Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?
The long lasting debate about the death penalty may be an issue that is never truly decided. The death penalty laws have been established as far back as the eighteenth century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi in Babylon. (Intro to the death penalty) As the population in the United States continues to grow, we as a society must decide what to do with the growth of career criminals. We must decide as a society if we are any better for taking a life or abolishing the death penalty and come up with a better plan for the future.
Abolishing the Death Penalty
The death penalty has outlived its stay here in the United States. Although the death penalty, has been around since 1800 B.C. We are now far more civilized than those who felt that death was the best punishment are. Our country was greatly influenced by Britain in the fact that when they settled here in the United States, they brought the "practice of capital punishment with them." (Intro to death penalty laws) Although it should be kept in mind, that many of these laws regarding the death penalty at that time in history were based upon religious beliefs. For instance if you did not believe in the "true god" you could be put to death. (Randa, 1997)
As time has progressed into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, people took a step back to look at the use of the death penalty. Is it being misused was the main concern. In the 1960's people began seeing the death penalty as "cruel and unusual punishment." In the case of Trop v. Dulles (356 U.S. 86), it was decided that this case was important, because it marked a "standard of decency". This marked the progress of a maturing society. (Intro to death penalty laws) It was also noted that because of this new standard of decency in its relation to the eighth amendment, we should "no longer tolerate the death penalty". (Bohm, 1999)
The death penalty was once again brought to the table in the case of Furman v. Georgia in 1972, when it appeared before the Supreme Court. This was a landmark case that made it known a punishment could only be considered "cruel and unusual" if it was in fact " too severe for the crime." In the final decision, of a vote of 5 to 4, the court upheld the decision that the death penalty did in fact violate the eighth amendment and was considered to be "cruel and unusual". (DPIC. Org) This was a substantial case due to the fact that on June 29, 1972, the Supreme Court commuted 629 death row inmates and suspended the death penalty because the death penalty laws were no longer valid.(DPIC.Org)
However this did not remove the death penalty on a permanent basis, as it should have. In 1976 in the case of Gregg v. Georgia the death penalty was re-instated. It was not until 1977 that the ten year 'moratorium" period ends with the execution of Gary Gilmore, who was put to death by a firing squad in Utah.
Why has there been such indecision with the death penalty? In 1994 President Clinton signed a bill which made dozens of federal crimes subject to the death penalty. (Pbs.org, Criminology of Capital Punishment) Then in 1997 The American Bar Association called for a moratorium on executions until fairness can be assured with the death penalty. This states that something is truly wrong, when we have lawyers and the ABA asking for a change in the way that we are sentencing people to death.
John M. Bailey has publicly stated that "Every dollar we spend on a capital case is a dollar we can't spend anywhere else. We have to let the public know what it costs [to pursue a capital case]. (Bailey, Chief States Attorney, Connecticut) Bailey has an excellent train of thought with his statement when you look at just how expensive it truly is to put someone to death.
According to Death Penalty info.org:
The Investigation in death sentence cases costs 3 times greater than for non-death cases.
Trial costs are about 16 times more expensive than non-death, as in 508,000 for a death case, and 32,000 for a non-death case.
The costs exceed into the millions for many of these states to pursue death penalty cases while it is proven that it is cheaper to imprison the inmates for life instead of imposing death. Just for thoughts in 1999, Russian President Boris Yeltsin signed a decree, which freed all of the convicts with death row sentences. (DPIC.website) Now if a country such as Russia can take a step such as this, why are we still in the dark ages?
With all of this in mind, we should take this wasted money and invest it where it is needed, as opposed to flushing it down the toilet. We could hire more law enforcement officers, and use it for the good of the communities to improve them as needed. Yet, as long as we keep the death penalty in effect we will be wasting millions of dollars per state each year.
References:
Criminology of Capital Punishment retrieved: June 27, 2004 from:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/angel/timeline.html
Death Penalty Information Center Website retrieved: June 27, 2004 from:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=108&scid=7
Introduction to the Death Penalty retrieved: January 27, 2004
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=15&did=410
Published by Misha
Working professional helping people resolve their tax issues with the State and Federal Taxing authorities. Also enjoys volunteering and spending time with family and friends. View profile
- Capital Punishment: The Death Penalty in AmericaIn Defense of Justice: Why America Should Not Relinquish the Death Penalty
The Death Penalty Revisted...Uh, RevistedThough the death penalty may cut some costs, it's ultimately an unjust system that needs to be abolished.
