Death Penalty Argumentative - Essay Example

Death Penalty Argumentative Essay

A lot can be written in a death penalty argumentative essay. Some would argue for it while others against it. Regardless, death penalty seems like the worst punishment that can ever be given to any capital offender. So it is the most detested punishment anyone could ever wish for.

Currently, this form of punishment or penalty is practiced in fifty-eight countries, with America making up the statistics. So. the United States of America is keen on how it passes the death penalty. For instance, it is given to individuals found guilty of first-degree murder for any death caused. Fortunately, it most often relies on the evidence presented by the witness and the accused. Sadly, most evidence is never sufficient enough to lead to the prosecution of the right person in a dead or murder case.

It explains the many incidences of mistaken identity during judgment. As a result, innocent individuals are cheated into submitting false evidence that ends up tying them to a case for a long time. While this practice remains prevalent, it has continued to receive criticism and support in equal measures.

Those who support the death penalty debate do so with the belief that it is the only way to stop capital offenders from continuing with their acts of causing death. However, my argument is that the United States of America should abolish death penalty as it is not, in any way, a deterrence to criminal acts.

Background Information

It would be better to provide brief background information on this issue of death penalties before proceeding with my argument. The death penalty is an idea that originated from Britain after the country declared its independence. The ancient society appreciated the concept of the death penalty as they considered it as being part of life.

The European states exercised the death penalty for a range of criminal offenses. Treason was the reason for the execution of George Kendall, who happened to be the first man to receive the death penalty in the different states in the United States of America.

The death penalty, in the pre-colonial times, varied between states. However, the death penalty slowly started becoming unpopular in the nineteenth century. States like Pennsylvania stopped conducting such cases of execution publicly. Instead, they were done in low key. With time, the entire practice was abolished by many states.

Today, fourteen states in the United States of America don't execute death penalties on criminal offenders. These include Michigan, North Dakota, Hawaii, New Mexico, West Virginia, Alaska, New York, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Vermont, Rhone Island, New Jersey, and Maine states. More states are expected to follow suit even as this practice continues to receive a backlash from many.

Cases against the death penalty have repeatedly been filed before the Supreme Court, as many argue that it violates the eighth amendment. It has also been seen as a cruel and unusual way of punishing criminals. The most memorable case against the death penalty is the Furman v. Georgia case. It is particularly memorable since it successfully brought an end to death penalties. However, the court ruling was only in effect for ten years, after which the death penalty was reintroduced. Its first victim after the reinstatement was Gary Gillmore.

America still practices the death penalty on different convicts. However, there are clear guidelines on who should be executed and who shouldn't. For instance, the states in the US are forbidden from exercising the death penalty on the mentally disabled and juveniles. Any other category could be executed. Currently, six procedures could be used to execute offenders.

These include:

• Lethal injection

• Hanging

• Lethal gas

• Firing squad

• Electrocution.

The procedure used varies between states. For instance, one state might prefer death by lethal injection while another death by electrocution. Needless to say, the practice is still on the decline in many states in America.

Argument on The Death Penalty

Many who support the death penalty do so with the belief that it is the only punishment against murder and will act as a deterrence against such acts. However, many arguments could be made for and against such claims on deterrence. Any type of punishment is indeed used as a way of preventing people from engaging in criminal practices. However, I believe that the death penalty should not be exercised on all criminals.

Those in support of the death penalty are misguided in many ways. For instance, there are many questions one is left with after reading the article titled "Death penalty is deterrence." The authors claim that violent criminals have been deterred from their criminal acts by the execution numbers in the past.

Statistically, the authors believe that there has been a reduction of 22% of all death cases reported in the United States of America as criminals are afraid of receiving the death penalty. While these are records to think about, many other researchers have come up with conflicting statistics on this. As a result, it is almost impossible to know the actual impact the death penalty has had in various states.

One of the common goals for justice is retribution. It is done with the belief that murder cases would be reduced or stopped by the execution of those involved in such acts. It is some form of people receiving what they deserve. In other words, if they kill, then the only right thing that can be done is by also killing them – through a death penalty.

It is only by taking the life of a murderer that justice is restored to its normal form as this acts as a deterrence to merciless killings. Anything other than that is assumed to cause an unwanted imbalance in the justice system. This argument is morally wrong and should never be supported. For instance, it becomes confusing why states should participate in acts of killing by punishing people for murder.

The two mentioned articles do not provide sufficient evidence on why the death penalty is deterrence. While both use statistical data to explain their support for the act, none fails to show how data was collected. Interestingly, the result of any research is always dependent on the method used to collect data.

Based on that, these results from the articles could probably have been different if a different data collection method was used. So there could be errors in studies based on the procedure used. For instance, Dr. Jeffrey Fagan reveals the various errors in studies conducted by those in support of death penalty. These errors are attributed to poor analysis of statistics and insufficient data to support claims.

As a result, Fagan believes that there is a gap in studies to prove whether or not capital punishment is the appropriate form of punishment for those charged with murder as it acts as a deterrence to other killers. It is unfair and immoral to use these unreliable sources of information as a justification of the imposition of capital or death penalty on murderers.

Policymakers should understand that this is a life and death decision, meaning that it would be inhuman to gamble with people's lives based on insufficient evidence. It would be better if a comprehensive study were conducted to cover these gaps in research and reveal the real truth regarding this issue. For now, all claims that the death penalty is a deterrence to continued murder cases should be dismissed as baseless unless and until sufficient, indisputable evidence is made available.

