" to the situation (do unto others, as you wish done to yourself), we see that execution is inevitably the correct step for us to make (Shell, 120). A person's right to live is lost when one intentionally takes an innocent life, everyone has the right to one life, his own. If he unlawfully takes the life of another he, eo ipso, loses his own right to life. Every person who can understand the nature and effects of his acts is responsible for them, and should be blamed and punished accordingly, if he could know that what he did was wrong."
Abstract The debate over the deathpenalty continues to confront our society. This paper looks at the beliefs of the proponents and opponents of the deathpenalty and decides which side is the most suitable in today's society.
Abstract This is a hot topic concerning the deathpenalty. Various pros and cons are provided throughout the paper. The paper argues whether the deathpenalty be allowed and if so, under what conditions.
Abstract A paper addressing the historical, legal, ethical and sociological ramifications of the deathpenalty. It concludes with a personal statement against the deathpenalty, although the bulk of the paper is nonbiased.
Abstract This paper presents five major arguments in favor of the abolition of the deathpenalty. The arguments include that the deathpenalty is not an effective deterrent, it weakens society, and it forecloses restitution or reconciliation.
From the Paper "If this very moment you were asked to serve on a jury in which there was a high probability that if convicted the defendant would receive the death penalty would you do it? If you are inclined to say yes ..."
Abstract This paper discusses the deathpenalty and the reasons that it should not be abolished. It explains the deathpenalty as a rational deterrent to violent crime a justification for punishment. The author also discusses several murder cases.
From the Paper "The purpose of this paper is to review the arguments for the death penalty to show that they persuasively argue and prove that it provides a viable and rational deterrent to violent crime. Human life deserves special ..."
Abstract The following paper is a brief review of the available literature on the deathpenalty. The paper notes that all of the studies dismiss the deathpenalty and its adherents as anachronistic and the paper also notes that a keen awareness of the racial dimensions of the practice is evident in two of the three works. The paper finishes by noting the contentious nature of the issue.
From the Paper "Few if any topics have engendered the heated debate that the death penalty has. Proponents view it as the ultimate denunciation of evil-doing; critics dismiss it as a machine of vengeance and blood-lust with little benefit accruing to society. Not surprisingly, the furor surrounding the continued practice of the death penalty has sparked a great deal of research in the matter as academics attempt to assess the social benefits and social costs of the most severe weapon any society can use against its citizens. The following paper will examine three sociological studies that address the fundamental question that always arises when this debate is revisited: what is the cost/benefit of the death penalty to American society? "
Abstract This paper is written based on a scenario in which an offender has committed an murder. The paper writes two essays on whether Jack, the murderer, should receive the deathpenalty, life in prison, or life without parole. The first essay is the life without parole essay and the second essay states that Jack should receive the deathpenalty for his crime.
From the Paper "Jack, who was convicted of 1st degree murder for the killing of a 65 year old woman while burglarizing her house should receive a sentence of life in prison for his crimes. Although Jack took a life and committed other heinous acts, he should not receive the death penalty for several reasons. One reason is that the death penalty, although held out as a crime prevention measure, does not actually deter crime. Secondly, the death penalty is applied in an arbitrary manner. Many, if not most of the criminals who commit the same act as Jack will more likely face a sentence of life without parole than the death penalty. Furthermore, it is far more costly to taxpayers to sentence Jack to death than to life in prison."
Abstract This paper examines both sides of the deathpenalty, and ultimately argues in favor of its abolition. The writer describes how this issue goes beyond the realm of politics, entering the sphere of religion and morality. The paper concludes by stating that the the existence and use of a deathpenalty has not been shown to reduce murder rates in both international and national comparisons.
From the Paper "However, the criminal justice system exists to protect the interests of the state, rather than the interests of individual victims or survivors. As a result, the question of whether the death penalty should be continued or abolished is an issue that must be resolved by determining whether or not the death penalty benefits the state. A punishment that is beneficial to the state would be expected to deter crime, be efficient to impose, protect innocent defendants, and benefit all members of society. Because the death penalty does not benefit the state, it is clear that the death penalty does not serve its intended purpose. First, the death penalty has not been shown to deter crime. Second, the death penalty is far more expensive than life imprisonment. Third, the death penalty differs from other forms of punishment, making the risk that an innocent person will be punished utterly unacceptable. Finally, society has a duty to all of its members, even those who violate its laws, and therefore has a responsibility to focus some of its penal efforts on the rehabilitation of criminals. Therefore, because the death penalty does not benefit the state, it should be abolished. "
Tags:death, penalty, capital, punishment, human, rights