The Aftermath of Saddam's Hanging, is the Death Penalty Still a Good Idea?With the video of Saddam Hussein's execution circulating the internet, we need to take a serious look at America's stance on the death penalty
Jesse Timmendequas, Murderer of Seven Year-Old Megan Kanka, Escapes Deat...Eight death row inmates, including Jesse Timmendequas, a sex offender who murdered 7-year-old Megan Kanka in 1994 were spared when New Jersey becomes the first state in 42 years...- 'Megan's Law' Killer Jesse Timmendequas' Death Penalty Sentence Reduced to Life in...New Jersey's Legislation to abolish the Death Penalty has been a hot debate item. This has been a sore subject for many in the state including the family of Megan Kanka, who was murdered, raped and beaten by convicted...
- Against the Death Penalty
- The History and Future of the Death Penalty
- The Death Penalty -OOPS Wrong Guy Sorry
- 'Megan's Law' Killer Jesse Timmendequas Spared Death Penalty
- The Capital Punishment Imperative
- Looking Through the Hourglass: An Essay on the Debate of the Death Penalty
- What's Wrong with the Death Penalty?
38 Comments
Post a CommentI agree with George E!
Justice has the authority to decide if another human being deserves to die. This authority was given by God. If a case of murder or a crime is clear without any smallest doubt, then capital punishment should be performed.
It is easy to say no one has the authority to decide if another human being deserves to die as long as you are not the one who witness a member of your family being raped and cut to pieces, or being shot in front of her children, etc. Justice must be done. If justice has no authority to decide, then it is not justice at all.
I BELIEVE THAT IF YOU TAKE THE LIFE OF ANOTHER PERSON YOU SHOULD LOOSE YOUR LIFE. ESPECIALLY IF THE VICTIM WAS TORTURED, ABUSED,. WHY SHOULD ANYONE HAVE THE RIGHT TO TAKE AN INNOCENT PERSON'S LIFE WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE? AN EYE FOR AN EYE.IT WONT BRING THE VICTIM BACK BUT IT WILL PREVENT THE PERPETRATOR FROM TAKING ANOTHER PERSONS LIFE, IN THE EVENT THAT THEY EITHER ESCAPED PRISON OR POSSIBLY PAROLED.
itshouldbeabolishedmannothatsnottruecrimewouldgoupnomatterwahtcrimeisgoingtobecrimenomatterwhatyoudosittinginprisoniswayworsenletthelordcallthemwenhesreadyandgetyourfactsrightwhoeversaiditcostmoretoleavethemthereitactuallysavestaxpayersmoneysomepeplewillneverunderstandthatsnottherightpunishmentandpeopledieeverydaytrustmetherejusticewillbeservedletthemdieletthemdecayonthereowntymetrustme
i think everyone who says that people on death penalty should just die are selfish and no better than them. it means that u have just as much as a murderous mind as them. But do that mean u should be put to death? who are we to judge if someone should die. put yourself in their shoes and in their position and then tell me if you think they should still die.
I believe the death penalty shouldn't be abolished. My reasoning is for these killers its an escape from the real world where they no longer have to pay for their food, water, and other expenses. Instead it comes from taxes. But hey if you want to keep them alive for another 20 years or so then lets raise your taxes and not mine.
Truth is, the cost to kill a criminal is much higher than it is to imprison him for life. In Maryland, I believe it costs 37 million to execute one criminal due to the higher upkeep and cost of all the paperwork over a period of months perhaps years to push the paperwork through. That is why the government prefers to incarcerate rather than execute
those good for nothing bogvampers they deserve every single minute of pain!!!! THEY SHOULD DIIIIIIIEEEEEEE!!!!!! These are the consequences of their action... miserable old bats!!!
hhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
The death penalty is the best thing that has happened to our country. If we abolish the death penalty, watch the crime rates skyrocket. There was a post that said below that life in prison is far worse than death. That isn't the problem. Keeping these murderers in prison costs lots of money.