Capital Punishment and Life Without Parole Essay

Capital Punishment is an issue that has been argued over from the dinner table in

The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. The death penalty is a concerning factor around the world, because killing a person goes against basis moral law. As long as the death penalty has been standing so has the argument against itself that the death penalty is sinking down to the level of the criminal. While many people agree with the death penalty, killing people as a punishment is wrong, because it is inhumane, costly, and risky for the lives of innocent people.

This research is based on several journal articles, online databases, and textbooks. The information extracted from these sources of content is used for the analysis of this study. Furthermore, the information gathered from this research is specifically used to focus on the difficulties that juveniles face when sentenced to life without parole. Instead of having the opportunity to serve their sentence through probation or parole, some juveniles are sentenced to face irreversible damages. Thus, it is imperative to understand that there are programs through community corrections that benefit juveniles far more than life without parole. The information gathered provides society with a better understanding of the sanctions in the Juvenile Justice

The death penalty was first introduced into the criminal justice system in 1622. Since then, this capital offense has taken many strides in the system. The first execution, done in 1622, was given to a man on an offense of a theft. Now, the death penalty is only imposed on certain cases of murder, treason and in just a

     Capital punishment should be viewed as the stripping away of humanity from a person. The death penalty itself should be "executed" because of racial inequities, the concept of murder, the possibility of error, lack of deterrence, the cost, and an overwhelmed legal system. "The goal of capital punishment is revenge" (Introduction 1). Capital punishment is simply an outlet for the bloodlust of the American people (Introduction 1).

The Death penalty has been a controversial subject since the beginning of time. People are concerned about the morality of the death penalty thus making it a debatable subject. Because of this, James Freeman, columnist for USA Today, decided to write an editorial on the subject of “Does America need the death penalty?” While being a writer for USA Today, one would think that he would effectively use the appeals of rhetoric (ethos, pathos, and logos), but in fact he does not and concludes with a poorly writing argument.

With all of the special lawyers, court dates, prison cells and maintenance, a death penalty case can cost millions of dollars. Like a lot of things, capital punishment is paid for with tax dollars. Cases with the death penalty can cost upwards of 1.7 million dollars while cases without it are usually about 740,000 dollars. Maintaining death row prisoners can also bring costs up immensely. One of the most severe instances of these high costs is California. Every year it costs California 180 million dollars more to maintain death row prisoners than it does to maintain LWOP prisoners. They have put thirteen people to death from 1973 until now, and each case has cost 137 million dollars. A 2011 study showed that California has spent four billion dollars on capital punishment since 1976, and that has only grown higher. This is only one of the horrendous examples of our tax dollars at work. Do we really want our hard earned money going towards the killing of what might be innocent

This country is determined to prove that killing someone under certain circumstances is acceptable, when in all reality there can be no rationalization for the taking of another human life.  Killing is murder.  It is as simple as that.  There have been so many different controversies surrounding this debate that often, the issues become clouded in false statistics and slewed arguments.  The basic fact remains that killing is morally and ethically wrong.  This fact does not disappear by simply changing the term "murder" to "capital punishment".  The act is still the taking of a life.  On these grounds, the death penalty should be abolished.

Capital punishment has been a debatable subject for decades. Human thinking often ignores the equal-value relationship when it comes to the taking of life. Attention shifts from the victim’s life to that of the murderer. Immanuel Kant believes that moral laws apply equally, and if someone breaks the law, we should make sure that the law applies to everyone. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be such thing as morality. And without morality, life is meaningless. We should be morally strong and be able to kill the criminals, in order to prove that the laws are more important than human life.

     Capital punishment is a very controversial issue, but it is a just penalty for murderers. Murderers forfeit their lives for taking the life of another. Capital punishment deters criminals from committing violet crimes. Incapacitating criminals is also another form of deterrence. The death penalty removes harmful criminals from society. In doing this, people can feel much safer knowing that there is one less criminal on the streets. The death penalty is also more economical than life without parole. Capital punishment is good for society, and should be used in a more timely manner.

Does taking another’s life actually avenge that of another? The disciplinary act of capital punishment, punishment through death, has been a major debate in the United States for years. Those in support of capital punishment believe that it is an end to the reoccurrence of a repeat murderer. The public has, for many years, been in favor of this few and pro-death penalty. Yet as time goes on, records show a decrease in the public and the state’s support of the continuation of capital punishment. Those against capital punishment believe it is an immoral, spends taxpayers’ money improperly, and does not enforce a way to rehabilitate criminals and/or warn off future crimes.

Try to imagine a relative sitting in a dark, cold, and tight prison cell and knowing minutes later that death would come for them through lethal injection. What if their case wasn't handled correctly, what if evidence was mishandled, and possibly an innocent person is going to die. Imagine the family who has been waiting years for justice to be served by the means of lethal injection. There is two sides to every story either way both families will grieve or already is. According to Death Penalty Information Center (2011), since 1976 the United States of America has executed 1,243 individuals who have been convicted of a serious crime. The death penalty has been used since the Eighteenth Century B.C. to present

The death penalty plays a controversial role in modern society. Many arguments against the death penalty are raised to question whether it is biased against race or violates the constitution. Reuben Greenberg, the first black police chief involved in innovative criminology and author of the article “Race, the Criminal Justice System, and Community-Oriented Policing,” openly shares his opinion on how race does not affect the death penalty. Reuben Greenberg also proves false accusations of the death penalty wrong. Jack Greenberg, American attorney and author of "Against the American System of Capital Punishment,” disagrees with Reuben Greenberg's statement, and claims that race does hold a high position within the death penalty. Aside from

Capital punishment has been a cause for debate for many years, and people continue to disagree on the topic. There are many reasons why the death penalty should be used, but the three most important are that it deters potential murderers from committing crimes, it saves our government money in the long run, and most importantly, it guarantees that these convicted murderers will not kill again. Why does the United States need capital punishment? The main purpose of the death penalty is to protect the rights of other Americans to live. In his book, The Law, Federic Bastiat writes, “humans have inalienable rights that existed outside of and before government. These rights are life, liberty, and property. The only legitimate purpose of

Capital punishment has been in effect for centuries, and the topic of the death penalty invokes massive controversy still to this day. According to the Death Penalty Information Center (2015), Lake Research Partners took a poll in 2010, based on “support for alternatives to the death penalty.” The outcome of the survey resulted with a mere 33% of Americans in favor of capital punishment, in contrast to the 61% that were in support of an alternative to the death penalty. The remaining 6% voted they had no opinion either way. Is capital punishment the reasonable means of reprimand for the murder of another human being?