advantages capital punishment essay

16 Advantages and Disadvantages of the Death Penalty and Capital Punishment

Human civilizations have used the death penalty in their set of laws for over 4,000 years. There have been times when only a few crimes receive this consequence, while some societies, such as the seventh century B.C.’s Code of Athens required the punishment for all crimes to be death.

The death penalty in the United States came about because of the influences of the colonial era. The first recorded execution in the colonies occurred in 1608 in Jamestown. Captain George Kendall was executed for being a spy for Spain. It only took four more years for Virginia to institute the death penalty for minor offenses such as stealing grapes or trading with Native Americans.

Today, capital punishment is reserved for brutal and heinous crimes, such as first-degree murder. Some countries use the death penalty for repetitive violent crime, such as rape and sexual assault, or for specific drug offenses. Here are the pros and cons of the death penalty to review as we head into 2021 and beyond.

List of the Pros of the Death Penalty

1. It is a way to provide justice for victims while keeping the general population safe. There is an expectation in society that you should be able to live your life without the threat of harm. When there is someone who decides to go against this expectation by committing a violent crime, then there must be steps taken to provide everyone else the safety that they deserve. Although arguments can be made for rehabilitation, there are people who would continue their violent tendencies no matter what. The only way to keep people safe in those circumstances, and still provide a sense of justice for the victims, is the use of the death penalty.

2. It provides a deterrent against serious crimes. The reason why there are consequences in place for criminal violations is that we want to have a deterrent effect on specific behaviors. People who are considering a breach of the law must see that the consequences of their actions are worse if they go through without that action compared to following the law.

Although up to 88% of criminologists in the United States report that capital punishment is not an effective deterrent to homicide, the fact that it can prevent some violence does make it a useful tool to have in society.

3. It offers a respectful outcome. A critical component of justice in modern society involves punishing criminal behavior in a way that is not cruel or unusual. That societal expectation has led the United States to implement capital punishment by using lethal injections. Although some regions struggle to purchase the necessary drugs to administer lethal injections, the process of putting someone to sleep before they stop breathing eliminates the pain and negative outcomes associated with other execution methods.

Modern processes in modern societies are much more compassionate compared to the historical methods of hanging, firing squads, or other gruesome methods of taking a life under the law.

4. It maintains prison populations at manageable levels. Over 2 million people are currently part of the prison population in the United States. About one in five people currently in jails across the country are awaiting trial for charges that they face. That is about the same amount of people who are labeled as being violent offenders. By separating those who are convicted of a capital crime, we create more room for individuals who want to work through rehabilitation programs or otherwise improve their lives and live law-abiding futures. This structure makes it possible to limit the financial and spatial impacts which occur when all serious crimes require long-term prisoner care.

5. It offers society an appropriate consequence for violent behavior. There are criminals who have a desire to rehabilitate their lives and create new futures for themselves within the bounds of the law. There are also criminals who desire to continue their criminal behaviors. By keeping capital punishment as an option within society, we create an appropriate consequence that fits the actions taken by the criminal. The death penalty ensures that the individual involved will no longer be able to create havoc for the general population because they are no longer around. That process creates peace for the victims, their families, and society in general.

6. It eliminates sympathetic reactions to someone charged with a capital crime. The United States offers a confrontational system of justice because that is an effective way to address the facts of the case. We make decisions based on logic instead of emotion. The law must be able to address the actions of a criminal in a way that discourages other people from conducting themselves in a similar manner. Our goal should be to address the needs of each victim and their family more than it should be to address the physical needs of the person charged with a capital crime.

7. It stops the threat of an escape that alternative sentences would create. The fastest way to stop a murderer from continuing to kill people is to eliminate their ability to do so. That is what capital punishment does. The death penalty makes it impossible for someone convicted of murder to find ways that kill other people. Failing to execute someone who is taking a life unjustly, who is able to kill someone else, makes us all responsible for that action. Although there are issues from a moral standpoint about taking any life, we must remember that the convicted criminal made the decision to violate the law in the first place, knowing full well what their potential outcome would be.

List of the Cons of the Death Penalty

1. It requires one person to kill another person. In an op-ed published by the New York Times, S. Frank Thompson discussed his experience in executing inmates while serving as the superintendent of the Oregon State Penitentiary. He talked about how the death penalty laws forced him to be personally involved in these executions. He came to a point where, on a moral level, he decided that life either had to be honored or not. His job required him to kill someone else. Whether someone takes a life through criminal means, or they do so through legal means, there still is an impact on that person which is unpredictable.

2. It comes with unclear constitutionality in the United States. In the 1970s, the Supreme Court of the United States found the application of the death penalty unconstitutional, but four years later, allowed the death penalty to resume with certain limitations on when and how it must be carried out. Some justices have called for a review of the death penalty due to current information about the risk of sentencing innocent people to death and other concerns about the death penalty.

After four decades of surveys, studies, and experiences with the death penalty, there are three specific defects that critics state exist. There is unreliability in the systems that are used to put prisoners to death, there are delays that can last for 20 years or more before executing a prisoner, and the application of capital punishment has been called arbitrary.

3. It does not have a positive impact on homicide rates. The United States implemented the death penalty 22 times in 2019, and imposed 34 death sentences. Crime statistics for that year indicate that there were 16,425 reported murders and non-negligent manslaughter cases in the U.S. Some claim that criminals do not think they’ll be caught and convicted, so the death penalty has a limited deterrence effect. Statistics on crimes show that when the death penalty is abolished, and replaced with a guaranteed life in prison, there are fewer violent acts committed.

4. It creates a revenge factor, which may not best serve justice. No one can blame families of victims for wanting justice. There is enough reason because of their pain and loss to understand concepts like vengeance. The problem with the death penalty is that it implements only one form of justice. It can be seen to create the framework for allowing for an eye for an eye, rather than taking a morally higher ground. If we permit the killing of people as a consequence of their own murderous decisions, then do we devalue life itself? It cannot be assumed that something that is legal is necessarily morally correct.

5. It costs more to implement the death penalty. The average case brought to trial which involves the death penalty costs taxpayers $1.26 million (counted through to execution). Cases that are taken to a jury which do not involve capital punishment cost an average of $740,000 (counted through to the end of incarceration). When you compare the costs of maintaining a prisoner in the general population compared to keeping someone on death row, taxpayers save money by avoiding the death penalty.

Maintaining a prisoner on death row costs $90,000 more per year than keeping that person in the general population. When one considers the cost of keeping someone on death row for 20 years or more, it is cheaper to sentence someone to life in prison without the possibility of parole in most states that it is to put them to death.

6. It comes with a risk that an innocent person could be executed. Although we like to think that our criminal justice systems are perfect, it is not. A study by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences determined that at least 4% of the people that are on death row are likely to be innocent. Since 1973, over 170 people have been taken off of death row because evidence showed that they were innocent of the crime for which they were convicted.

The justice system has flaws in our justice system. There have been cases where prosecutors knowingly withheld exculpatory information. There have been times when the justice system has introduced false evidence against defendants. People can be coerced into entering a guilty plea, or admitting their guilt, because of external pressures placed on them.

7. It does not always provide the sense of justice that families require. Research published in 2012 by the Marquette Law Review found that the victim’s family experienced higher levels of psychological, physical, and behavioral health when the convicted criminal was sentenced to life in prison, instead of the death penalty. The death penalty might be considered to be the ultimate form of justice, but it does not always provide the satisfaction people think it will once it is administered.

8. It does not seek alternative solutions. About one in every nine people in the U.S. is the population is currently serving a life sentence. Many more are serving a sentence that keeps them in prison for the rest of their lives because it will last for 15 years or more. Violent crime has declined dramatically since it peaked in the early 1990s. According to FBI data, the violent crime rate fell 51% between 1993 and 2018, and using the Bureau of Justice Statistics, it fell 71% during that same period. In 2016, 2,330 prisoners escaped from prison in the U.S.

There are numerous ways to prevent someone from breaking out of prison and hurting someone else, and the decreased number of violent crimes should mean a smaller prison population to work with to seek alternative solutions.

9. It automatically assumes that the criminal cannot be rehabilitated. There will always be people who decide they will live with a disregard for others. These people may never successfully complete a rehabilitation process after committing a crime. Sentencing someone to death makes the assumption that the person cannot be rehabilitated and suggests that there is no other way to help society except to get rid of that criminal.

These death penalty pros and cons are not intended to serve as a moral framework but are an attempt at a balanced look at reasons why capital punishment is a useful tool within societies, as well as reasons to the contrary. There are also specific outcomes that occur when the death penalty is not a potential sentence, which can be beneficial. That is why these critical points must continue to be discussed so that we all can come to the best possible decision to keep one another safe.

Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages

Advantages of capital punishment, disadvantages of capital punishment, works cited.

This paper analyses impact of death penalty. Actually, capital punishment refers to a death sentence on individuals who have committed unlawful deeds. Indeed, such punishment arises due to capital offences. Death penalty is normally conducted by knocking out head from an individual’s body. Initially, death penalty was practiced by many countries but currently several nations have abandoned the practice.

However, capital punishment has been a controversial issue in many nations. Indeed, many positions have been raised due to religious and cultural explanations, and political principles. In fact, the Holy Bible justifies death penalty against criminal offenses such as murder. In 1723, England parliament passed legislation that allowed capital punishment to curb criminal cases in the nation. This paper examines death penalty from an impartial view by considering disadvantages and advantages of capital punishment in society.

First, according to Zimring, death penalty eradicates criminal activities in a community (5). Indeed, capital punishment is an important mission for every person simply because it instills moral while discouraging criminal activities in society. Actually, dead victims would not commit more illegal actions either when freed from jail or in jail. Secondly, money is ever a limited commodity.

In this case, nations would utilize wisely their scarce resources to care their citizens who need help rather than spending such resources in imprisoning criminals for long term basis (Vermeules & Sunstein 56) Capital punishment is hence cost-effectual. Indeed, infinite appeals would spend much time and more resources in resolving death disputes. Death penalty is therefore cost-valuable.

Thirdly, Haney views that death penalty is a retribution action in which a victim is punished because of offenses committed (20). In fact, capital punishment is an eye for an eye formula which is revengeful with no forgiveness. Lastly, capital punishment is a deterrent device that has discouraged crimes. Actually, before committing crimes, criminals have to perceive possible impacts of their actions because they are aware of what death penalty justifies.

First, Vermeules & Sunstein explains that there is a conviction that innocent persons would be killed and therefore there would be no alternative manner for compensating and rehabilitating such people (58). Secondly, death penalty is an unkind, barbaric and unashamed inhuman act, regardless how atrocious offense is. Actually, “Human Right Advocates perceive capital punishment as an overt infringement of individual’s right of existence” (Zimring 7).

Indeed, human being has self-respect to exist which is a natural law from religious perspective. In addition, human being has dignity to exist with self-respect which should be key priority for any government objective for people. Moreover, there has been a big concern how a government would tread on persons’ dignity and right. Third, according to Haney, death penalty never gives a victim possibility to be regretful of his actions (21).

Actually, capital punishment has never treated criminals with a just prospect to recover their deeds. Lastly, there is no tangible proof that death penalty has been capable to prevent latent victims from performing offensive acts. Furthermore, mitigating capital punishment as way to prevent future unlawful acts is likely to be an obvious one-dimension justification to several people. Indeed, this should not be the case. Actually, people should look for objective justifications that support every person, even criminal offenders.

Capital punishment had been a controversial dispute since ancient era, though remains certainty in some nations in the world. Actually, India and other countries still endow death penalty for most terrible unlawful acts. However, Human Right Advocates have remained persistent to resist against capital punishment in order to restore human dignity. However, some States have embraced death penalty as an eventual sentence so long as unlawful deeds typifies intense brutal act.

Haney, C. Death by Design: Capital Punishment as Social Psychological System. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print.

Vermeules, A., & Sunstein C. “Is Capital Punishment Morally Required? Acts, omission, and life-life tradeoffs.” Stanford Law Review, 58 (2005): 10-14. Print.

Zimring, Franklin. The Contradictions of American Capital Punishment. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Print.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2020, April 25). Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages. https://studycorgi.com/capital-punishment/

"Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages." StudyCorgi , 25 Apr. 2020, studycorgi.com/capital-punishment/.

StudyCorgi . (2020) 'Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages'. 25 April.

1. StudyCorgi . "Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages." April 25, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/capital-punishment/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages." April 25, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/capital-punishment/.

StudyCorgi . 2020. "Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages." April 25, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/capital-punishment/.

This paper, “Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: June 5, 2023 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Capital Punishment: Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty

• History & Major Milestones
• U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights
• U.S. Legal System
• U.S. Political System
• Defense & Security
• Campaigns & Elections
• Business & Finance
• U.S. Foreign Policy
• U.S. Liberal Politics
• U.S. Conservative Politics
• Women's Issues
• Civil Liberties
• The Middle East
• Race Relations
• Immigration
• Crime & Punishment
• Canadian Government
• Understanding Types of Government
• M.S., Agricultural Economics, Virginia Tech
• B.A., Journalism, University of Georgia

The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is the lawful imposition of death as punishment for a crime. In 2004 four (China, Iran, Vietnam, and the US) accounted for 97% of all global executions. On average, every 9-10 days a government in the United States executes a prisoner.

It is the Eighth Amendment , the constitutional clause that prohibits "cruel and unusual" punishment, which is at the center of the debate about capital punishment in America. Although most Americans support capital punishment under some circumstances, according to Gallup support for capital punishment has dropped dramatically from a high of 80% in 1994 to about 60% today.

Facts and Figures

Red state executions per million population are an order of magnitude greater than blue state executions (46.4 v 4.5). Blacks are executed at a rate significantly disproportionate to their share of the overall population.

Based on 2000 data , Texas ranked 13th in the country in violent crime and 17th in murders per 100,000 citizens. However, Texas leads the nation in death penalty convictions and executions.

Since the 1976 Supreme Court decision that reinstated the death penalty in the United States, the governments of the United States had executed 1,136, as of December 2008. The 1,000th execution, North Carolina's Kenneth Boyd, occurred in December 2005. There were 42 executions in 2007 .

More than 3,300 prisoners were serving death-row sentences in the US in December 2008. Nationwide, juries are delivering fewer death sentences: since the late 1990s, they have dropped 50%. The violent crime rate has also dropped dramatically since the mid-90s, reaching the lowest level ever recorded in 2005.

Latest Developments

In 2007, the Death Penalty Information Center released a report, “ A Crisis of Confidence: Americans’ Doubts About the Death Penalty .”

The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty should reflect the "conscience of the community," and that its application should be measured against society's "evolving standards of decency. This latest report suggests that 60% of Americans do not believe that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder. Moreover, almost 40% believe that their moral beliefs would disqualify them from serving on a capital case.

And when asked whether they prefer the death penalty or life in prison without parole as punishment for murder, the respondents were split: 47% death penalty, 43% prison, 10% unsure. Interestingly, 75% believe that a "higher degree of proof" is required in a capital case than in a "prison as punishment" case. (poll margin of error +/- ~3%)

In addition, since 1973 more than 120 people have had their death row convictions overturned. DNA testing has resulted in 200 non-capital cases to be overturned since 1989. Mistakes like these shake public confidence in the capital punishment system. Perhaps it is not surprising, then, that almost 60% of those polled—including almost 60% of the southerners—in this study believe that the United States should impose a moratorium on the death penalty.

An ad hoc moratorium is almost in place. After the 1,000th execution in December 2005, there were almost no executions in 2006 or the first five months of 2007.

