HIRE WRITER

Death Penalty Pro and Con Arguments

This is FREE sample
This text is free, available online and used for guidance and inspiration. Need a 100% unique paper? Order a custom essay.
  • Any subject
  • Within the deadline
  • Without paying in advance
Get custom essay

Whether someone should be sentenced to death and then be put to death is one of the most controversial issues facing the country today. The fact that the death penalty exists in some states but not all states demonstrates the difficulty in reaching a consensus regarding this particular part of the criminal justice system. It is not so controversial in Texas, however, where a total of 243 prisoners is currently awaiting their fate on Death Row (“Death Penalty Information Center”). Texas currently ranks third in the number of inmates sentenced to death behind California and Florida. According to an article written in The Guardian, 1,468 inmates have been put to death in Texas since 1976, though the number of death penalty rulings has dropped by 80 percent since 1980 (“US Death Penalty”). There were 20 death penalties carried out in 2016, 23 in 2017, and so far in 2018, there have been three (“Death Penalty Information Center”).

People have been executed as a penalty for crimes in Texas since 1819. The majority of those executions were by hanging. In recent history, Texas was the first state to perform execution by lethal injection in 1982 when they made the switch from death by electric chair (“Death Penalty information Center). You can go visit Old Sparky today in Huntsville. There is the side of the argument for the death penalty in cases of people committing particularly heinous crimes. Crimes committed against children even violate the prison code of ethics. People who have been found to be guilty of sexually violating children or killing children are said to face a very dark prison term within the prisoner community itself. One might also consider the current political climate in which home-grown terrorists who kill large numbers of innocent people would rightly deserve to die having taken the lives of so many people.

Particularly gruesome murders would seem to justify the death of those murderers. Their deaths would bring closure to the victims’ families and might be considered a deterrent to others who might also be thinking of committing similar crimes. John Battaglia was finally executed just last week after killing his own daughters while their mother listened to it all happen over the phone. The murders were committed in 2001 (“John Battaglia Taunts Ex Wife…” ). Many might say that he finally got what he deserved, and that it sure was a long time coming. But not all people in Texas believe that the death penalty is just.

There are many people who believe that killing someone who has killed is just as bad as the original crime. Those against the death penalty would argue that the idea of putting someone to death is barbaric and reeks of a medieval type treatment. The idea of an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth is severely outdated, isn’t it? The United States supports the death penalty in some form along with China, Iraq, Bangladesh and many other Middle East and northern African countries. Do we as a country really want to be equated with those places that we deem unacceptable?

There is also an argument that if the death penalty is such a great deterrent, why do people keep committing crimes? Aren’t they afraid of being put to death? Apparently not really. Another factor that should be considered is the racial bias that exists in the justice system itself. There is a disproportionate number of minorities on death row when compared to the actual percentage of minorities in the general population (“Top 10 Pro and Con Arguments”). That implies something other than guilt may be determining who gets death penalty convictions.

Many people who today are in favor of changing the current state of the criminal justice system point to the number of people who might actually be innocent. According to Amnesty International USA, 151 people have been released from Death Rows throughout the country due to evidence of their wrongful convictions. In 2003 alone, 10 wrongfully convicted defendants were released from Death Row (“Death Penalty-Amnesty International..”). If even one innocent person has been wrongfully put to death, shouldn’t the system which supports the death penalty be changed?

Some proponents of the death penalty sight the cost factor in executing criminals versus keeping them in jail for life. Surely it is more cost effective to just kill somebody and get it all over with rather than house them for life? From testimony submitted to the Nebraska legislature on March 13, 2013 by Richard C. Dieter, MS, JD, former director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a common misconception is that the death penalty saves money. He makes the point that that notion might be true if execution actually happened directly after trial and sentencing (“Top 10 Pro and Con Arguments”).

That is, of course, not the case. Death penalty convictions are often automatically appealed. Look at the Battaglia case. It took 17 years for his conviction to actually be carried out. Many more people await their actual convictions, thus costing taxpayers more money in appeals and in time spent in jail. So executions really aren’t cost effective. Dieter claims, “All of the studies conclude that the death penalty system is far more expensive than an alternative system in which the maximum sentence is life in prison.” (“Top 10 Pro and Con Arguments”).

Given all this information, I am not a very strong supporter of the death penalty in Texas. Or anywhere for that matter. This is obviously a very complex issue and one that even makes me question my views. In theory, I am not very fond of the idea of putting someone to death. Something about it just seems so incredibly barbaric to me. Putting people to death was something we did in medieval times…perhaps not as kindly as we do now..if there even truly is a way to kindly put someone to death. But my point being, I would think we have come further, advanced as a society to where we’re not casting the same punishments on people anymore. There are still states that allow execution by electrocution, hanging, and even death by gas chamber..yes…gas chamber. Arizona, Missouri and Wyoming to be exact.

That’s just insane to me. I can’t even think of an eloquent way to put that, it’s just wild. Why do we even have gas chambers, are americans not entitled to no “cruel and unusual punishment?” A gas chamber seems pretty cruel and unusual to me. I remember we had a debate about the death penalty in on of my classes my first semester of my freshmen year, and my teacher gave a really great scenario that seemed to challenge a lot of people’s thinking. I can’t remember the name of the guy, but I know it took place in oklahoma during the time when we were having issues getting ahold of the drug we use to euthanize people.

But basically the guy who was to be out to death, got either a bad or outdated batch of the medicine and took like two days to die. His organs basically slowly melted and I think it’s safe to assume he died a very painful and slow death. At this point, my professor asked the class how we felt about this. And we all exhibited some kind of empathy or remorse for this guy. And then he told us what he had done to be given the death sentence. He had kidnapped and raped a girl and then buried her alive. Now after he told us this, most of the class..even me, were like well shit you reap what you sow like that guy obviously had it coming.

And my professor was like “but you shouldn’t feel that way.” its shows a lack of progress as a society that we still kill people for well…killing people. That that whole philosophy is a wrong way of thinking. As I mentioned before, the thought process of an “eye for an eye” is something that countries we would never want to compare ourselves or align with still practice. So why do we? I mean the whole reason this man even suffered was because the country we had been getting the drug from decided they didn’t want to be involved..because they didn’t agree with it. I think that says a lot.

The death penalty is a complex issue that continues to be controversial. There are many factors which could and should be continually discussed regarding a penalty which ends someone’s life. Whether or not Texas will ever decide to change from being a death penalty state remains to be seen. I’m not holding my breath awaiting change.

Cite this paper

Death Penalty Pro and Con Arguments. (2021, Jun 14). Retrieved from https://samploon.com/death-penalty-pro-and-con-arguments/

FAQ

FAQ

Are there any pros to the death penalty?
There are some pros to the death penalty in that it is a very effective deterrent for crime and it also gives justice to the victims and their families.
What are 2 arguments against the death penalty?
1. The death penalty is inhumane and violates the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 2. There is a risk of executing innocent people.
What are the pro and cons of death penalty?
The death penalty is a controversial topic with many pros and cons. Some people believe that it is a humane and effective way to punish criminals, while others believe that it is inhumane and ineffective.
What are three pros of the death penalty?
The feud in Romeo and Juliet is between the Montagues and the Capulets.
We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

Hi!
Peter is on the line!

Don't settle for a cookie-cutter essay. Receive a tailored piece that meets your specific needs and requirements.

Check it out