• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

An issue that has continually created tension in today's society is whether the death penalty serves as a justified and valid form of punishment.

Extracts from this document...


An issue that has continually created tension in today's society is whether the death penalty serves as a justified and valid form of punishment. Whenever the word "death penalty" comes up, extremists from both sides start yelling out their arguments. One side says deterrence, the other side says there's a potential of executing an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder. Crime is an evident part of society, and everyone is aware that something must be done about it. Most people know the threat of crime to their lives, but the question lies in the methods and action in which it should be dealt with. In several parts of the world, the death penalty has been apportioned to those who have committed a variety of offenses from the time of ancient Babylon to present-day America. The Roman Empire made use of the death penalty liberally, as did the Church of the Middle Ages. As history tells us, capital punishment, whose definition is "the use of death as a legally sanctioned punishment," is an acceptable and efficient means of deterring crime. Today, the death penalty remains an effective method of punishment for murder and other heinous crimes. ...read more.


While attorneys are protecting the rights of the accused, the family of the victim often gets lost in the legal proceedings. While the accused is protected by laws and is the center of the scuffle between various lawyers, the mourning family receives little more than the media circus for their grief. They receive inadequate compensation for their loss, but with a death penalty, they can at least be assured that that person who murdered their loved one will never kill again. Capital punishment should remain in use and delivered more frequently. Only too often are death penalties reduced to life sentences or less and more condemned inmates die in death row than by execution. The effectiveness of capital punishment rests largely on the willingness of officials to use it liberally and thus exerting the power of the government. This penalty would serve as a deterrent of violent crimes and restore justice. Increased use would prod people to stay away from violent crimes. Would-be criminals would think twice before committing an offense punishable by death, and because of this, societies would gain a sense of "moral security." As we can see from previous civilizations such as the Babylonian and Roman Empires, death penalty is effective and much more efficient than spending millions of society's tax dollars to upkeep their prison stay. ...read more.


A second argument against the death penalty is discrimination. Eighty-two percent of all murder victims are white and thirteen percent are black. This is about a 6:1 ratio. Opponents of the death penalty, such as the NAACP, argue that the system values white lives more than black lives. If this is true, one has to wonder why whites represent fifty-five percent of those executed and blacks thirty-nine percent, when blacks have committed forty-nine percent of all murders, and whites thirty-nine percent from 1976-1994. Successful prosecutions depend on the nature of the crime and not the race of the victim. The reason that whites are overwhelmingly the victims in death row cases is that whites are overwhelmingly the victims in capital crimes. The death penalty is not racist and does not violate the cruel and unusual punishment clause. Capital punishment has proven to have good benefits upon the country in determining the consequences that criminals deserve. This is needed to ensure the safety and moral values of society. If this is the case, there is no need for us to consider the expenses involved in the death penalty. Certainly human lives are more important, for it may easily be yours. We should not abolish capital punishment, but hold our country accountable for properly exercising the death penalty upon those who deserve it. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Capital Punishment section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Capital Punishment essays

  1. Critically evaluate arguments for and against the death penalty.

    a lesser sentence, and 7% of those sent for retrial were acquitted altogether5. He found that it was important for this system to be successful and morally just, and therefore it should be ensured that the right person was sentenced to death and within the guidelines of the constitution.

  2. Death Penalty

    This is hardly a rejection of capital punishment. Christ in the bible did not make sure of his views. Islamic Views In dealing with murder, the Quran definitely discourages capital punishment "The free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female" Due to human

  1. Should the death penalty be used lawfully in civilised society

    The apology can be accepted, but it will not bring back the years lost in the men's lives. Sometimes there are 'Crimes of Passion', where (because of the circumstances) the criminal should, in my opinion, be either set free, or sent to a prison for life imprisonment.

  2. Is the death penalty the best protection from a murderer? Is justice for the ...

    Another reason is that most crimes are committed in the heat of the moment, it means during the moment of great emotional stress, anger, or under the influence of stimulants. General Jim Mattox, a former Texas Attorney who presided over many of Texas's executions, remarked, " It is my own

  1. Capital Punishment

    ultimately it is good for us, and may prevent something which is even more unpleasant. Punishment will not be justified on utilitarian grounds if there is some other way of reducing or preventing crime which does not involve suffering. Since suffering is an intrinsic evil for utilitarianism, it must be

  2. Capital punishment is the infliction of death by an authorized public authority as punishment ...

    the taking of human life that we affirm the highest value of human life." (Edward Koch). Cost: Once a convicted murder is executed and buried, there are no further maintenance costs to the state. Safety: Once a convicted murderer is executed, there is no chance that he will break out of jail and kill or injure someone.

  1. Let's Give murderers What they Deserve - the Death penalty.Explain the arguments for and ...

    row that they die of old age rather than a lethal injection or electrocution. Some people insist that a person on death row suffers more than his victim, but this cannot be proven; however, unlike the murderer, the victim deserved none of the suffering inflicted upon them.

  2. Capital Punishment Amendment Act 1868

    not going to happen these printers would offer such scripts to the offender8. It is relatively fair to assume that such wording would be intended to be inflammatory rather than acceptable to the throng. The spectacle of death as a form of entertainment is an evocative image that sticks in the mind of the modern observer.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work