Executions as a form of punishment date to at least the 18th century BC. In America, Captain George Kendall was executed in 1608 in the Jamestown Colony of Virginia; he was accused of being a spy for Spain. In 1612, Virginia's death penalty violations included what modern citizens would consider minor violations: stealing grapes, killing chickens and trading with Indigenous peoples.

In the 1800s, abolitionists took up the cause of capital punishment, relying in part on Cesare Beccaria's 1767 essay, On Crimes and Punishment .

From the 1920s-1940s, criminologists argued that the death penalty was a necessary and preventative social measure. The 1930s, also marked by the Depression, saw more executions than any other decade in our history.

From the 1950s-1960s, public sentiment turned against capital punishment , and the number executed plummeted. In 1958, the Supreme Court ruled in Trop v. Dulles that the Eighth Amendment contained an "evolving standard of decency that marked the progress of a maturing society." And according to Gallup, public support reached an all-time low of 42% in 1966.

Two 1968 cases caused the nation to rethink its capital punishment law. In U.S. v. Jackson , the Supreme Court ruled that requiring that the death penalty be imposed only upon recommendation of a jury was unconstitutional because it encouraged defendants to plead guilty to avoid trial. In Witherspoon v. Illinois , the Court ruled on juror selection; having a "reservation" was insufficient cause for dismissal in a capital case.

In June 1972, the Supreme Court (5 to 4) effectively voided death penalty statutes in 40 states and commuted the sentences of 629 death row inmates. In Furman v. Georgia , the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment with sentencing discretion was "cruel and unusual" and thus violated the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

In 1976, the Court ruled that capital punishment itself was constitutional while holding that new death penalty laws in Florida, Georgia and Texas—which included sentencing guidelines, bifurcated trials, and automatic appellate review—were constitutional.

A ten-year moratorium on executions that had begun with the Jackson and Witherspoon ended on 17 January 1977 with the execution of Gary Gilmore by firing squad in Utah.

There are two common arguments in support of capital punishment : that of deterrence and that of retribution.

According to Gallup, most Americans believe that the death penalty is a deterrent to homicide, which helps them justify their support for capital punishment. Other Gallup research suggests that most Americans would not support capital punishment if it did not deter murder.

Does capital punishment deter violent crimes? In other words, will a potential murderer consider the possibility that they might be convicted and face the death penalty before committing murder? The answer appears to be "no."

Social scientists have mined empirical data searching for the definitive answer on deterrence since the early 20th century. And "most deterrence research has found that the death penalty has virtually the same effect as long imprisonment on homicide rates." Studies suggesting otherwise (notably, writings of Isaac Ehrlich from the 1970s) have been, in general, criticized for methodological errors. Ehrlich's work was also criticized by the National Academy of Sciences - but it is still cited as a rationale for deterrence.

A 1995 survey of police chiefs and country sheriffs found that most ranked the death penalty last in a list of six options that might deter violent crime. Their top two picks? Reducing drug abuse and fostering an economy that provides more jobs.

Data on murder rates seem to discredit the deterrence theory as well. The region of the county with the greatest number of executions—the South—is the region with the largest murder rates. For 2007, the average murder rate in states with the death penalty was 5.5; the average murder rate of the 14 states without the death penalty was 3.1. Thus deterrence, which is offered as a reason to support capital punishment ("pro"), doesn't wash.

Retribution

In Gregg v Georgia , the Supreme Court wrote that "[t]he instinct for retribution is part of the nature of man..." The theory of retribution rests, in part, on the Old Testament and its call for "an eye for an eye." Proponents of retribution argue that "the punishment must fit the crime." According to The New American : "Punishment—sometimes called retribution—is the main reason for imposing the death penalty."

Opponents of retribution theory believe in the sanctity of life and often argue that it is just as wrong for society to kill as it is for an individual to kill. Others argue that what drives American support for capital punishment is the " impermanent emotion of outrage ." Certainly, emotion not reason seems to be the key behind support for capital punishment.

Some supporters of the death penalty also contend it is less expensive than a life sentence. Nevertheless, at least 47 states do have life sentences without the possibility of parole. Of those, at least 18 have no possibility of parole. And according to the ACLU :

The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment (Duke University, May 1993). In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases.

More than 1000 religious leaders  have written an open letter to America and its leaders:

We join with many Americans in questioning the need for the death penalty in our modern society and in challenging the effectiveness of this punishment, which has consistently been shown to be ineffective, unfair, and inaccurate... With the prosecution of even a single capital case costing millions of dollars, the cost of executing 1,000 people has easily risen to billions of dollars. In light of the serious economic challenges that our country faces today, the valuable resources that are expended to carry out death sentences would be better spent investing in programs that work to prevent crime, such as improving education, providing services to those with mental illness, and putting more law enforcement officers on our streets. We should make sure that money is spent to improve life, not destroy it... As people of faith, we take this opportunity to reaffirm our opposition to the death penalty and to express our belief in the sacredness of human life and in the human capacity for change.

In 2005, Congress considered the Streamlined Procedures Act (SPA), which would have amended the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). AEDPA placed restrictions on the power of federal courts to grant writs of habeas corpus to state prisoners. The SPA would have imposed additional limits on the ability of state inmates to challenge the constitutionality of their imprisonment through habeas corpus.

• Recent Legal History of the Death Penalty in America
• New Challenges to the Death Penalty
• Pros & Cons of the Death Penalty
• Furman v. Georgia: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
• The Death Penalty in the United States
• 5 Arguments in Favor of the Death Penalty
• Coker v. Georgia: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
• History of Capital Punishment in Canada
• Abolition of Capital Punishment in Canada
• The Eighth Amendment: Text, Origins, and Meaning
• Ewing v. California: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
• Criminal Justice and Your Constitutional Rights
• The Main Classifications of Criminal Offenses
• "The Penalty of Death" by H.L. Mencken
• America's Most Famous Murder Cases
• Finding Sources for Death Penalty Research

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty

Click the buttons below to view arguments and testimony on each topic.

The death penalty deters future murders.

Society has always used punishment to discourage would-be criminals from unlawful action. Since society has the highest interest in preventing murder, it should use the strongest punishment available to deter murder, and that is the death penalty. If murderers are sentenced to death and executed, potential murderers will think twice before killing for fear of losing their own life.

For years, criminologists analyzed murder rates to see if they fluctuated with the likelihood of convicted murderers being executed, but the results were inconclusive. Then in 1973 Isaac Ehrlich employed a new kind of analysis which produced results showing that for every inmate who was executed, 7 lives were spared because others were deterred from committing murder. Similar results have been produced by disciples of Ehrlich in follow-up studies.

Moreover, even if some studies regarding deterrence are inconclusive, that is only because the death penalty is rarely used and takes years before an execution is actually carried out. Punishments which are swift and sure are the best deterrent. The fact that some states or countries which do not use the death penalty have lower murder rates than jurisdictions which do is not evidence of the failure of deterrence. States with high murder rates would have even higher rates if they did not use the death penalty.

Ernest van den Haag, a Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University who has studied the question of deterrence closely, wrote: “Even though statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts. Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most. Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence. Perhaps they will not be deterred. But they would certainly not be deterred by anything else. We owe all the protection we can give to law enforcers exposed to special risks.”

Finally, the death penalty certainly “deters” the murderer who is executed. Strictly speaking, this is a form of incapacitation, similar to the way a robber put in prison is prevented from robbing on the streets. Vicious murderers must be killed to prevent them from murdering again, either in prison, or in society if they should get out. Both as a deterrent and as a form of permanent incapacitation, the death penalty helps to prevent future crime.

Those who believe that deterrence justifies the execution of certain offenders bear the burden of proving that the death penalty is a deterrent. The overwhelming conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that the death penalty is, at best, no more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in prison. The Ehrlich studies have been widely discredited. In fact, some criminologists, such as William Bowers of Northeastern University, maintain that the death penalty has the opposite effect: that is, society is brutalized by the use of the death penalty, and this increases the likelihood of more murder. Even most supporters of the death penalty now place little or no weight on deterrence as a serious justification for its continued use.

States in the United States that do not employ the death penalty generally have lower murder rates than states that do. The same is true when the U.S. is compared to countries similar to it. The U.S., with the death penalty, has a higher murder rate than the countries of Europe or Canada, which do not use the death penalty.

The death penalty is not a deterrent because most people who commit murders either do not expect to be caught or do not carefully weigh the differences between a possible execution and life in prison before they act. Frequently, murders are committed in moments of passion or anger, or by criminals who are substance abusers and acted impulsively. As someone who presided over many of Texas’s executions, former Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox has remarked, “It is my own experience that those executed in Texas were not deterred by the existence of the death penalty law. I think in most cases you’ll find that the murder was committed under severe drug and alcohol abuse.”

There is no conclusive proof that the death penalty acts as a better deterrent than the threat of life imprisonment. A 2012 report released by the prestigious National Research Council of the National Academies and based on a review of more than three decades of research, concluded that studies claiming a deterrent effect on murder rates from the death penalty are fundamentally flawed. A survey of the former and present presidents of the country’s top academic criminological societies found that 84% of these experts rejected the notion that research had demonstrated any deterrent effect from the death penalty .

Once in prison, those serving life sentences often settle into a routine and are less of a threat to commit violence than other prisoners. Moreover, most states now have a sentence of life without parole. Prisoners who are given this sentence will never be released. Thus, the safety of society can be assured without using the death penalty.

Ernest van den Haag Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Policy, Fordham University. Excerpts from ” The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense,” (Harvard Law Review Association, 1986)

“Execution of those who have committed heinous murders may deter only one murder per year. If it does, it seems quite warranted. It is also the only fitting retribution for murder I can think of.”

“Most abolitionists acknowledge that they would continue to favor abolition even if the death penalty were shown to deter more murders than alternatives could deter. Abolitionists appear to value the life of a convicted murderer or, at least, his non-execution, more highly than they value the lives of the innocent victims who might be spared by deterring prospective murderers.

Deterrence is not altogether decisive for me either. I would favor retention of the death penalty as retribution even if it were shown that the threat of execution could not deter prospective murderers not already deterred by the threat of imprisonment. Still, I believe the death penalty, because of its finality, is more feared than imprisonment, and deters some prospective murderers not deterred by the thought of imprisonment. Sparing the lives of even a few prospective victims by deterring their murderers is more important than preserving the lives of convicted murderers because of the possibility, or even the probability, that executing them would not deter others. Whereas the life of the victims who might be saved are valuable, that of the murderer has only negative value, because of his crime. Surely the criminal law is meant to protect the lives of potential victims in preference to those of actual murderers.”

“We threaten punishments in order to deter crime. We impose them not only to make the threats credible but also as retribution (justice) for the crimes that were not deterred. Threats and punishments are necessary to deter and deterrence is a sufficient practical justification for them. Retribution is an independent moral justification. Although penalties can be unwise, repulsive, or inappropriate, and those punished can be pitiable, in a sense the infliction of legal punishment on a guilty person cannot be unjust. By committing the crime, the criminal volunteered to assume the risk of receiving a legal punishment that he could have avoided by not committing the crime. The punishment he suffers is the punishment he voluntarily risked suffering and, therefore, it is no more unjust to him than any other event for which one knowingly volunteers to assume the risk. Thus, the death penalty cannot be unjust to the guilty criminal.”

Full text can be found at PBS.org .

Hugo Adam Bedau (deceased) Austin Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, Tufts University Excerpts from “The Case Against The Death Penalty” (Copyright 1997, American Civil Liberties Union)

“Persons who commit murder and other crimes of personal violence either may or may not premeditate their crimes.

When crime is planned, the criminal ordinarily concentrates on escaping detection, arrest, and conviction. The threat of even the severest punishment will not discourage those who expect to escape detection and arrest. It is impossible to imagine how the threat of any punishment could prevent a crime that is not premeditated….

Most capital crimes are committed in the heat of the moment. Most capital crimes are committed during moments of great emotional stress or under the influence of drugs or alcohol, when logical thinking has been suspended. In such cases, violence is inflicted by persons heedless of the consequences to themselves as well as to others….

If, however, severe punishment can deter crime, then long-term imprisonment is severe enough to deter any rational person from committing a violent crime.

The vast preponderance of the evidence shows that the death penalty is no more effective than imprisonment in deterring murder and that it may even be an incitement to criminal violence. Death-penalty states as a group do not have lower rates of criminal homicide than non-death-penalty states….

On-duty police officers do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide in abolitionist states than they do in death-penalty states. Between l973 and l984, for example, lethal assaults against police were not significantly more, or less, frequent in abolitionist states than in death-penalty states. There is ‘no support for the view that the death penalty provides a more effective deterrent to police homicides than alternative sanctions. Not for a single year was evidence found that police are safer in jurisdictions that provide for capital punishment.’ (Bailey and Peterson, Criminology (1987))

Prisoners and prison personnel do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide from life-term prisoners in abolition states than they do in death-penalty states. Between 1992 and 1995, 176 inmates were murdered by other prisoners; the vast majority (84%) were killed in death penalty jurisdictions. During the same period about 2% of all assaults on prison staff were committed by inmates in abolition jurisdictions. Evidently, the threat of the death penalty ‘does not even exert an incremental deterrent effect over the threat of a lesser punishment in the abolitionist states.’ (Wolfson, in Bedau, ed., The Death Penalty in America, 3rd ed. (1982))

Actual experience thus establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the death penalty does not deter murder. No comparable body of evidence contradicts that conclusion.”

Click here for the full text from the ACLU website.

Retribution

A just society requires the taking of a life for a life.

When someone takes a life, the balance of justice is disturbed. Unless that balance is restored, society succumbs to a rule of violence. Only the taking of the murderer’s life restores the balance and allows society to show convincingly that murder is an intolerable crime which will be punished in kind.

Retribution has its basis in religious values, which have historically maintained that it is proper to take an “eye for an eye” and a life for a life.

Although the victim and the victim’s family cannot be restored to the status which preceded the murder, at least an execution brings closure to the murderer’s crime (and closure to the ordeal for the victim’s family) and ensures that the murderer will create no more victims.

For the most cruel and heinous crimes, the ones for which the death penalty is applied, offenders deserve the worst punishment under our system of law, and that is the death penalty. Any lesser punishment would undermine the value society places on protecting lives.

Robert Macy, District Attorney of Oklahoma City, described his concept of the need for retribution in one case: “In 1991, a young mother was rendered helpless and made to watch as her baby was executed. The mother was then mutilated and killed. The killer should not lie in some prison with three meals a day, clean sheets, cable TV, family visits and endless appeals. For justice to prevail, some killers just need to die.”

Retribution is another word for revenge. Although our first instinct may be to inflict immediate pain on someone who wrongs us, the standards of a mature society demand a more measured response.

The emotional impulse for revenge is not a sufficient justification for invoking a system of capital punishment, with all its accompanying problems and risks. Our laws and criminal justice system should lead us to higher principles that demonstrate a complete respect for life, even the life of a murderer. Encouraging our basest motives of revenge, which ends in another killing, extends the chain of violence. Allowing executions sanctions killing as a form of ‘pay-back.’

Many victims’ families denounce the use of the death penalty. Using an execution to try to right the wrong of their loss is an affront to them and only causes more pain. For example, Bud Welch’s daughter, Julie, was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Although his first reaction was to wish that those who committed this terrible crime be killed, he ultimately realized that such killing “is simply vengeance; and it was vengeance that killed Julie…. Vengeance is a strong and natural emotion. But it has no place in our justice system.”

The notion of an eye for an eye, or a life for a life, is a simplistic one which our society has never endorsed. We do not allow torturing the torturer, or raping the rapist. Taking the life of a murderer is a similarly disproportionate punishment, especially in light of the fact that the U.S. executes only a small percentage of those convicted of murder, and these defendants are typically not the worst offenders but merely the ones with the fewest resources to defend themselves.