It is interesting to know of the many studies that dismiss the effectiveness of the death penalty. Most have facts to show that this form of punishment or penalty is actually not a deterrence to criminal acts as might think. It is supported by the Death Penalty Information Center in its claims that low murder rates are witnessed in regions with no such capital punishment. It is a study carried over seventeen years and which could be said to have sufficient evidence against the claims that the death penalty is the only way criminal acts could be deterred. New York, for instance, has enjoyed reduced cases of death since its abolition of the death penalty.

This state witnessed a four percent drop in these cases after taking such death penalty measures. It is yet another real-life scenario to prove wrong all those in support of the death penalty as it is evidently not a deterrence. They are so wrong as they are only united in their fight for evil judicial practices.

There is a good reason why the death penalty never acts as a deterrence. It is because most people who engage in such criminal acts never think that they will be discovered. It means that they never see themselves being arrested and charged for these offenses. As a result, there is no fear created even if they see the punishment being executed on other killers.

So, to them, it is always only a form of punishment meant for others rather than it being intended for them. In other words, they fail to get themselves in a situation where, psychologically, they feel scared and unable to continue with their killing spree.

There is no sense made by those who consider the death penalty as a form of retribution. In fact, they are not united in their reasoning. No wonder sub-national governments in the United States of America end up contradicting themselves instead. It becomes a bit confusing and impossible to understand why the government opposes all acts of killing when, through its courts, it passes a penalty that leads to the killing of convicted criminals based on the evidence provided. Criminal acts indeed are some of the most undesired acts in any society.

Families that lose their loved ones to such acts could attest to this. However, it still does not make sense why these criminals have to be killed when, by doing this, the lost lives will not be returned to life. Citizens also get the impression that it is okay to revenge the murder of a friend or loved one. It is because they see the state also commit such acts.

Death penalty has lost its meaning in today's generation. While many are still receiving the death penalty, very few end up being executed while in prison. Statistics reveal that many death row inmates are likely to die of natural death in prison due to the long duration it takes before their execution. Interestingly, only thirteen inmates have successfully been executed since 1976.

The number of inmates currently awaiting execution is on the increase, with California alone presently having a total of seven hundred inmates waiting in line for their killing. Unless this trend changes, it is highly likely that most of these inmates will end up dying a natural cause in their prison cells before facing justice.

Based on this, it makes no sense to have a type of criminal law that is only good on paper. The delays could mean that the justice system is also confused about whether or not this law on the death penalty is the most ideal for any capital offender. Should the murder of one be attributed to the killing of another? It is almost impossible to see execution as the best penalty.

It would be better to understand how the justice system to know how inefficient the death penalty is. First, inmates have the freedom to appeal to any death penalty if they think that they were wrongfully convicted. Sadly, the courts of appeal are always understaffed and take long to look at any new evidence provided before them. Some evidence might take longer to collect.

It means that death penalty cases filed with them could take up to 10 years before being heard. Such a long wait increases the chances of someone dying of a natural cause before the final judgment is presented, and execution dates are set.

Based on the argument, it seems like the death penalty has ended up not producing the results for which it was intended. Criminals still get away with their crimes as they don't get to experience this harsh punishment. As a result, it would only be wise if the death sentencing was eliminated from the laws of the United States of America. Many more people have tried abolishing this penalty. A perfect example is the death penalty case dubbed Baze v. Rees, where claims were made regarding the inhumane nature of the death procedures. Lethal injection was specifically cited as a cruel way of ending a person's life.

However, this case never succeeded as a ruling was still made in favor of capital punishment – the death penalty. Based on the judgment, there was no better way of causing the death of a convicted person. Those fighting against lethal injection could as well be disgusted by the other methods used in the execution of convicts. It was therefore considered irrelevant to think that one procedure was crueler than the other. Regardless, the continued fight against the death penalty shows the lack of support it has among citizens. People are disgusted by it, meaning it fails to offer an assurance that the desired justice will be served.

It is not unusual for some people to be afraid of a possible resurgence of criminal acts if the death penalty is ever revoked. However, they would probably change their minds if they learn of the findings that reveal that the death penalty doesn't deter criminal practices. While there is no solid argument against death penalty, it is evident that the US doesn't need it to reduce criminal acts.

In fact, some researchers believe that death penalty could probably be increasing the very death rates it purports to reduce. Such arguments should be used to defend claims against the implementation of death penalty by the courts regardless of the evidence provided. Perhaps this is the best time for people to be united for a judicial revolution.

In conclusion, the death penalty needs to be abolished. People need to be united against this practice. It is because those who support it have, for years, failed to defend its effectiveness. Instead, more evidence continues to arise that shows how capital punishment or penalty continues to lose support. The truth is that it is becoming harder to execute any criminal convicted of murder. It is because of the long wait in the judicial system that sees inmates die in prison before they can even be killed.

Sadly, the victims of such inmates might have to wait for years before justice is served. It means having to go through the hectic court proceedings that last up to 10 years. It is for such reasons that the United States of America needs to consider a fairer way of executing justice. It doesn't have to be through the death or murder of the accused through such a harsh death penalty. In fact, it is never a deterrence to any criminal act: the reduction of killings is attributed to many other factors, not in any way linked to the murder of a convicted murderer.