Capital
punishment, or the death penalty, is a controversial topic in which has been
debated on for years at this point. The death penalty is often sentenced for
treason, espionage, murder, drug trafficking, or attempted murder on people
involved in certain cases. Since 1976,
Texas leads the states in the number of cumulative executions, and is one of
the leaders of most wrongful convictions.
Despite
the death penalty only being handed down for the most serious of criminal cases,
I personally do not think that it should continue to be used as a punishment
for crimes. Had life in prison without parole not been an alternative sentence,
I could more see supporting the death penalty as it would be the only option;
however, seeing as there is the option of keeping the convicted in prison for
the remained of their life, it seems as if this would be the more humane
punishment.
At least4%, if not more, of the people sentenced to death turn out to be innocent. We
can only hope that they are exonerated before their execution takes place, unlike
the Willingham case. Due to the fact that the death penalty is not 100% fault
proof, it doesn’t seem fair to use. Should there be a way to make sure that
every single person that is sentenced to death is 100% guilty, then it would be
a more argumentatively fair punishment if the person committed one of the crimes
listed earlier. However, seeing as it is not without error, and has not been for decades, the
alternative life in prison without parole seems more fitting.
The
Eighth Amendment of the Bill of Rights states “no cruel and unusual punishments
should be inflicted.” In my opinion, killing someone seems fitting as cruel and
unusual. To kill someone to punish them for killing someone only puts us in the
same category as the convict. Especially considering the statistics about
innocent people being executed, this makes the death penalty all the more
inhumane. There is no good lesson taught in killing someone, even murderers, and they could
easily receive a punishment of life without parole.
The
hypocrisy of killing someone who killed someone is evident, and becomes all the
more apparent when the person executed turns out to be innocent. Without having
a foolproof way of knowing the death row inmate is not innocent, there is a
chance of executing an innocent person which has happened countless times. The
death penalty is everything the Eighth Amendment prohibits, especially with the
alternative of life without parole sitting right next to it.
2 comments:
My fellow classmate, Caitlin Burnette, wrote an editorial about the Death Penalty called "The Circle of Killing Someone Who Killed Someone" which points out the hypocrisy of the death penalty. Also in the editorial are many different example on why it is an overuse of force, due to the fact that not all people on death row are guilty, and hypocritical, due to the fact that the 8th Amendment of the Bill of Rights prevents cruel and unusual punishment, but the very act of killing someone is a cruel punishment.
I agree with Caitlin's viewpoint fully. The whole concept of killing someone for killing another person reminds me of the Code of Hammurabi, which is most famous for the phrase "an eye for an eye". Also, last semester I wrote a persuasive paper about the exact same topic and how the Death Penalty isn't worth the cost and used about the exact same arguments to convey how senseless it is.There are better ways to punish criminals in a more humane way, and Caitlin talked about how life without parole is as drastic a punishment for criminals but doesn't kill them, and allow them to clear their name if they are innocent.
I believe this is a well written editorial that shows how the Death Penalty is too extreme and should only be used if we can guarantee that it will punish only the guilty.
In her July 30th post, The Circle of Killing Someone Who Killed Someone, Caitlin Burnette of Current Views on Government News argues against the use of capital punishment. My classmate argues that it should be eradicated because it is immoral, hypocritical, and doesn't serve justice. I fully agree with her stance on this often debated issue.
The death penalty is not only wrong but it is incredibly unproductive and expensive. Inmates can wait on death row for years after sentencing. Maintaining death row prisoners costs taxpayers $90,000 more per year than non-death row inmates. Not only is is extremely costly in the economic sense, but as Caitlin pointed out, it's not uncommon for innocent men and women to be sentenced to death. Life in prison is not only a more economical approach for taxpayers, but it leaves opportunity to undo the damage of unfair sentencing.
Caitlin's argument is extremely solid because it effectively approaches the argument from multiple angles. Her use of statistical evidence and linking to outside sources expands and credits her argument further. By bringing in the Eighth Amendment, she brings in evidence directly from our nation's founders that supports her argument that capital punishment is immoral and flat-out un-American. Finally, by pointing out the hypocrisy inherent in the death penalty, Caitlin is offering a logical reason to support an end to capital punishment, offering a plausible alternative and effectively closing the argument.
Post a Comment