Louis P. Pojman Author and Professor of Philosophy, U.S. Military Academy. Excerpt from “The Death Penalty: For and Against,” (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 1998)

“[Opponents of the capital punishment often put forth the following argument:] Perhaps the murderer deserves to die, but what authority does the state have to execute him or her? Both the Old and New Testament says, “’Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord” (Prov. 25:21 and Romans 12:19). You need special authority to justify taking the life of a human being.

The objector fails to note that the New Testament passage continues with a support of the right of the state to execute criminals in the name of God: “Let every person be subjected to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment…. If you do wrong, be afraid, for [the authority] does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13: 1-4). So, according to the Bible, the authority to punish, which presumably includes the death penalty, comes from God.

But we need not appeal to a religious justification for capital punishment. We can site the state’s role in dispensing justice. Just as the state has the authority (and duty) to act justly in allocating scarce resources, in meeting minimal needs of its (deserving) citizens, in defending its citizens from violence and crime, and in not waging unjust wars; so too does it have the authority, flowing from its mission to promote justice and the good of its people, to punish the criminal. If the criminal, as one who has forfeited a right to life, deserves to be executed, especially if it will likely deter would-be murderers, the state has a duty to execute those convicted of first-degree murder.”

National Council of Synagogues and the Bishops’ Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops Excerpts from “To End the Death Penalty: A Report of the National Jewish/Catholic Consultation” (December, 1999)

“Some would argue that the death penalty is needed as a means of retributive justice, to balance out the crime with the punishment. This reflects a natural concern of society, and especially of victims and their families. Yet we believe that we are called to seek a higher road even while punishing the guilty, for example through long and in some cases life-long incarceration, so that the healing of all can ultimately take place.

Some would argue that the death penalty will teach society at large the seriousness of crime. Yet we say that teaching people to respond to violence with violence will, again, only breed more violence.

The strongest argument of all [in favor of the death penalty] is the deep pain and grief of the families of victims, and their quite natural desire to see punishment meted out to those who have plunged them into such agony. Yet it is the clear teaching of our traditions that this pain and suffering cannot be healed simply through the retribution of capital punishment or by vengeance. It is a difficult and long process of healing which comes about through personal growth and God’s grace. We agree that much more must be done by the religious community and by society at large to solace and care for the grieving families of the victims of violent crime.

Recent statements of the Reform and Conservative movements in Judaism, and of the U.S. Catholic Conference sum up well the increasingly strong convictions shared by Jews and Catholics…:

‘Respect for all human life and opposition to the violence in our society are at the root of our long-standing opposition (as bishops) to the death penalty. We see the death penalty as perpetuating a cycle of violence and promoting a sense of vengeance in our culture. As we said in Confronting the Culture of Violence: ‘We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing.’ We oppose capital punishment not just for what it does to those guilty of horrible crimes, but for what it does to all of us as a society. Increasing reliance on the death penalty diminishes all of us and is a sign of growing disrespect for human life. We cannot overcome crime by simply executing criminals, nor can we restore the lives of the innocent by ending the lives of those convicted of their murders. The death penalty offers the tragic illusion that we can defend life by taking life.’1

We affirm that we came to these conclusions because of our shared understanding of the sanctity of human life. We have committed ourselves to work together, and each within our own communities, toward ending the death penalty.” Endnote 1. Statement of the Administrative Committee of the United States Catholic Conference, March 24, 1999.

The risk of executing the innocent precludes the use of the death penalty.

The death penalty alone imposes an irrevocable sentence. Once an inmate is executed, nothing can be done to make amends if a mistake has been made. There is considerable evidence that many mistakes have been made in sentencing people to death. Since 1973, over 180 people have been released from death row after evidence of their innocence emerged. During the same period of time, over 1,500 people have been executed. Thus, for every 8.3 people executed, we have found one person on death row who never should have been convicted. These statistics represent an intolerable risk of executing the innocent. If an automobile manufacturer operated with similar failure rates, it would be run out of business.

Our capital punishment system is unreliable. A study by Columbia University Law School found that two thirds of all capital trials contained serious errors. When the cases were retried, over 80% of the defendants were not sentenced to death and 7% were completely acquitted.

Many of the releases of innocent defendants from death row came about as a result of factors outside of the justice system. Recently, journalism students in Illinois were assigned to investigate the case of a man who was scheduled to be executed, after the system of appeals had rejected his legal claims. The students discovered that one witness had lied at the original trial, and they were able to find another man, who confessed to the crime on videotape and was later convicted of the murder. The innocent man who was released was very fortunate, but he was spared because of the informal efforts of concerned citizens, not because of the justice system.

In other cases, DNA testing has exonerated death row inmates. Here, too, the justice system had concluded that these defendants were guilty and deserving of the death penalty. DNA testing became available only in the early 1990s, due to advancements in science. If this testing had not been discovered until ten years later, many of these inmates would have been executed. And if DNA testing had been applied to earlier cases where inmates were executed in the 1970s and 80s, the odds are high that it would have proven that some of them were innocent as well.

Society takes many risks in which innocent lives can be lost. We build bridges, knowing that statistically some workers will be killed during construction; we take great precautions to reduce the number of unintended fatalities. But wrongful executions are a preventable risk. By substituting a sentence of life without parole, we meet society’s needs of punishment and protection without running the risk of an erroneous and irrevocable punishment.

There is no proof that any innocent person has actually been executed since increased safeguards and appeals were added to our death penalty system in the 1970s. Even if such executions have occurred, they are very rare. Imprisoning innocent people is also wrong, but we cannot empty the prisons because of that minimal risk. If improvements are needed in the system of representation, or in the use of scientific evidence such as DNA testing, then those reforms should be instituted. However, the need for reform is not a reason to abolish the death penalty.

Besides, many of the claims of innocence by those who have been released from death row are actually based on legal technicalities. Just because someone’s conviction is overturned years later and the prosecutor decides not to retry him, does not mean he is actually innocent.

If it can be shown that someone is innocent, surely a governor would grant clemency and spare the person. Hypothetical claims of innocence are usually just delaying tactics to put off the execution as long as possible. Given our thorough system of appeals through numerous state and federal courts, the execution of an innocent individual today is almost impossible. Even the theoretical execution of an innocent person can be justified because the death penalty saves lives by deterring other killings.

Gerald Kogan, Former Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Excerpts from a speech given in Orlando, Florida, October 23, 1999 “[T]here is no question in my mind, and I can tell you this having seen the dynamics of our criminal justice system over the many years that I have been associated with it, [as] prosecutor, defense attorney, trial judge and Supreme Court Justice, that convinces me that we certainly have, in the past, executed those people who either didn’t fit the criteria for execution in the State of Florida or who, in fact, were, factually, not guilty of the crime for which they have been executed.

“And you can make these statements when you understand the dynamics of the criminal justice system, when you understand how the State makes deals with more culpable defendants in a capital case, offers them light sentences in exchange for their testimony against another participant or, in some cases, in fact, gives them immunity from prosecution so that they can secure their testimony; the use of jailhouse confessions, like people who say, ‘I was in the cell with so-and-so and they confessed to me,’ or using those particular confessions, the validity of which there has been great doubt. And yet, you see the uneven application of the death penalty where, in many instances, those that are the most culpable escape death and those that are the least culpable are victims of the death penalty. These things begin to weigh very heavily upon you. And under our system, this is the system we have. And that is, we are human beings administering an imperfect system.”

“And how about those people who are still sitting on death row today, who may be factually innocent but cannot prove their particular case very simply because there is no DNA evidence in their case that can be used to exonerate them? Of course, in most cases, you’re not going to have that kind of DNA evidence, so there is no way and there is no hope for them to be saved from what may be one of the biggest mistakes that our society can make.”

The entire speech by Justice Kogan is available here.

Paul G. Cassell Associate Professor of Law, University of Utah, College of Law, and former law clerk to Chief Justice Warren E. Burger. Statement before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights Concerning Claims of Innocence in Capital Cases (July 23, 1993)

“Given the fallibility of human judgments, the possibility exists that the use of capital punishment may result in the execution of an innocent person. The Senate Judiciary Committee has previously found this risk to be ‘minimal,’ a view shared by numerous scholars. As Justice Powell has noted commenting on the numerous state capital cases that have come before the Supreme Court, the ‘unprecedented safeguards’ already inherent in capital sentencing statutes ‘ensure a degree of care in the imposition of the sentence of death that can only be described as unique.’”

“Our present system of capital punishment limits the ultimate penalty to certain specifically-defined crimes and even then, permit the penalty of death only when the jury finds that the aggravating circumstances in the case outweigh all mitigating circumstances. The system further provides judicial review of capital cases. Finally, before capital sentences are carried out, the governor or other executive official will review the sentence to insure that it is a just one, a determination that undoubtedly considers the evidence of the condemned defendant’s guilt. Once all of those decisionmakers have agreed that a death sentence is appropriate, innocent lives would be lost from failure to impose the sentence.”

“Capital sentences, when carried out, save innocent lives by permanently incapacitating murderers. Some persons who commit capital homicide will slay other innocent persons if given the opportunity to do so. The death penalty is the most effective means of preventing such killers from repeating their crimes. The next most serious penalty, life imprisonment without possibility of parole, prevents murderers from committing some crimes but does not prevent them from murdering in prison.”

“The mistaken release of guilty murderers should be of far greater concern than the speculative and heretofore nonexistent risk of the mistaken execution of an innocent person.”

Full text can be found here.

Arbitrariness & Discrimination

The death penalty is applied unfairly and should not be used.

In practice, the death penalty does not single out the worst offenders. Rather, it selects an arbitrary group based on such irrational factors as the quality of the defense counsel, the county in which the crime was committed, or the race of the defendant or victim.

Almost all defendants facing the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney. Hence, they are dependent on the quality of the lawyers assigned by the state, many of whom lack experience in capital cases or are so underpaid that they fail to investigate the case properly. A poorly represented defendant is much more likely to be convicted and given a death sentence.

With respect to race, studies have repeatedly shown that a death sentence is far more likely where a white person is murdered than where a Black person is murdered. The death penalty is racially divisive because it appears to count white lives as more valuable than Black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 296 Black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 31 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a Black victim. Such racial disparities have existed over the history of the death penalty and appear to be largely intractable.

It is arbitrary when someone in one county or state receives the death penalty, but someone who commits a comparable crime in another county or state is given a life sentence. Prosecutors have enormous discretion about when to seek the death penalty and when to settle for a plea bargain. Often those who can only afford a minimal defense are selected for the death penalty. Until race and other arbitrary factors, like economics and geography, can be eliminated as a determinant of who lives and who dies, the death penalty must not be used.

Discretion has always been an essential part of our system of justice. No one expects the prosecutor to pursue every possible offense or punishment, nor do we expect the same sentence to be imposed just because two crimes appear similar. Each crime is unique, both because the circumstances of each victim are different and because each defendant is different. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a mandatory death penalty which applied to everyone convicted of first degree murder would be unconstitutional. Hence, we must give prosecutors and juries some discretion.

In fact, more white people are executed in this country than black people. And even if blacks are disproportionately represented on death row, proportionately blacks commit more murders than whites. Moreover, the Supreme Court has rejected the use of statistical studies which claim racial bias as the sole reason for overturning a death sentence.

Even if the death penalty punishes some while sparing others, it does not follow that everyone should be spared. The guilty should still be punished appropriately, even if some do escape proper punishment unfairly. The death penalty should apply to killers of black people as well as to killers of whites. High paid, skillful lawyers should not be able to get some defendants off on technicalities. The existence of some systemic problems is no reason to abandon the whole death penalty system.

Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr. President and Chief Executive Officer, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, Inc. Excerpt from “Legal Lynching: Racism, Injustice & the Death Penalty,” (Marlowe & Company, 1996)

“Who receives the death penalty has less to do with the violence of the crime than with the color of the criminal’s skin, or more often, the color of the victim’s skin. Murder — always tragic — seems to be a more heinous and despicable crime in some states than in others. Women who kill and who are killed are judged by different standards than are men who are murderers and victims.

The death penalty is essentially an arbitrary punishment. There are no objective rules or guidelines for when a prosecutor should seek the death penalty, when a jury should recommend it, and when a judge should give it. This lack of objective, measurable standards ensures that the application of the death penalty will be discriminatory against racial, gender, and ethnic groups.

The majority of Americans who support the death penalty believe, or wish to believe, that legitimate factors such as the violence and cruelty with which the crime was committed, a defendant’s culpability or history of violence, and the number of victims involved determine who is sentenced to life in prison and who receives the ultimate punishment. The numbers, however, tell a different story. They confirm the terrible truth that bias and discrimination warp our nation’s judicial system at the very time it matters most — in matters of life and death. The factors that determine who will live and who will die — race, sex, and geography — are the very same ones that blind justice was meant to ignore. This prejudicial distribution should be a moral outrage to every American.”

Justice Lewis Powell United States Supreme Court Justice excerpts from McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987) (footnotes and citations omitted)

(Mr. McCleskey, a black man, was convicted and sentenced to death in 1978 for killing a white police officer while robbing a store. Mr. McCleskey appealed his conviction and death sentence, claiming racial discrimination in the application of Georgia’s death penalty. He presented statistical analysis showing a pattern of sentencing disparities based primarily on the race of the victim. The analysis indicated that black defendants who killed white victims had the greatest likelihood of receiving the death penalty. Writing the majority opinion for the Supreme Court, Justice Powell held that statistical studies on race by themselves were an insufficient basis for overturning the death penalty.)

“[T]he claim that [t]his sentence rests on the irrelevant factor of race easily could be extended to apply to claims based on unexplained discrepancies that correlate to membership in other minority groups, and even to gender. Similarly, since [this] claim relates to the race of his victim, other claims could apply with equally logical force to statistical disparities that correlate with the race or sex of other actors in the criminal justice system, such as defense attorneys or judges. Also, there is no logical reason that such a claim need be limited to racial or sexual bias. If arbitrary and capricious punishment is the touchstone under the Eighth Amendment, such a claim could — at least in theory — be based upon any arbitrary variable, such as the defendant’s facial characteristics, or the physical attractiveness of the defendant or the victim, that some statistical study indicates may be influential in jury decision making. As these examples illustrate, there is no limiting principle to the type of challenge brought by McCleskey. The Constitution does not require that a State eliminate any demonstrable disparity that correlates with a potentially irrelevant factor in order to operate a criminal justice system that includes capital punishment. As we have stated specifically in the context of capital punishment, the Constitution does not ‘plac[e] totally unrealistic conditions on its use.’ (Gregg v. Georgia)”

The entire decision can be found here.

• Capital Punishment: Our Duty or Our Doom?
• Markkula Center for Applied Ethics
• Focus Areas
• More Focus Areas

Capital Punishment:Our Duty or Our Doom?

But human rights advocates and civil libertarians continue to decry the immorality of state-sanctioned killing in the U.S. Is capital punishment moral?

About 2000 men, women, and teenagers currently wait on America's "death row." Their time grows shorter as federal and state courts increasingly ratify death penalty laws, allowing executions to proceed at an accelerated rate. It's unlikely that any of these executions will make the front page, having become more or less a matter of routine in the last decade. Indeed, recent public opinion polls show a wide margin of support for the death penalty. But human rights advocates and civil libertarians continue to decry the immorality of state-sanctioned killing in the U.S., the only western industrialized country that continues to use the death penalty. Is capital punishment moral?

Capital punishment is often defended on the grounds that society has a moral obligation to protect the safety and welfare of its citizens. Murderers threaten this safety and welfare. Only by putting murderers to death can society ensure that convicted killers do not kill again.

