The paper analyzes the topic of capital punishment, focusing specifically on the Washington D.C. sniper case, to argue why the death penalty is a necessary form of punishment for violent crimes, and should not be abolished.
# 28604 | 1,329 words | 6 sources | MLA | 2002 |
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
The paper looks at the pros and cons of capital punishment and then examines the issue of jurisdiction in the case of the Washington D.C. sniper, since only certain states carry the death penalty. The paper also discusses a new anti-terrorism law enacted after September 11th 2001, that says a murderer can receive the death penalty if they shoot more than one person within three years. The paper argues that the death penalty is the only real deterrent to violent crime and therefore should not be abolished.
From the Paper:"Capital punishment is not a simple issue; it has long been debated and has always been divisive and emotional for both sides, both pro and anti death penalty. In the United States, the debated over capital punishment began soon after American achieved independence from England. Some Americans wondered if any person or government really had the right to take a human life (Vila and Morris xxv), and the dispute has raged ever since. Obviously, capital punishment is necessary, or so many inmates would not have been put to death in the United States. Between 1977 and 2000, 683 inmates have been put to death under their state's death penalty laws. The states use several different methods to carry out the death penalty. 519 were by lethal injection, 149 were by electrocution, 11 were by lethal gas, 2 were by firing squad, and 3 were by hanging (Editors 347). "
Cite this Argumentative Essay:
Capital Punishment (2003, June 30) Retrieved October 21, 2020, from https://www.academon.com/argumentative-essay/capital-punishment-28604/
"Capital Punishment" 30 June 2003. Web. 21 October. 2020. <https://www.academon.com/argumentative-essay/capital-punishment-28604/>