Death Penatly
Abolitionists claim that capital punishment does not deter murderers from killing or killing again. They base most of their argument against deterrence on statistics. States that use it extensively show a higher murder rate than those that have abolished the death penalty. Also, states that have abolished the death penalty and then reinstituted it show no significant change in the murder rate. They say adjacent states with the death penalty and those without show no long term differences in the number of murders that occur in that state. And finally, there has been no record of change in the rate of homicides in a given city or state following a local execution. Any possibly of deterring a would-be murderer from killing has little effect.Most retentionists (people for capital punishment) argue that none of this statistical evidence proves that capital punishment does not deter potential criminals. There is absolutely no way prove, with any certainty, how many would-be murderers were in fact deterred from killing They point out that the murder rate in any given state depends on many things besides whether or not that state has capital punishment. They cite such factors as the proportion of urban residents in the state, th
The moral issues concerning the legitimacy of the death have been brought by many abolitionists. They think that respect for life forbids the use of the death penalty, while retentionists believe that respect for life requires it. Retentionists says the bible (Genesis 9:6) says, "Whosoever sheds man's blood, by man may his blood be shed." This classic argument in favor of the death penalty has usually been interpreted as a proper and moral reason for putting a murderer to death. "Let the punishment fit the crime" is its secondary counterpart (Cox). Both quotes imply that the murderer deserves to die and it was his own fault for putting himself on death row. Supporters of capital punishment say that society has the right to kill in defense of its members, just as an individual has the right to kill in self defense for his or her own personal safety. This analogy is somewhat doubtful, however, as long as the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent to violent crimes has yet to be proven. 3) Well, it is hard for me to answer. I'm in middle of both sides. I'm not sure which one is right. But in my opinion, I believe that if we abolish the death penalty, we could end up in huge debts. The debts are just for paying the prisoners in the death row. The prisons could become overcrowded. We don't want to have "the final solution" a plan set up by Adolf Hitler. He wanted to eliminate Jews. Same with us, if the prisons become overcrowded, we don't want the idea to appear "the final solution" is to kill all criminals. If the death penalty is abolished, it will not improve the people's behavior. Right now most people would rather to die than to spend lifetime in cell. So its hard to say, what will happen if we abolish the death penalty, but I know one thing for sure is that the prisons will become over crowded and also the murder rates will not change.
Some common words found in the essay are:
, Adolf Hitler, death penalty, capital punishment, death row, murder rate, abolished death penalty, capital punishment deter, prisons overcrowded don't, death penalty abolished, abolish death, punishment deter, public safety, abolish death penalty, person death, prisons overcrowded, execution innocent,
Approximate Word count = 1256
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