Second, those favoring capital punishment contend that society should support those practices that will bring about the greatest balance of good over evil, and capital punishment is one such practice. Capital punishment benefits society because it may deter violent crime. While it is difficult to produce direct evidence to support this claim since, by definition, those who are deterred by the death penalty do not commit murders, common sense tells us that if people know that they will die if they perform a certain act, they will be unwilling to perform that act.

If the threat of death has, in fact, stayed the hand of many a would be murderer, and we abolish the death penalty, we will sacrifice the lives of many innocent victims whose murders could have been deterred. But if, in fact, the death penalty does not deter, and we continue to impose it, we have only sacrificed the lives of convicted murderers. Surely it's better for society to take a gamble that the death penalty deters in order to protect the lives of innocent people than to take a gamble that it doesn't deter and thereby protect the lives of murderers, while risking the lives of innocents. If grave risks are to be run, it's better that they be run by the guilty, not the innocent.

Finally, defenders of capital punishment argue that justice demands that those convicted of heinous crimes of murder be sentenced to death. Justice is essentially a matter of ensuring that everyone is treated equally. It is unjust when a criminal deliberately and wrongly inflicts greater losses on others than he or she has to bear. If the losses society imposes on criminals are less than those the criminals imposed on their innocent victims, society would be favoring criminals, allowing them to get away with bearing fewer costs than their victims had to bear. Justice requires that society impose on criminals losses equal to those they imposed on innocent persons. By inflicting death on those who deliberately inflict death on others, the death penalty ensures justice for all.

This requirement that justice be served is not weakened by charges that only the black and the poor receive the death penalty. Any unfair application of the death penalty is the basis for extending its application, not abolishing it. If an employer discriminates in hiring workers, do we demand that jobs be taken from the deserving who were hired or that jobs be abolished altogether? Likewise, if our criminal justice system discriminates in applying the death penalty so that some do not get their deserved punishment, it's no reason to give Iesser punishments to murderers who deserved the death penalty and got it. Some justice, however unequal, is better than no justice, however equal. To ensure justice and equality, we must work to improve our system so that everyone who deserves the death penalty gets it.

The case against capital punishment is often made on the basis that society has a moral obligation to protect human life, not take it. The taking of human life is permissible only if it is a necessary condition to achieving the greatest balance of good over evil for everyone involved. Given the value we place on life and our obligation to minimize suffering and pain whenever possible, if a less severe alternative to the death penalty exists which would accomplish the same goal, we are duty-bound to reject the death penalty in favor of the less severe alternative.

There is no evidence to support the claim that the death penalty is a more effective deterrent of violent crime than, say, life imprisonment. In fact, statistical studies that have compared the murder rates of jurisdictions with and without the death penalty have shown that the rate of murder is not related to whether the death penalty is in force: There are as many murders committed in jurisdictions with the death penalty as in those without. Unless it can be demonstrated that the death penalty, and the death penalty alone, does in fact deter crimes of murder, we are obligated to refrain from imposing it when other alternatives exist.

Further, the death penalty is not necessary to achieve the benefit of protecting the public from murderers who may strike again. Locking murderers away for life achieves the same goal without requiring us to take yet another life. Nor is the death penalty necessary to ensure that criminals "get what they deserve." Justice does not require us to punish murder by death. It only requires that the gravest crimes receive the severest punishment that our moral principles would allow us to impose.

While it is clear that the death penalty is by no means necessary to achieve certain social benefits, it does, without a doubt, impose grave costs on society. First, the death penalty wastes lives. Many of those sentenced to death could be rehabilitated to live socially productive lives. Carrying out the death penalty destroys any good such persons might have done for society if they had been allowed to live. Furthermore, juries have been known to make mistakes, inflicting the death penalty on innocent people. Had such innocent parties been allowed to live, the wrong done to them might have been corrected and their lives not wasted.

In addition to wasting lives, the death penalty also wastes money. Contrary to conventional wisdom, it's much more costly to execute a person than to imprison them for life. The finality of punishment by death rightly requires that great procedural precautions be taken throughout all stages of death penalty cases to ensure that the chance of error is minimized. As a result, executing a single capital case costs about three times as much as it costs to keep a person in prison for their remaining life expectancy, which is about 40 years.

Finally, the death penalty harms society by cheapening the value of life. Allowing the state to inflict death on certain of its citizens legitimizes the taking of life. The death of anyone, even a convicted killer, diminishes us all. Society has a duty to end this practice which causes such harm, yet produces little in the way of benefits.

Opponents of capital punishment also argue that the death penalty should be abolished because it is unjust. Justice, they claim, requires that all persons be treated equally. And the requirement that justice bc served is all the more rigorous when life and death are at stake. Of 19,000 people who committed willful homicides in the U.S. in 1987, only 293 were sentenced to death. Who are these few being selected to die? They are nearly always poor and disproportionately black. It is not the nature of the crime that determines who goes to death row and who doesn't. People go to death row simply because they have no money to appeal their case, or they have a poor defense, or they lack the funds to being witnesses to courts, or they are members of a political or racial minority.

The death penalty is also unjust because it is sometimes inflicted on innocent people. Since 1900, 350 people have been wrongly convicted of homicide or capital rape. The death penalty makes it impossible to remedy any such mistakes. If, on the other hand, the death penalty is not in force, convicted persons later found to be innocent can be released and compensated for the time they wrongly served in prison.

The case for and the case against the death penalty appeal, in different ways, to the value we place on life and to the value we place on bringing about the greatest balance of good over evil. Each also appeals to our commitment to"justice": Is justice to be served at all costs? Or is our commitment to justice to be one tempered by our commitment to equality and our reverence for life? Indeed, is capital punishment our duty or our doom?

(Capital punishment) is . . . the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated . . can be compared . . . For there to be an equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life. --Albert Camus

If . . . he has committed a murder, he must die. In this case, there is no substitute that will satisfy the requirements of legal justice. There is no sameness of kind between death and remaining alive even under the most miserable conditions, and consequently there is no equality between the crime and the retribution unless the criminal is judicially condemned and put to death. --Immanuel Kant

For further reading:

Hugo Adam Bedau, Death Is Different: Studies in the Morality, Law, and Politics of Capital Punishment (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1987).

Walter Berns, For Capital Punishment (New York: Basic Books, 1979.)

David Bruch, "The Death Penalty: An Exchange," The New Republic , Volume 192 (May 20, 1985), pp. 20-21.

Edward I. Koch, "Death and Justice: How Capital Punishment Affirms Life," The New Republic, Volume 192 (April 15,1985), pp. 13-15.

Ernest van den Haag and John P. Conrad , The Death Penalty: A Debate (New York: Plenum Press, 1983).

This article was originally published in Issues in Ethics - V. 1, N.3 Spring 1988

NBC reversed itself on the hiring of Ronna McDaniel after the network’s top anchors mounted a revolt on air. We need a pro-democracy standard.

Renewing a call for careful social media sharing

On navigating the turbulent flows of deepfakes, data voids, and availability cascades.

Mercy is the divine power to transform evil into good – a power that is offered to every person and that extends to every dimension of human life.

5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know

Capital punishment is an ancient practice. It’s one that human rights defenders strongly oppose and consider as inhumane and cruel. In 2019, Amnesty International reported the lowest number of executions in about a decade. Most executions occurred in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Egypt . The United States is the only developed western country still using capital punishment. What does this say about the US? Here are five essays about the death penalty everyone should read:

“When We Kill”

By: Nicholas Kristof | From: The New York Times 2019

In this excellent essay, Pulitizer-winner Nicholas Kristof explains how he first became interested in the death penalty. He failed to write about a man on death row in Texas. The man, Cameron Todd Willingham, was executed in 2004. Later evidence showed that the crime he supposedly committed – lighting his house on fire and killing his three kids – was more likely an accident. In “When We Kill,” Kristof puts preconceived notions about the death penalty under the microscope. These include opinions such as only guilty people are executed, that those guilty people “deserve” to die, and the death penalty deters crime and saves money. Based on his investigations, Kristof concludes that they are all wrong.

Nicholas Kristof has been a Times columnist since 2001. He’s the winner of two Pulitizer Prices for his coverage of China and the Darfur genocide.

“An Inhumane Way of Death”

By: Willie Jasper Darden, Jr.

Willie Jasper Darden, Jr. was on death row for 14 years. In his essay, he opens with the line, “Ironically, there is probably more hope on death row than would be found in most other places.” He states that everyone is capable of murder, questioning if people who support capital punishment are just as guilty as the people they execute. Darden goes on to say that if every murderer was executed, there would be 20,000 killed per day. Instead, a person is put on death row for something like flawed wording in an appeal. Darden feels like he was picked at random, like someone who gets a terminal illness. This essay is important to read as it gives readers a deeper, more personal insight into death row.

Willie Jasper Darden, Jr. was sentenced to death in 1974 for murder. During his time on death row, he advocated for his innocence and pointed out problems with his trial, such as the jury pool that excluded black people. Despite worldwide support for Darden from public figures like the Pope, Darden was executed in 1988.

“We Need To Talk About An Injustice”

By: Bryan Stevenson | From: TED 2012

This piece is a transcript of Bryan Stevenson’s 2012 TED talk, but we feel it’s important to include because of Stevenson’s contributions to criminal justice. In the talk, Stevenson discusses the death penalty at several points. He points out that for years, we’ve been taught to ask the question, “Do people deserve to die for their crimes?” Stevenson brings up another question we should ask: “Do we deserve to kill?” He also describes the American death penalty system as defined by “error.” Somehow, society has been able to disconnect itself from this problem even as minorities are disproportionately executed in a country with a history of slavery.

Bryan Stevenson is a lawyer, founder of the Equal Justice Initiative, and author. He’s argued in courts, including the Supreme Court, on behalf of the poor, minorities, and children. A film based on his book Just Mercy was released in 2019 starring Michael B. Jordan and Jamie Foxx.

“I Know What It’s Like To Carry Out Executions”

By: S. Frank Thompson | From: The Atlantic 2019

In the death penalty debate, we often hear from the family of the victims and sometimes from those on death row. What about those responsible for facilitating an execution? In this opinion piece, a former superintendent from the Oregon State Penitentiary outlines his background. He carried out the only two executions in Oregon in the past 55 years, describing it as having a “profound and traumatic effect” on him. In his decades working as a correctional officer, he concluded that the death penalty is not working . The United States should not enact federal capital punishment.

Frank Thompson served as the superintendent of OSP from 1994-1998. Before that, he served in the military and law enforcement. When he first started at OSP, he supported the death penalty. He changed his mind when he observed the protocols firsthand and then had to conduct an execution.

“There Is No Such Thing As Closure on Death Row”

By: Paul Brown | From: The Marshall Project 2019

This essay is from Paul Brown, a death row inmate in Raleigh, North Carolina. He recalls the moment of his sentencing in a cold courtroom in August. The prosecutor used the term “closure” when justifying a death sentence. Who is this closure for? Brown theorizes that the prosecutors are getting closure as they end another case, but even then, the cases are just a way to further their careers. Is it for victims’ families? Brown is doubtful, as the death sentence is pursued even when the families don’t support it. There is no closure for Brown or his family as they wait for his execution. Vivid and deeply-personal, this essay is a must-read for anyone who wonders what it’s like inside the mind of a death row inmate.

Paul Brown has been on death row since 2000 for a double murder. He is a contributing writer to Prison Writers and shares essays on topics such as his childhood, his life as a prisoner, and more.

You may also like

11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger 

15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai

12 Ways Poverty Affects Society

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

Social Change 101: Meaning, Examples, Learning Opportunities

Rosa Parks: Biography, Quotes, Impact

Top 20 Issues Women Are Facing Today

Top 20 Issues Children Are Facing Today

15 Root Causes of Climate Change

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

Essay on Capital Punishment

• Updated on  
• Jun 11, 2022

The phrase “punishment” is one that we are all familiar with. However, only a small percentage of the population is familiar with capital punishment. Capital punishment is a court-ordered death penalty for violating criminal laws . Furthermore, the method of punishment differs from one country to the next. Some countries hang the criminals until they die, while others shoot or inject them with a fatal injection. Keep reading the blog to find an IELTS Essay on Capital Punishment and much more!

Methods of Capital Punishment 

• Electrocution – In this method, the perpetrator is bound to a chair and a high-voltage current is passed through his body, quickly killing a guy. It also leads to organ failure (especially heart).
• Tranquilization – This method causes the criminal to die slowly and painlessly by injecting toxin injections into his body. It can take up to several hours for the criminal to die.
• Beheading – Arab and Gulf countries commonly use this method of capital punishment. In this, they just sever the person’s head from their body using this manner.
• Stoning – It is a kind of capital punishment in which the criminal is beaten to death. It’s also the most agonizing technique of execution.
• Shooting – In this approach, the culprit is shot either in the head or in the chest. Hanging – In this method, the culprit is hanged till death.

Also Read: Essay on Human Rights

Advantages of Capital Punishment

• A life sentence is disproportionate to the seriousness of the offense.
• The death sentence has the potential to deter violent crime.
• It does not have to be done in a violent manner.
• The affected family is not re-victimized by the death penalty.
• It eliminates the prospect of an escape and potential victims in the future.
• When capital punishment is used in a fair manner, it can help to reduce prison overcrowding.

Disadvantages of Capital Punishment

• When applied, it is the ultimate negation of human rights.
• The death penalty has the potential to execute someone who is potentially innocent.
• The cost of bringing a death penalty case to trial is substantially higher than in other situations.
• With the death sentence in existence, there may be no deterrent to crime.
• It’s used to keep political messages under control.
• Capital punishment is occasionally used to put children to death.
• There is no turning back once the execution has occurred.
• Sometimes the evidence used to justify the death penalty is contaminated.
• It is frequently used in a discriminating manner.
• The death sentence has a negative influence on a victim’s family.
• Only a few jail escapes occur each year, and even fewer involve violent offenders.
• Some people are simply unconcerned.

IELTS Essay On Capital Punishment (Sample) 

This is an IELTS essay on Capital Punishment which can help you for your exam-

Our lives are less secure without capital punishment, and violent crimes are on the rise. Capital punishment is necessary to restrain violence in society. Since the beginning of time, there has been debate about capital punishment, particularly for violent offences. Many regard it as one of the most heinous penalties, intended to convey a stern message to anyone who even contemplates trouble. While some believe it is natural justice, others believe it is unnatural and argue that humans should not play the role of demi-god. I am certain that people are incapable of deciding one’s death purely on the basis of a disruptive account.

Capital punishment strongly depicts eye-for-an-eye justice, which is a barbarous act in and of itself. Hanging someone to death will not improve the victim’s position, nor will it bring the dead back to life. It may provide a phoney sense of fairness to the people, proving transitory and fading with media attention. Instead, the victim must be given the opportunity to reflect on his own actions, perhaps by meeting the victim or the victim’s family. History has demonstrated that such an exercise acts as a form of punishment because the guilty is usually consumed by flames of repentance. Certainly, such a person deserves a second opportunity.

Few people, on the other hand, would argue that capital punishment restricts criminals and makes the general public feel safe, which is the establishment’s primary responsibility. It is not, in my opinion, lethal punishment that induces a sense of security. People will feel safer in countries like India if decisions are delivered on time and the process is transparent because justice delayed is justice denied. 

It should be emphasized that the main goal of punishment is to reform and rehabilitate a criminal. The state’s job should be to punish the guilty person in a way that re-educates and morally redeems him. Given the inevitability of capital punishment, it should not be used in any circumstance.

A life sentence could instead be used for this purpose where it’s possible that the criminal is given a second opportunity.

Also Read: Essay on Democracy

To learn more about such topics and score well in English proficiency, check Leverage Live !

We hope this blog helped you in understanding what is capital punishment, its methods, and its various advantages as well as disadvantages. Sign-up for a free session or contact Leverage Edu if you’re thinking of studying abroad or need help with the scholarships. 

Sonal is a creative, enthusiastic writer and editor who has worked extensively for the Study Abroad domain. She splits her time between shooting fun insta reels and learning new tools for content marketing. If she is missing from her desk, you can find her with a group of people cracking silly jokes or petting neighbourhood dogs.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Leaving already?

8 Universities with higher ROI than IITs and IIMs

Grab this one-time opportunity to download this ebook

Connect With Us

25,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. take the first step today..

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

September 2024

January 2025

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Capital Punishment Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on capital punishment.

Every one of us is familiar with the term punishment. But Capital Punishment is something very few people understand. Capital punishment is a legal death penalty ordered by the court against the violation of criminal laws. In addition, the method of punishment varies from country to country. Where some countries hung the culprits until death and some shoot or give them a lethal injection.

Types of Capital Punishments

In this topic, we are going to discuss the various methods of punishment that are used in different countries. But, before that let’s talk about the capital punishments that people used in the past. Earlier, the capital punishments are more like torture rather than a death penalty. They used to strain and punish the body of the culprit to the extreme that he/she dies because of the pain and fear of torture.

Besides, modern methods are quicker and less painful than traditional methods.

• Electrocution – In this method, the criminal is tied to a chair and a high voltage current that can kill a man easily is passed through the body. In addition, it causes organ failure (especially heart).
• Tranquilization – This method gives the person a slow but painless death as the toxin injections are injected into his body that takes up to several hours for the criminal to die.
• Beheading – Generally, the Arab and Gulf countries use this method. Where they decide the death sentence by the crime of the person. Furthermore, in this method, they simply cut the person’s head apart from the body.
• Stoning – In this the criminal is beaten till death. Also, it is the most painful method of execution.
• Shooting – The criminal is either shoot in the head or in his/her chest in this method.
• Hanging – This method simply involves the hanging of culprit till death.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Advantages and Disadvantages of Capital Punishments

Although many people think that it’s a violation of human rights and the Human Rights Commission strongly opposes capital punishment still many countries continue this practice.

The advantages of capital punishment are that they give people an idea of what the law is capable of doing and the criminal can never escape from the punishment no matter who he/she is.

In addition, anyone who is thinking about committing a crime will think twice before committing a crime. Furthermore, a criminal that is in prison for his crime cannot harm anyone of the outside world.

The disadvantages are that we do not give the person a second chance to change. Besides, many times the real criminal escape the trial and the innocent soul of the prosecution claimed to guilty by false claims. Also, many punishments are painful and make a mess of the body of the criminal.

To conclude, we can say that capital punishment is the harsh reality of our world. Also, on one hand, it decreases the crime rate and on the other violates many human rights.

Besides, all these types of punishment are not justifiable and the court and administrative bodies should try to find an alternative for it.

FAQs about Capital Punishment

Q.1 What is the difference between the death penalty and capital punishment?

A.1 For many people the term death penalty and capital punishment is the same thing but there is a minute difference between them. The implementation of the death penalty is not death but capital punishment itself means execution.

Q.2 Does capital punishment decrease the rate of crime?

A.2 There is no solid proof related to this but scientists think that reduces the chances of major crimes to a certain level.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty

Introduction, a case for the death penalty, works cited.

The survival of any civilization hinges on the establishment of laws and codes of conduct and the subsequent obeying of the same by the society’s members. Due to the fact that not all members of the society are going to follow the law on their own accord, forms of punishment for wrongs done may be used both for retribution and deterrence purposes. In the United States, capital punishment has been used as the most harsh form of retribution for the society’s most vicious offences.

However, not all people believe that the death sentence is justifiable notwithstanding the brutality of the crime that a person may have perpetrated. This paper argues that the death penalty is not only necessary but also the most efficient means for deterring future offenders. The paper will reinforce this proposition by delving into the merits of the death penalty.

An article on “Public Support for the Death Penalty” indicates that the support for capital punishment has risen over the years with 77% of Americans supporting capital punishment. While this statistics do not in any way offer justification for the death penalty, they do show that many Americans are of the opinion that the death penalty is a just retribution for the evils perpetrated by the accused.

In most of the states, capital punishment is only issued when the accused party is convicted of crimes such as first degree murder or treason. Capital punishment therefore affords the federal state with a means of dispensing justice. The public and the parties affected by the accused actions can therefore find some solace in the fact justice has been served.

The most desirable function of punishments should be to act as a deterrence to would be criminals. In an ideal environment, punishments should never have to be executed but their mere presence should cause all to abide to the rules and regulations in place therefore peacefully coexist. Capital punishment presents the highest level of deterrence since death is indeed the ultimate punishment. This is especially so in cases where the criminal feels immune to the other forms of punishment such as restriction on freedom of movement or even hard labor.

“Televised Executions” indicates that executions, in this case televised ones, serviced an important social purpose of deterrence as the public is afforded a glimpse as to the fate that awaits those who engage in despicable acts thus making would be future offenders think twice about the results of their acts.

According to “Update: Death Penalty”, one of the most unique attributes of capital punishment is that it irrevocably protects the society from repeat offenders. This is an especially significant point since convicts have been known to reenter society either as a result of parole or more dramatic happenings such as jail breaks.

The death penalty ensures that some of the society’s most vicious criminals; murderers, arsons, etc. are rid off the society for good. The society can therefore continue without fear of there undesirable elements every coming back and causing chaos.

From an economic point on view, the cost of maintaining prisoners in the correctional facilities is fairly expensive. Opponents of the death penalty propose that in its place, life imprisonment without parole should be implemented. What this boils down to is that the prisoner will have to be maintained in the penitentiary for his entire life. This is a very costly affair and the brunt of it is bore by the taxpayer.

Capital punishment as executed by methods such as the lethal injection is not only radically cheaper but it also spares the state of the resources it would have utilized to ensure that the prisoner is maintained for a lifetime. While most of the opponents of the death penalty point to its execution being inhumane and hence torturous to the victim, a report on “lethal injection” indicates that not only is the lethal injection method (which is greatly favored by most states) almost entirely painless but the method presents a great advancement from past methods such as hanging and the use of the gas chamber. As such, capital punishment provides a cheap and human and relatively human method of dealing with criminals.

This paper has argued that the death penalty possess numerous advantages that make it a necessary tool in the justice system. It has been articulated that through the death penalty, retribution is served and the society is purged off its most vicious criminals. In addition to this, capital punishment presents the strongest form of deterrence to would be offenders as an example is made of those who have already been convicted.

While some people do contend that the death penalty should never be imposed on anyone, regardless of their crimes, it can be authoritatively stated from the above discussions that capital punishment does serve a significant role in the society and as such, it’s use should be perpetuated albeit with a lot of caution so as to avoid subjecting innocent parties to this ultimate form of punishment.

“Lethal Injection.” Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 19 Oct. 2007. Web.

“Public Support for the Death Penalty Remains Strong (sidebar).” Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 29 Dec. 1995. Web.

“Televised Executions.” Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 11 May 2001. Web.

“Update: Death Penalty.” Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 1 Apr. 2004. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 23). Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/

"Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." IvyPanda , 23 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty'. 23 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." November 23, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.

1. IvyPanda . "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." November 23, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." November 23, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.

• Should Trials Be Televised?
• Candid Camera: Should Trials Be Televised?
• Colin Kaepernick’s Protest: The Revolution Will Be Televised
• Argumentative Essay Writing
• The Cons of the Current Drugs Used for Lethal Injection
• Argumentative Essay: Uighur Genocide
• Should Animals be Used in Research: Argumentative Essay
• Aspects of the Writing an Argumentative Essay
• Death Penalty: James a Inciardi Perspective
• An Argumentative Essay: How to Write
• Democratic and Undemocratic Elements of the Constitution
• State and local public policies
• How Did It Feel Being a Governor?
• The Conflict Between Armenia and Azerbaijan
• The Articles of Confederation. Nullification and Secession

Free IELTS lessons signup

• Academic practice
• General practice
• Task 1 Academic
• Task 1 General
• Task 2 (essay)

IELTS band 9 essay: death penalty

Here you can find advice how to structure IELTS essay and IELTS model answer for death penalty topic. Question type: advantages and disadvantages .

Here is the question card:

Some people advocate death penalty for those who committed violent crimes. Others say that capital punishment is unacceptable in contemporary society.

Describe advantages and disadvantages of death penalty and give your opinion.

So this is the advantage/disadvantage essay. In this essay you're asked about :

• Advantages of capital punishment
• Disadvantages of capital punishment
• Your opinion about it

Before writing this IELTS essay, you should decide what’s your opinion and then choose your arguments to describe pros and cons of death penalty. You don’t have to make up very complicate ideas. Even simple, but well-written arguments can often give you a band 9 for writing .

Some of the possible arguments :

• Disadvantages of capital punishment :
• we have no rights to kill other humans
• innocent people can be killed because of unfair sentences
• even criminals deserve a second chance
• Advantages of capital punishment :
• it prevents major crimes
• it restores equilibrium of justice
• it lessens expenses on maintenance of prisoners

How to structure my answer?

Surely, there are a lot of ways to organise this essay. But here is one possible way of structuring the answer to produce a band 9 essay :

Introduction : rephrase the topic and state your opinion.

Body paragraphs :

• paragraph 1: disadvantages of death penalty
• paragraph 2: advantages of death penalty

Conclusion : sum up the ideas from body paragraphs and briefly give your opinion.

Band 9 essay sample (death penalty)

Many people believe that death penalty is necessary to keep security system efficient in the society. While there are some negative aspects of capital punishment, I agree with the view that without it we will become more vulnerable to violence.

Death penalty can be considered unsuitable punishment for several reasons. The strongest argument is that we have no rights to kill other humans. Right to live is the basic right of any human being, and no one can infringe this right, irrespective of the person’s deeds. Moreover, innocent people can face wrongful execution. Such unfair sentences take away lives of innocent people and make other citizens lose faith in law and justice. And besides, sometimes criminals repent of their acts. In this case they should be given a second chance to improve themselves.

However, I believe that capital punishment is necessary in the society. Firstly, it is an effective deterrent of major crimes. The best method to prevent a person from committing crime is to show the consequences of his or her actions. For example, the government of Pakistan has controlled the rate of terrorism by enforcing death penalties for the members of terrorist organisations. Secondly, the governments spend large sums of national budget on maintenance of prisoners. Instead, this money can be used for the development of the society and welfare of the people.

To sum up, although capital punishment has some disadvantages, I think that it proves to be the best way of controlling criminals, lessening governmental expenses and preventing other people from doing crimes.

(257 words)

Useful vocabulary

capital punishment = death penalty

to commit a crime - to do a crime

deterrent of major crimes - something that prevents big crimes

to face wrongful execution - to be mistaken for a criminal and killed for that

to infringe someone’s right - restrict someone’s right, hurt someone’s interests

innocent people - people who are not guilty or responsible for crimes

to repent of something - to feel sorry for something

right to live is basic right of any human being

unfair sentence - not fair judgement

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

The Death Penalty Can Ensure ‘Justice Is Being Done’

A top Justice Department official says for many Americans the death penalty is a difficult issue on moral, religious and policy grounds. But as a legal issue, it is straightforward.

By Jeffrey A. Rosen

Mr. Rosen is the deputy attorney general.

This month, for the first time in 17 years , the United States resumed carrying out death sentences for federal crimes.

On July 14, Daniel Lewis Lee was executed for the 1996 murder of a family, including an 8-year-old girl, by suffocating and drowning them in the Illinois Bayou after robbing them to fund a white-supremacist organization. On July 16, Wesley Purkey was executed for the 1998 murder of a teenage girl, whom he kidnapped, raped, killed, dismembered and discarded in a septic pond. The next day, Dustin Honken was executed for five murders committed in 1993, including the execution-style shooting of two young girls, their mother, and two prospective witnesses against him in a federal prosecution for methamphetamine trafficking.

The death penalty is a difficult issue for many Americans on moral, religious and policy grounds. But as a legal issue, it is straightforward. The United States Constitution expressly contemplates “capital” crimes, and Congress has authorized the death penalty for serious federal offenses since President George Washington signed the Crimes Act of 1790. The American people have repeatedly ratified that decision, including through the Federal Death Penalty Act of 1994 signed by President Bill Clinton, the federal execution of Timothy McVeigh under President George W. Bush and the decision by President Barack Obama’s Justice Department to seek the death penalty against the Boston Marathon bomber and Dylann Roof .

The recent executions reflect that consensus, as the Justice Department has an obligation to carry out the law. The decision to seek the death penalty against Mr. Lee was made by Attorney General Janet Reno (who said she personally opposed the death penalty but was bound by the law) and reaffirmed by Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder.

Mr. Purkey was prosecuted during the George W. Bush administration, and his conviction and sentence were vigorously defended throughout the Obama administration. The judge who imposed the death sentence on Mr. Honken, Mark Bennett, said that while he generally opposed the death penalty, he would not lose any sleep over Mr. Honken’s execution.

In a New York Times Op-Ed essay published on July 17 , two of Mr. Lee’s lawyers criticized the execution of their client, which they contend was carried out in a “shameful rush.” That objection overlooks that Mr. Lee was sentenced more than 20 years ago, and his appeals and other permissible challenges failed, up to and including the day of his execution.

Mr. Lee’s lawyers seem to endorse a system of endless delays that prevent a death sentence from ever becoming real. But his execution date was announced almost a year ago, and was initially set for last December. It was delayed when his lawyers obtained six more months of review by unsuccessfully challenging the procedures used to carry out his lethal injection.

After an appellate court rejected their claim as “without merit,” the Justice Department rescheduled Mr. Lee’s execution, providing an additional four weeks of notice. Yet on the day of the rescheduled execution, after family members of his victims had traveled to Terre Haute, Ind., to witness the execution, a District Court granted Mr. Lee’s request for further review. That court entered a last-minute reprieve that the Supreme Court has said should be an “extreme exception.”

Given the long delay that had already occurred, the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to lift the order so the execution could proceed. Mr. Lee’s lawyers opposed that request, insisting that overturning the order would result in their client’s imminent execution. After reviewing the matter, the court granted the government’s request , rebuked the District Court for creating an unjustified last-minute barrier, and directed that the execution could proceed.

In the final minutes before the execution was to occur, Mr. Lee’s lawyers claimed the execution could not proceed because Mr. Lee still had time to seek further review of an appellate court decision six weeks earlier lifting a prior stay of execution. The Justice Department decided to pause the execution for several hours while the appellate court considered and promptly rejected Mr. Lee’s request. That cautious step, taken to ensure undoubted compliance with court orders, is irreconcilable with the suggestion that the department “rushed” the execution or disregarded any law. Mr. Lee’s final hours awaiting his fate were a result of his own lawyers’ choice to assert a non-meritorious objection at the last moment.

Mr. Lee’s lawyers also disregarded the cost to victims’ families of continued delay. Although they note that some members of Mr. Lee’s victims’ families opposed his execution, others did not. Nor did the family members of Wesley Purkey’s victim, Jennifer Long, who were in Terre Haute on Wednesday afternoon. When the District Court again imposed another last-minute stoppage, granting more time for Mr. Purkey’s lawyers to argue (among other things) that he did not understand the reason for his execution, the Justice Department again sought Supreme Court review.

As the hours wore on, Justice Department officials asked Ms. Long’s father if he would prefer to wait for another day. The answer was unequivocal: He would stay as long as it took. As Ms. Long’s stepmother later said, “We just shouldn’t have had to wait this long.” The Supreme Court ultimately authorized the execution just before 3 a.m. In his final statement, Mr. Purkey apologized to “Jennifer’s family” for the pain he had caused, contradicting the claim of his lawyers that he did not understand the reason for his execution.

The third execution, of Dustin Honken, occurred on schedule, but still too late for some of his victims’ families. John Duncan — the father of the victim Lori Duncan and grandfather of her slain daughters, Kandace (age 10) and Amber (age 6) — had urged Mr. Honken’s execution for years. As John Duncan was dying of cancer in 2018, he asked family members to promise they would witness the execution on his behalf. On July 17, they did. “Finally,” they said in a statement, “justice is being done.”

Mr. Lee’s lawyers and other death penalty opponents are entitled to disagree with that sentiment. But if the United States is going to allow capital punishment, a white-supremacist triple murderer would seem the textbook example of a justified case. And if death sentences are going to be imposed, they cannot just be hypothetical; they eventually have to be carried out, or the punishment will lose its deterrent and retributive effects.

Rather than forthrightly opposing the death penalty and attempting to change the law through democratic means, however, Mr. Lee’s lawyers and others have chosen the legal and public-relations equivalent of guerrilla war. They sought to obstruct by any means the administration of sentences that Congress permitted, juries supported and the Supreme Court approved. And when those tactics failed, they accused the Justice Department of “a grave threat to the rule of law,” even though it operated entirely within the law enacted by Congress and approved by the Supreme Court. The American people can decide for themselves which aspects of that process should be considered “shameful.”

Jeffrey A. Rosen is the deputy attorney general.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram .

18 Advantages and Disadvantages of the Death Penalty

The death penalty, or “capital punishment” if one prefers a friendlier term, is the planned killing of an individual by a government or ruling entity in response to a crime. It is considered the just punishment for a person legally convicted of an action which is deemed a safety threat to society.

Most states in the U.S. which allow for the death penalty due so because of murder. Capital punishment is a legal penalty at the federal level in the United States for murder as well, along with treason, espionage, piracy, certain drug-trafficking offenses, or the attempted murder of a juror, court officer, or witness in some situation.

As of 2018, every prisoner under a federal death sentence was convicted of aggravated murder. There were 63 offenders on “death row” at the Federal Bureau of Prisons as of September 2018. The U.S. military has a death penalty as well, and the branches have executed 135 people since 1916. That includes Private Eddie Slovik, who was executed on January 31, 1945 under the conviction of desertion.

There are passionate people on both sides of this debate, so it is imperative to take a look at the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty with an open mind whenever possible.

List of the Advantages of the Death Penalty

1. A sentence of life in prison is disproportionate to the capital crime. Almost all death sentences handed out by the United States or state-level justice systems are for aggravated murder. Only two people were on death row for a non-murder offense when the Supreme Court last ruled on the validity of the death penalty in 2008. Both inmates were convicted of the aggravated rate of a child under the age of 13, including Patrick Kennedy who was sentenced for raping his step-daughter.

“As it relates to crimes against individuals… the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim’s life was not taken,” wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy in 2008 when the sentence was overturned. If a convicted criminal receives life in prison for taking a life, proponents argue that this is not justice because the outcome is disproportionate to the action taken.

2. The death penalty can provide a deterrent against violent crime. When many criminologists define deterrence in terms of the death penalty, they are looking at how the presence of this sentencing can stop violent acts by preventing someone to commit them in the first place. It becomes a value proposition. Do I want to risk my life because I have a willingness right now to take the life of another? In that circumstance, 88% of criminologists agree that the presence of the death penalty is not useful.

What we must look at for this advantage is the actual convicted person. Capital punishment creates an irreversible deterrent that the murderer will never get the chance to take a life again. It is a form of incapacitation that helps to protect society by preventing future crime in this manner.

“Capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else,” said Ernest van den Haag, Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University. “They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts. Whatever people fear most is likely to deter the most.”

3. It doesn’t need to be carried out with brutality. The focus of the death penalty in the United States today is focused on ending life as quickly and as peacefully as possible. That is why the process is typically carried out through the use of a lethal injection, creating a medically-imposed death that involves the least amount of pain possible.

At various points in history, the death penalty was carried out by beheading, stoning, crucifixion, electrocution, shooting, or hanging. Saudi Arabia still carries out sword-based executions, while India, Japan, and Singapore use hanging. China uses a single shot to the back of the head, while Indonesia uses a firing squad.

4. The death penalty does not re-victimize the affected family. There is rightful sympathy or empathy directed toward the family of someone accused of a capital crime. These people are losing a loved one because of this legal structure. The family of the victim has also lost someone as well. The person who does not deserve sympathy is the criminal who decided to commit the capital act (usually aggravated murder) in the first place. When the death penalty is one of the possible consequences that someone faces for their conduct, then it shields the family of the victim from another form of victimization.

If given life without parole, there is always the possibility that the criminal could discuss their side of the case, describe the actions they took, or issue threats to other members of the family. Capital punishment eventually stops this issue so that the victim’s family can feel like they can be safe again.

5. It eliminates the possibility of an escape and future victims. Drug lord Joaquin Guzman, better known as “El Chapo,” has a long history of being captured and escaping from maximum security prisons. In 2001, with the help of guards that he bribed, he escaped in a dirty laundry cart, and then into the trunk of a waiting Monte Carlo. He hid in tunnels for days when captured in Mazatlan in 2014. He then escaped through a tunnel in 2015 out of Mexico’s top-security prison.

When there is a life in prison sentence, then an individual has nothing to lose with their effort to escape. What can the criminal justice system do to that person except add more time to their life sentence? By using capital punishment, this threat disappears – which means there will be no future victims either.

6. The application of capital punishment in just ways can limit prison overpopulation issues. People are living longer today than arguably at any other time in history. California’s criminal justice system became so overcrowded with prisoners that the federal courts had to step in to order changes or risk letting convicted prisoners loose because there was no room to house them. The state has the largest death room in the country, and with new capital convictions happening every month, their prison ran out of room.

There were 750 people on death row in California in 2015, up from 646 in 2006. By managing this process so that it is efficient, including any appeals or pleadings which are legally permitted, it becomes possible to manage the population and limit costs without creating the potential for harm in the rest of society.

List of the Disadvantages of the Death Penalty

1. It is the ultimate denial of human rights when implemented. Amnesty International describes the implementation of capital punishment like this. “The death penalty is the ultimate denial of human rights,” the organization says. “It is the premeditated and cold-blooded killing of a human being by the state in the name of justice. It violates the right to life. It is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment. There can never be any justification for torture or cruel treatment.”

The definition of justice can be a tricky element. How a society chooses to punish its offenders is more reflective of them than it is the choices that criminals make. Sparing someone’s life, even if that person took the life of another, takes vengeance out of the scenario. Being pro-life by definition means that one must be for every life.

2. The death penalty can execute someone who is possible innocent. Ever since the United States reinstated the death penalty after a Supreme Court ruling allowed for it as part of the justice system, over 1,400 people have been executed by the state or federal government. Courts in the U.S. don’t usually entertain a claim of innocence until after the convicted individual dies of natural causes or goes through with the execution. There are 15 cases where there is strong evidence to suggest innocence out of this number, with the latest being Carlton Michael Gary, who was executed in 2018 by the state of Georgia.

A police statement withheld from the defense indicated that the witness who identified Gary in court was actually asleep at the time and that she could not describe or identify her attacker. DNA evidence left at the scene excluded him as well. Improper handling of evidence and a lack of presentation of other items were also part of the issue, along with a lack of federal review despite all of these concerns.

Even one innocent person being put to death by the state is too many.

3. The cost to prosecute the death penalty is much higher than other cases. When the state of Oklahoma examined the differences in cases where capital punishment was the desired outcome sought with a conviction rather than life in prison, the overall cost of pursuing the death penalty was 3.2 times higher. This data is similar to that found in a review of 15 state studies that looked at the cost of this issue and found that seeking the death penalty raises the average cost of a case by over $700,000. Even the most conservative estimates from this information finds that there is a $110,000 increase in expense.

When you incorporate the time spent on death row, the cost of the lengthy appeals process in the United States, and the issues with secure housing, it can cost over $1 million more to proceed with capital punishment instead of a sentence of life without the possibility of parole.

4. There may not be any deterrence to crime with the death penalty in place. “I know that in practice, the death penalty does more harm than good,” said Police Chief James Abbot of West Orange, NJ. “So, while I hang on to my theoretical views, as I’m sure many of you will, I stand before you to say that society is better off without capital punishment. Life in prison without parole in a maximum-security detention facility is the better alternative.

When examining data between states with and without the death penalty, there are five specific conclusions to draw.

• States with the death penalty have higher murder rates than those without it.
• National trends do not impact local decisions by criminals to break the law, whether the death penalty is present or not.
• There is no apparent correlation between the death penalty and changes in murder rates.
• Capital punishment has no discernible effect on the killing of law enforcement officials.
• The abolition of the death penalty occurs most often in states where the murder of police officers is a very low percentage of all homicides.

In 2014, there were 14,000 murders that took place in the United States, but there were only 35 executions that took place.

5. It is used to control political messages. The United States uses the death penalty exclusively for the punishment of crimes as defined by legal code and precedent. It is a principle which is not consistent for other countries in the world. 78% of global executions because of capital punishment come from just four countries when excluding China: Iraq, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.

Some countries, including Sudan and Iran, use the death penalty as a political tool. It becomes a way to punish political opponents who might want to take their country in a different direction. There were a total of 2,500 death sentences recorded in 54 countries in 2018, with about 20,000 people currently under sentence around the world at the end of the year.

6. Children are sometimes put to death through the use of capital punishment. There are at least 97 kids who were put to death by capital punishment laws in Iran since 1990. Another 145 child executions have happened in China, the Republic of Congo, Pakistan, Sudan, South Sudan, Yemen, Nigeria – and the United States.

Scott Hain, Toronto Patterson, T.J. Jones, Napoleon Beazley, Gerald Mitchell, Shaka Sankofa, Glen McGinnis, and Steven Roach were all put to death in the United States for a crime that they committed at age 17. Sean Sellers was executed when he was 29 for a crime that he committed when he was 16.

7. There is no going back after the execution takes place. When we carry out a death sentence, it is an irreversible sentence. Over 160 people sent to death row in the United States have either been exonerated of the crime or released because there was direct evidence of their innocence. Even though a grand jury must indict someone and then the case and sentencing are both held before another jury in the U.S., their finding that someone is guilty does not mean the individual is innocent.

Conservative estimates on the number of innocent people convicted in the United States suggest that at least 0.4% of convicted criminals are not guilty of the crimes for which they are accused. If the death penalty were not in place, then there would be time to reverse an unjust conviction.

8. The evidence obtained to justify the death penalty is sometimes tainted. There are specific guidelines in the United States today that limit how and when law enforcement can obtain evidence during questioning. This structure of protection is not always available around the world. There are numerous people executed after being convicted during an unfair trial, often on the basis of evidence or confessions obtained through the use of torture. Some defendants were not given adequate legal representation.

Some countries even use the death penalty as a mandatory punishment for specific offenses, which means the judge cannot consider the circumstances of the crime during the sentencing phase of a trial.

9. It tends to be applied in a discriminatory way. “The weight of the death penalty is disproportionally carried by those with less advantaged socio-economic backgrounds or belonging to a racial, ethnic, or religious minority,” writes Amnesty International. The Women Donors Network found that 95% of the elected prosecutors in the United States are white, and 79% of them are white men. In nine of the death penalty states, there was not a single elected prosecutor who came from a minority group.

Professor Katherine Beckett of the University of Washington found that jurors were 4.5 times more likely to impose a capital punishment sentence on a defendant who was black compared to a white defendant in a similar circumstance in an examination of 285 cases.

10. Family members of a victim are adversely impacted by the death penalty. The Marquette Law Review found that when family members go through the capital punishment process after someone they love becomes a victim, they have higher levels of mental, physical, and behavioral health problems when compared to when the perpetrator receives a sentence of life in prison. Although this issue does not happen in every circumstance, some family members can feel responsible for the fact that the government is putting this criminal to death.

Proponents would argue that capital punishment provides relief because it guarantees that person can no longer harm another, but there are many families who do not feel a sense of satisfaction with this action. If they are the ones who experience loss, then there should be a way to provide input for them.

11. There are very few prison escapes that occur, and fewer that involve violent criminals. The number of escapes from prison in the United States declined by more than 50% between 1998-2013, falling to a rate of 10.5 escapes per 10,000 prisoners in 2013. At the same time, the number of life sentences handed out by the court system has gone up by 500%. Most of the incidents that contribute to a prisoner escape come from low-security situations, like when 16 prisoners walked away from a work site and another 3 disappeared from a community work center.

Out of all of the reported escapes in 2013, only one inmate from a secured facility was able to get away.

12. Some people just don’t care. There are people who will always decide to operate outside of the rules that society sets for safety and security. These are the criminals that filter into and out of prison consistently until they end up spending their life there. Rehabilitation doesn’t work because there is no investment to be different. The death penalty is not going to stop someone from hurting another person in this situation because the criminal is living for the thrill of the moment instead of thinking about their future consequences.

Verdict on the Advantages and Disadvantages of the Death Penalty

As of May 2019, about 60% of the world’s population lives in a country, state, or province where the death penalty is a possible outcome for criminal conduct. There are 56 nations which retain the option for capital punishment for a variety of crimes, including incidents that do not include aggravated homicide.

Some countries execute people who are under the age of 18 when the crime was committed. It is used against those with intellectual or mental disabilities. There are times when it is applied after an unfair trial in clear violation of international laws and norms. “The death penalty is a symptom of a culture of violence,” writes Amnesty International, “not a solution to it.”

The advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty rely on several instruments to restrict its use to the most severe situations while providing states, provinces, and nations the freedom to implement it as local populations see fit. Whether it is the right or wrong approach is ultimately up to you to decide.

• IELTS Scores
• Life Skills Test
• Find a Test Centre
• Alternatives to IELTS
• General Training
• Academic Word List
• Topic Vocabulary
• Collocation
• Phrasal Verbs
• Writing eBooks
• Reading eBook
• All eBooks & Courses

Life in Prison or the Death Penalty

by Viktoriia (Ukraine)

What should happen to him?

Click here to add your own comments

Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How? Simply click here to return to IELTS Essay Feedback Forum .

Capital Punishment

by Azam (Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan)

Without capital punishment (the death penalty) our lives are less secure and crimes of violence increase. Capital punishment is essential to control violence in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree? I thoroughly agree with the proposition, capital punishment should be made mandatory in our society, where crime ratio is being increased day by day because we live in a world where people are not even certain about how they are going to return, either on legs or on shoulders. There is a law of physics, which is known as "Murphy's Law", which states that "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong". So whose duty is it to make it right again? To start with, the ratio of crime and terrorism is being so increased exponentially. People feel unsafe, even being at their own homes. Criminals show no compassion or mercy to those who are being held by them as captives. I do not know what they get by doing such heinous and diabolical acts. In my opinion, death penalty should be made as an essential punishment for those criminals and insurgents who love to annihilate the humanity or the society we live in, where people get massacred brutally just like flies in air. The good example of this is in most of middle-eastern countries where criminals get beheaded or hanged publicly for their wrongdoings, that is why their crime ratio is equivalent to almost zero. Crime is afterall a crime, irrespective of how big or small it is. By this i mean that, adopting such policy might frightens those criminals and make them to think at least ten times before bringing any kind of furor among citizen and annihilate them. On the other hand, many people or activists think that criminals are also humans so they also deserve another chance to rectify themselves to become a better citizen in future. From these facts, I would maintain that, no human-being happens to be an insurgent, criminal or terrorist by birth. It is just the time which plays as a best teacher for some and worst for some.

IELTS Capital Punishment Essay

Capital Punishment Essay

Please give some honest feedback. Without capital punishment (the death penalty) our lives are less secure and crimes of violence increase. Capital punishment in essential to control violence in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? With rising violence and ghost gun availability, normal people are more prone to danger now than ever. The whole judicial process consumes a lot of time and effort to punish the guilty. Furthermore, the lighter penalities fail to dither the culprit from repeating the crime placing the public in danger. I partially agree that capital punishment is needed to control violence and will try to explain the same below. Many criminals repeat their offending behavioural pattern as soon as they come out of the prison after serving the sentence as prison fails to bring any change in their basic nature. Plenty of criminals jailed in sexual assualt cases and robbery continue such behaviour once they are out again. Many racists and terrorists with extreme nature also follow the similar kind of pursuit. Also ghost guns without serial numbers and unexcepted attacks inspired from online videos mak it difficult to guard against vulnerable victims. capital punishment thus sounds good to deter offenders depending on the gravity of the situation as such people are too risky to be left out in to the society again. Nevertheless, awarding a death penalty to criminals cannot alone change their behaviour as observed in ISIS follwers who are prepared to die in their own attacks. Thus, death sentence cannot be a solution that reduces the crimes and secures public. Also, it assumes that perpetrators can never change rejecting the basic notion behind the punishment and legal process. Death is too severe and cannot be reversed in terms of penalty. Thus, capital punishment fails to address the cause of concern in reducing the crime rate but it is imperative in few cases of extremely grave crimes. Just like how one shoe doesn't fit every foot, one punishment cannot address all the uprising violence in the society alone. It surely does apply to few scenarios and some other measures are to be taken to address the elephant in the room.

Click here to post comments

Death Penalty

by sadineni (Bangalore)

With Out Capital punishment (The death Penalty) our lives are less secure and crimes of violence increase. Do you agree or disagree? Death is same for both good people and as well as bad people (criminals). Fear of death is the deepest and strongest fear in the humane race. Nobody raise hand aganist this point. But here the question is whether capital punishment is essential to controle violence in society? Can We use this fear of death to controle violence? Killing a person who was killed other person. How far it is correct? In Recent years, If we see some crimes. even death penality is not sufficient to punish the criminals of those crimes like Nirbhaya case in India, Terrorist attack on Taj hotel in India and famous attack on world trade towers. As i already mentioned inherited death will be there in all living creatures in this universe. We can user this fear of death to prevent crime in society by installing the fear in peoples mind by hanging the criminal in the crime like nirbhaya case in India. If some body ask the question, How far it is correct to kill a person with the name of punishment, then deffinetly my answer is "yes it is correct" Because we have to see the intention behind killing the person. A soldier killing an enemy is not at all a crime but a person who was killed other person for the sake of money is deffinetly a crime. Similarly killing a person who was killed other person is to prevent the crime and to make justice to the victim. Capital punishment is not a new concept to us, It is there from our ancient times. So i can conclude my argument as capital punishment is essential to controle violance in society along with efforts to chnage the idiology and way of thinking of criminals .There should be strong system not to misuse the capital punishment,other wise it may cause furthermore violence in society instead of decrease violence in society.

Death Penalty Essay

Some people advocate the death penalty for those who committed violent crimes. Others say that capital punishment is unacceptable in contemporary society. Describe the advantages and disadvantages of the death penalty and give your opinion. It's always said that "forgiving and making people learn from the mistakes is the best solution".The death penalty is something that is given to the people who committed an absolute brutal or cruel crime. As it is known that every coin has two different sides and every aspect or decision has both advantages and disadvantages. In detail, the death penalty when given to the criminals the authorities hang them or kill them on a decided date. The death penalty brings fear in the people who think of attempting a crime and people will never have the audacity to commit a crime. Which results in clearance of the negatives in the society and keeping it safe. In other words, the death penalty brings awareness to people who commit an offense and force them to choose the right path. On the contrary, this causes a loss of human life and great grief to their friends and family. An innocent person may lose their due to this punishment. For an instance, many criminals these days use innocent people as a part of their crime, and later these people are caught instead of the original criminals. If these people are given the death penalty this results in taking away an innocents life. Also, this may lead to a revolt by the public on authorities. Moreover. killing someone is never a favorable solution, Teaching them the way of life and how to exceptionally use their ideas for a better living would be much more satisfactory and ideal. A punishment should teach someone how to go on the right way by following the rules and regulations, but should never kill someone. Therefore, I support the idea that capital punishment is unacceptable in contemporary society. Authorities should try to avoid death penalties to the maxing extent and should promote the ideology of changing the criminal's mindsets and thoughts and make them a better human being.

Before you go...

Check out the ielts buddy band 7+ ebooks & courses.

Would you prefer to share this page with others by linking to it?

• Click on the HTML link code below.
• Copy and paste it, adding a note of your own, into your blog, a Web page, forums, a blog comment, your Facebook account, or anywhere that someone would find this page valuable.

Band 7+ eBooks

"I think these eBooks are FANTASTIC!!! I know that's not academic language, but it's the truth!"

Linda, from Italy, Scored Band 7.5

IELTS Modules:

Other resources:.

• All Lessons
• Band Score Calculator
• Writing Feedback
• Speaking Feedback
• Teacher Resources
• Free Downloads
• Recent Essay Exam Questions
• Books for IELTS Prep
• Useful Links

Recent Articles

Decreasing House Sizes Essay

Apr 06, 24 10:22 AM

Latest IELTS Writing Topics - Recent Exam Questions

Apr 04, 24 02:36 AM

IELTS Essay: English as a Global Language

Apr 03, 24 03:49 PM

Important pages

IELTS Writing IELTS Speaking IELTS Listening   IELTS Reading All Lessons Vocabulary Academic Task 1 Academic Task 2 Practice Tests

Connect with us

Copyright © 2022- IELTSbuddy All Rights Reserved

IELTS is a registered trademark of University of Cambridge, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia. This site and its owners are not affiliated, approved or endorsed by the University of Cambridge ESOL, the British Council, and IDP Education Australia.

• Privacy Policy

Death Penalty or Capital Punishment Advantages and Benefits Essay

Capital punishment is a highly debated subject all over the world. Life is so precious since science or technology failed to unveil the miseries of life till now. Capital punishment is normally given to criminals who cause severe damage to the life of innocent people without any convincing reasons. Advocates of capital punishment argue that hardcore criminals will never rectify their behavior and releasing them from prisons may create threats to the lives of innocent people again. In their opinion, keeping hardcore criminals in prison for a lifelong period is expensive and meaningless and hence giving capital punishment to such people can be justified. At the same time opponents of capital punishment believe that by giving capital punishment to the criminals, the criminal justice system is also repeating the same mistake committed by the criminals even though the criminal justice system may have some convincing reasons

The death penalty has for ages been a common practice among almost all human societies. In fact, it may well be said that the application of execution extends to prehistoric times as communal punishment for certain offenses included corporal punishment, banishment, shunning and death sentence on the law breaker all aimed at compensating the society or the victim of a criminal.

It has indeed been common practice to execute law breakers and political opponents in virtually all societies. The purpose of such executions has mainly been to contain political dissent and to punish criminals. Today, close to 58 countries around the world actively employ the penalty against those who commit capital offenses. Although close to 96 countries have abolished the use of death penalties against humans, several others still have it still entrenched within their judicial systems without practicing it for at least the last ten years owing to its controversial nature.

The death penalty has drawn great and uncommon controversy throughout the world with different groups and members of society taking different stands concerning the subject. In fact, the subject of death penalty is a matter of active debate even among states, nations and territories. With regard to the subject, people often take differing stands even though they may share similar political, religious and cultural ideologies.

Introduction

According to Sharp, (1997) approximately 5900 persons have been sentenced to death and 358 executed (from 1973-96) in Untied States (See appendix). 56 murderers were executed in 1995 alone, a record number for the modern death penalty. Moreover, executions are seen as the appropriate punishment for certain criminals committing specific crimes. So says the U.S. Supreme Court and so say most death penalty supporters (Sharp, 1997). As of December 2008, United States had executed 1,136 criminals (Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty (Capital Punishment), 2009). Death penalty is a controversial subject all over the world. The right of the government or the criminal justice system to take the life of a criminal under any circumstances is highly debated in United States. Even though imposition of death penalty in United States is extremely rare, many people believe that even if thousands of criminals are escaped from punishments, not even a single innocent should be punished or executed. But because of the loopholes in criminal justice system it is quite possible that innocents may undergo capital punishments. Life is the most precious thing in this world which nobody can create. If we are unable to create something, we have no right to destroy it according to many people. At the same time lack of severity of punishments often result in increased number of serious criminal activities.

According to Ferdic et al (2008), one of the biggest challenges of criminal justice system is to keep its competing notions of due process and crime control in balance. A heavy focus on either of them may have detrimental effect on American society (Ferdic et al, 2008, p.4). Nominal punishments cannot prevent serious crimes in the current era in which suicide bombers are ready to sacrifice even their lives for executing their plots. More focus given to the human right issues will prevent the criminal justice system from enforcing severe punishments like death penalties

Death penalty has been in use in the United States for centuries. It has been used a punishment for capital crimes such as murder, hijackings, conspiracy to commit a capital crime and also treason. The employment of the death penalty has raised controversies about its effectiveness in maintenance of law and order. Various states have had their opinions about death penalty with some upholding it while others scrapping it from the laws. However, there exists no general agreement as to whether the death penalty is an effective punishment to deal with capital crimes.

The proponents of the penalty derive their arguments from the fact that is cheaper than holding convict for life, and acts as a deterrence to crime. However, the proponents are tasked with a heavy burden of proof assignment that has not been successful so far. This leads to the question whether the death penalty deters crime. The paper seeks to answer the question through an argumentative approach.

According to Amnesty International USA, the assertion that the death penalty reduces murder rates are flawed (Amnesty USA n.d). The fundamental basics to prove that it does not deter crimes are evident in the murder statistics difference between states that employ the death penalty and the states that do not use the penalty

Death Penalty Definition

The death penalty is the pre-meditated and planned process of killing a human being in reaction to an offence committed by the person (Banner, 2002).. Also known as capital punishment, the act is normally done by a government against a person who has legally been convicted through a legal or judicial process.

There are several methods that have been employed in executing capital punishments against people accused of committing capital offenses as noted by Hood (2002). Historically, the death sentence was carried out mostly in the most painful of ways. In many ancient societies, convicts were often stoned to death while in other societies the convicts’ heads were severed using different means. For example in ancient Russia, executioners used swords to chop of the heads of those who were condemned to die while in France, the victim’s head was cut off using a guillotine.

Ferocious or venomous animals were also used in some societies to cause the deaths of those who were unlucky enough to be convicted of rave and unforgivable mistakes. Commonly, lions, snakes, or leopards were unleashed upon the convicts in an ultimate move to cause their death. Other means of causing the death of wrongdoers in ancient societies included boiling to death, crushing the wrongdoer using various means, crucifixion, and dismemberment. Yet again, wrongdoers in other societies would be slowly sliced, decapitated, or sawed. Both in the Old and New Testaments of the bible, it is recorded of quite a number of instances that wrongdoers were stoned to death. The Jews also, would punish perceived capital offenders by death by crucifying them as was the case of Jesus Christ.

While most of these means were common in ancient societies, their use in some modern societies persists. In some Islamic countries for example, people are still executed by stoning more like the Jews performed their act in ancient times. In modern times, capital punishment is commonly administered through hanging, electrocution, shooting by firing squads and through deathly injections. One main difference between the execution of death penalties in ancient times and many of today’s societies is the fact that previously, some societies demanded that even the members of family of the wrongdoer be executed together with them (the wrongdoer). This was done in association irrespective of whether the relatives participated in the crime or whether they were innocent (Benn, 2002). This has however changed with time as modern societies recognize the concept of natural rights and embrace the idea of citizenship.

Capital Offenses and Capital Punishment Statistics

Across the world, crimes that warrant capital punishment are greatly varied depending on nationality. In many countries and cultures though, crimes such as murder, treason, adultery, incest, sodomy and theft commonly result in the sentencing of convict to the death. Other crimes that warrant capital punishment in various jurisdictions include rape, drug trafficking and homicide. In China, one may also be punished by execution for engaging in high level corruption and for trafficking humans. World military organizations have commonly applied the death penalty for several reasons the common ones being cowardice, mutiny, desertion and insubordination (Bedau and Cassell, 2005). This has always been aimed at maintaining discipline among entities that are commonly referred to as disciplined forces. Apart from executing their own wrongdoers, military units have often punished those of the opposing camp (enemy militants) by executing them using one means or another.

According to Amnesty International’s death penalty annual report for the year 2008, over 2,390 individuals were executed in at least 25 nations while at least 52 nations across the globe sentenced over 8,864 people to death (Amnesty International, 2009). At least 34 states in the United States and the federal government, by October 2009, had officially sanctioned the death penalty according to the organization. The report further states that between 1976 and October 2009, at least 1,177 felons had been killed through capital punishment in the United States alone. Apart from the USA, Middle Eastern and Asian nations are known to favor greatly the application of the death penalty.

Public Execution

Death penalty has been executed in a variety of ways. The most common and ancient method is strangulation. Most of the strangulation scenes were performed in public. With the evolution of execution methods, public executions ceased to exist in the USA. However, there are arguments about the issue of public executions. Both proponents and opponents of the penalty have valid reasons to justify their stands.

Proponents believe that the death penalty can act as deterrence to crime. Consequently, effective use of the penalty can minimize the criminal minds in the society. The impact of execution scenes lingers longer and deeper into the minds of people who have witnessed it. This implies that people will always beware of following the death penalty path. Public executions also involved painful and heartbreaking techniques such as strangulation, which aggravates the need to maintain sanity and avoid capital crimes.

Despite the perceived advantages of public executions, there are numerous issues that show the distastefulness of public executions. The moral basis of the issue and its eventual implementation is a question of interest to the community. First, the public perceptions about executions dwindle when the acts are committed in public. This makes the society wary about the long term impacts of observing the scenes. The disturbing episodes can bring long term physiological complication to people and especially the family members of the convict.

National and International Support for and against Capital Punishment

Although capital punishment has not been common practice in the United States, Some quarters claim that since colonial times, the country has witnessed close to 13 thousand people get executed on legal grounds. A United States Supreme Court annulled the death penalty in 1972 and reduced the punishment of those on death row to life imprisonment as noted by Palmer (1998). However, another supreme court later in 1976 ruled that the form of punishment was in fact constitutional (Banner, 2002). This dramatic ruling has seen more than 1160 people face the executioner’s wrath between 1976 and early 2009 in the United States.

Although the practice is common among the most populous countries of the world including the United States and China, death penalty is uncommon in certain regions. Close to all European states and countries that border the Pacific Ocean such as Australia, Timor Leste and New Zealand are known to have abolished the death sentence (Council of Europe, 1999).

Public support for the execution of offenders has relatively dwindled among nationals of countries such as New Zealand, Australia and Canada among others. However, special cases such as terrorism, child murder and large sale murder often cause significant ripples in support of the death penalty’s reinstitution.

During one of the United Nations’ (UN) General Assemblies in 2007, the international body garnered for the universal abolition of capital punishment.  Quite a number of conventions have also voiced their views with regard to capital punishment. The European Convention on Human Rights, American Convention on Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights have all pressed for the abandonment of and prohibition of death penalty as a means of punishing wrongdoers (Schabas, 2002).

Many international organization including the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe has required those countries that wish to gain membership to abolish capital punishment (Council of Europe, 1999).

Views about Capital Punishment

One of the main historic events that have drawn great attention to the world’s views and concerns about capital punishment was the case of Nobel Peace prize nominee and author, Mr. Williams, who was executed through capital punishment for his engagement in criminal activities before his reformation. William’s case has forced the public to reflect on the foundations and purposes of applying capital punishment.

Williams’ case has drawn debate over whether or not the aim of capital punishment is to eliminate a person who may cause more harm from society, whether its purpose is to exclude from society an individual who is beyond rehabilitation, and whether the purpose of the death penalty is to deter potential criminals from performing certain activities. The case further draws society to ask whether the punishment is aimed at punishing the criminal, and whether it is meant to be a retribution against acts committed by the criminal to his/her victim(s). The following sections of this report will analyze the advantages, benefits and pros of capital punishment or death penalty.

Arguments in Favor of Capital Punishment or Death Penalty

It has been agreed among different people and experts that the prison serves three main purposes; first, the prison contains the criminal and therefore keeps the society safe from further harm, secondly it is used as a punishment by denying some liberties to the wrongdoer, and finally to rehabilitate the prisoner (Bedau and Cassell, 2005). The third reason is founded on the premise that when the prisoner is finally released from custody, they will not go back to crime. Capital punishment may serve the first two courses but gives no provision for the realization of the third. Once a prisoner’s life is ended, there is absolutely no chance that they could be rehabilitated in death.

Several people have argued in favor of the dreaded capital punishment as a means of punishing people for their grievous acts. The reasoning behind this favor is based on the fact that severe crimes demand or call for equally severe punishments (Bedau and Cassell, 2005). It is also comes from the notion that when a n individual is given capital punishment, other would-be committers of similar crimes are dissuaded from proceeding with their plans in fear of similarly losing their lives. This effectively helps in curbing crime in the community and in the larger society.

One prosecuting Attorney of Indiana has in favor of the punishment stated that some people have ultimately earned the punishment by committing acts such as cold blooded murder (Bedau and Cassell, 2005). The Attorney claims that life is sacred and must be preserved at all costs against those who would be tempted towards killing innocent persons and thus cheapening their lives.  In his and many other people’s views thence, the society retains the right to protect itself from further acts of murder among other capital offenses by acting to protect the its members in self defense. In this respect, the society has the right to completely eliminate those who commit capital offenses by applying capital punishments.

Another reason some people favor capital punishment is based on the fact that when an offender is imprisoned, he/she could commit a similar crime or one that is worse once he/she is released from custody. The death penalty in this view offers the best solution to such a problem as it completely eliminates the offender from the society. The society hence remains safe by being devoid of the criminal and others of their ilk. Capital punishment, according to those of this school of thought is most appropriate for those who are considered to be serial killers, and those who even after facing prison life remain unchangeable (Bedau and Cassell, 2005)..

Even in matters of life and death, there are people who consider matters economic very seriously. Some argue that instead of issuing life imprisonment to convicts, the better option would be giving the death penalty. This is so out of the reasoning that it would be better for a person to face death rather than spend the rest of their lives in futility and behind bars – in which case they remain an expensive economic expense to the state and the national of a country (Bedau and Cassell, 2005). In other words, it is better to avoid spending on someone who could as well commit other terrifying crimes by putting them to death.

Pojman and Reiman (1998) argue that the death penalty can be equated to the pain and suffering that victims of a crime face when they are attacked or harmed by the convict. In this regard, some people believe that anyone who takes the life of another person should themselves have no right to live. Thus, by applying capital punishment to such a one, the criminal’s victim’s family members get the feeling that justice has been obtained eventually.

Yet another argument that has been postulated in favor of capital punishment is with regard to the safety and security of prison guards and fellow inmates. Some people argue that those who have committed horrifying crimes such as murder generally retain their violent personalities even when placed under custody (Phil for Humanity, nd). They could therefore attack other prisoners or wardens and commit the same crimes s they had earlier committed. In order to avoid such cases, others prefer that some criminals should be placed under in death row.

A critical review of the arguments in favor of capital punishment reveals that when foundation of such arguments is roughly for the development of a better society. The arguments however place very little concern or emphasis on the issues of morality, ethics, and religious beliefs and affiliations. The following section will discuss the arguments that have been stated against the death penalty.

Positives of Death Penalty or Capital Punishment

In the absence of capital punishment, criminal activities may increase a lot. We are living in a world in which people are ready to even sacrifice their lives for protecting their beliefs. Suicide bombers succeeded in killing even the former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. If capital punishments were prohibited, it is easy for criminals to commit serious crimes and escape from the punishments with the help of loopholes provided by the criminal justice system. Even if they were convicted; still they can enjoy the luxury of facilities like probation, parole, bail etc and live a substantial period of their remaining life outside the prison. Under such circumstances, the number of criminal activities may grow up. If capital punishment is in force, criminals will think twice before committing a serious crime as there is no chance for them to escape from the prison if they were convicted for capital punishment.

According to the supporters of capital punishment, a criminal, who is deliberately taking the life of others don’t have the moral or ethical right to live in this world. In their opinion, if taking the life of a criminal saves the life of other innocent people, there is no harm in doing so. Man cannot live like animals as he has superior wisdom compared to animals. But before declaring capital punishment to a criminal, the criminal justice system should consider all the dimensions of the crime happened and also the future threat the criminal may raise to the lives of innocent people.  “It is said that it dissuades others in society from committing such severe offences when a criminal is given a death penalty. Because of fear of losing their life, they would refrain from such offenses. This would assist to reduce the crime rate in society.” (10 Pros and Cons of Capital Punishment, 2010)

In Coker vs Georgia case the Supreme Court of America held that the death penalty was a disproportionate penalty for the crime of rape of an adult woman considering the severity and irrevocability of death penalty. Moreover, Louisiana State Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the capital punishment for the rape of a child below 12 years of age in State vs Bethley case (Ferdic et al, 2008, p.42). Keeping a criminal in prison for a prolonged period is an expensive act. The criminal has no right to sustain his life if he has not shown any sign of rectifying his mistake at the expense of the mercy of the tax payers. Under such circumstances, capital punishment may save money and reduce threat to the society. In many cases, persons with criminal behavior repeat the crimes once they released from the prisons.  For example, there is no point in believing that Bin Laden like hardcore terrorists may correct themselves if we succeeded in arresting and sending him to the prison. Such criminals have the belief that sacrificing the life for the religion may bring salvation to them. In short, advocates of capital punishment argue that hard core criminals must be executed in order to save the lives of other innocent people.

Arguments in Favor of Capital Punishment based on the Interview with a Sociologist

The sociologist has taken an entirely opposite view with respect to capital punishment. In response to question related to the justification of capital punishment, life of the innocent people is more important than the life of the criminal. In his opinion, people should obey certain laws in order to sustain a society in a healthy manner. In his opinion, hardcore criminals will never change their behavior even if we give them second or third chance. He has pointed out that majority of the current criminal activities are performed because of the awareness that a criminal can escape from severe punishments with the help of expert lawyers. In his opinion, capital punishment will force a criminal to think twice of thrice before committing a serious crime.

He has quoted the opinions of Van den Haag in order to substantiate his argument in favor of death penalty.  “Distribution, Miscarriages of information and Deterrence are often cited as reasons to justify death penalty. Equality is morally less important than justice and justice is independent of distributional inequalities” (Van den Haag, 1986). Both equality and justice are travelling in opposite directions. He explained that if we leave criminals alive in the name of equality, innocent people may not get justice as their lives will keep on losing. So equality cannot be equated against justice while analyzing capital punishment.

I asked about the possibility of avoiding capital punishment in certain exceptional cases. The sociologist cited Ferdic et al’s view to answer my query ; “partisan advocacy on one occasion from both sides will encourage the ultimate goal of convicting the guilty and freeing the innocent” (Ferdic et al, 2008, p.37). He has argued that guilt needs punishment under all circumstances. However, he has pointed out that if the court is convinced by the repentance of a criminal, it can consider the replacement of death penalty by life term.

Ethical Theory related to the Argument of the Sociologist

One of the most popular ethical theory; “Utilitarianism says “do the best you can—actually achieve the best outcome available given your opportunities, resources, skills, knowledge, and so on””(House, 2007, p.2). In other words, utilitarianism justifies all the actions based on the utility it provides to the society. Giving death penalty to criminals will help the society to reduce crimes and also to reduce the threats to the lives of innocent people.

“Utilitarianism firstly expounded by Jeremy Bentham, says moral actions are those which produce, the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people” (Discuss the idea that capital punishment is only justified because criminals are permanently disabled of causing harm, 2011). Since the execution of a criminal reduces the threats to the lives of many innocent people, capital punishment can be justified when we analyze it with respect to utilitarianism. Life of more people is more important than the life of one person, especially that of a criminal.

Pros of Death Penalty or Capital Punishment

Capital punishment has been the most popular punishments for most heinous crimes. The arguments for and against the punishment are based on the extent of damage and the message to be sent to potential criminals. In the light of offenses that deserve highest punishment, the proponents have reserved their arguments on the advantages of having capital punishment. The arguments have been supported by the following issues;

Capital punishment is considered just and cost effective. Despite serving justice to the victims, the costs of holding capital criminals for life are reduced. Holding criminals for life implies various costs to the states and the government in terms of resources spent in maintaining the convict at the penitentiary institution. Such costs include food, clothing, security and medical services. All the mentioned services come at a cost to the taxpayer. So, the more life sentences, the more taxpayers dig deeper into their pockets. The overall costs of maintaining penitentiary services can thus be reduced by sentencing extreme crimes by death.

Death penalty is regarded as the most severe form of punishment in the world. This implies that capital offenses should be punished by capital punishment. The advantage of execution is that it offers enough lessons to potential criminals who are deterred from risking their lives through the penalty. Moreover, death penalty is regarded as the best way to serve justice to victims of murder and other capital crimes. Safety of the community is preserved by death sentence because hardened criminals can exploit the imperfections of the penitentiary facilities to escape can pose imminent danger to the public. Consequently, a chilling example is set to other criminals thus dissuading them from following the death penalty path.

Research has it that most capital punishment victims are very violent or swift in criminal acts. This implies that they pose a danger to every person they are in contact with. It beats the logic when such an individual is locked in a cell with other inmates of lesser crimes. The main issue is that the criminal history and the degree of damage can determine the behavior of an inmate even in prison. For example, given a maximum of a life sentence, a convict is at liberty to cause any mayhem since he or she is under the most extreme punishment. The action may hurt, or even lead to deaths of fellow inmates. In rare cases, capital criminals, such as terrorists, may radicalize the inmates who are serving lesser sentences. This poses a greater danger to the national security. As such, it is better to carry out the execution.

It may generally be stated that death penalty or capital punishment is the pre-meditated and planned killing of an individual in reaction to an offence committed by the person.  In modern times, punishment by death is normally done by a government against a person who has legally been convicted through a legal or judicial process. Capital punishment may perhaps be considered to be the greatest and worst punishment that a normal human being can go through as it involves the termination of the individual’s life.

Death penalty or capital punishment is a highly controversial topic. Even though America is a democratic country, death penalties are more in America compared to many other countries. There are many arguments in favor and against capital punishment. Proponents of death penalty believe that it is better to give capital punishments to the hardcore criminals in order to save the life of innocent people, save money, reduce criminal activities etc.

Related Posts

Tips for resolving legal disputes, the conundrum of non-criminalization of marital rape in..., the stages of strategic crime analysis report, negative effects of drugs legalization, examination of school shootings and student safety from..., international and non-international armed conflict, comparison between democracy vs. dictatorship, america vs china political system, gun control: legal, psychology and political viewpoint, difference between criminal and civil court system, leave a comment cancel reply.

Please enter an answer in digits: 17 − three =

• Free Samples
• Premium Essays
• Editing Services Editing Proofreading Rewriting
• Extra Tools Essay Topic Generator Thesis Generator Citation Generator GPA Calculator Study Guides Donate Paper
• Essay Writing Help
• About Us About Us Testimonials FAQ
• Studentshare
• Advantages And Disadvantages Of Capital Punishment

Advantages And Disadvantages Of Capital Punishment - Essay Example

• Subject: English
• Type: Essay
• Level: Masters
• Pages: 2 (500 words)
• Downloads: 8
• Author: jmurazik

Extract of sample "Advantages And Disadvantages Of Capital Punishment"

English 4th April, A Comparison of the Advantages and Disadvantages of Capital Punishment Capital punishment refers to the killing of criminals guilty of grave crimes as a way of punishing them for the crimes that they have committed. As a form of punishment, capital punishment has a number of advantages and disadvantages. This paper compares and contrasts the two main advantages and disadvantages of capital punishment. One of the advantages of capital punishment is that it helps to deter crime.

This is because once criminals have been killed, they will not have another chance of committing some more crimes; also, since capital punishment is a cruel form of punishment, many potential criminals are afraid of being subjected to capital punishment and for that reason they abstain from committing crimes. On the other hand, however, although capital punishment can help to deter crimes, capital punishment causes deep pain and loss to the family of the executed criminals. This is because, however grave are the crimes committed by the criminals who are executed, their family members and their friends still love them, although they may not approve of the grave crimes.

For this reason, therefore, capital punishment causes real emotional trauma to the family members and friends of the executed criminal. A comparison of the deterrent advantage of capital punishment and the emotional trauma disadvantage of capital punishment shows that the advantage of capital punishment far outweighs the disadvantage. This is because since capital punishment helps to prevent further commission of crime, capital punishment helps to prevent more emotional trauma in the lives of people.

This is because grave crimes cause emotional trauma to the relatives and friends of the victims of the crimes. Hence, the deterrent advantage of capital punishment outweighs the emotional trauma disadvantage of capital punishment because it helps to prevent more emotional trauma to the victim’s relatives and friends. The second advantage of capital punishment is that it relieves the government of the economic burden of feeding and meeting the other basic needs of criminals guilty of grave crimes.

This is because it is actually expensive for the government to meet economic needs of criminals, guilty of heinous crimes, while they are in prison. On the other hand, although, capital punishment in fact relieves governments of the economic burden of meeting the economic needs of criminals guilty of serious crimes, capital punishment, however, deprives governments of productive members of the society. This is because many criminals guilty of grave crimes are people with various skills that can be put into various use for the economic good of a country.

For this reason, therefore, a comparison of the advantage of relieving the government of economic burden of meeting the basic needs of criminals guilty of grave crimes, with the disadvantage of depriving government of productive members of the society shows that the disadvantage outweighs the advantage. This is because, although, capital punishment relieves governments of the economic burden of meeting the economic needs of the criminals guilty of grave crimes, the government can, however, put the skills of criminals guilty of heinous crimes into use to ensure that the criminals are economically productive and able to provide for their basic needs.

For this reason, therefore, instead of killing criminals guilty of serious crimes on economic grounds, it is more reasonable to engage the criminals in various economic worth activities to ensure that the criminals are able to fend for themselves.

• advantages and disadvantages of mobile phone
• advantages disadvantages a polygamous family
• Cited: 0 times
• Copy Citation Citation is copied Copy Citation Citation is copied Copy Citation Citation is copied

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Advantages And Disadvantages Of Capital Punishment

The death penalty as a form of a penalty, social justice: the issue of death penalty, a confucian system and han dynasty, problem of erroneous convictions, the benefit of the death penalty, the death penalty: fair result to particular crimes, prison overcrowding being a burden on a taxpaying society, race and the death penalty in america.

• TERMS & CONDITIONS
• PRIVACY POLICY
• COOKIES POLICY