Arguments against the death penalty

Authors Avatar

Arguments against the death penalty

The opposition to the death penalty developed in America. Edward Livingston articulated many of the classic arguments against the death penalty as early as 1822 in his quest to eliminate death penalty in Louisiana. Although, the classic arguments, pros and cons have been re-examined and refined over the years.

A person forfeits his right to life when he kills the death penalty can be viewed as a retributive act. The defendant should be allowed to feel what the defendant himself had put the victim through. The death penalty deters murder and is just retribution. The death penalty deters murder by literally putting the fear of death into 'would be' killers. A person is less likely to do something, if he or she thinks that harm will come to him. Another way the death penalty deters murder, is the fact that if the killer is dead, he will not be able to kill again. If society has a right to protect itself against such men as Hitler, Stalin and Kemmler, why may it not do so in whatever way proves effective, and protect it from those evil, malevolent slaughterers? If it is urged that death penalty is not the most effective way, such an argument, well supported by facts, is pertinent and valid. However, this is not to say that the society, which inflicts death penalty, commits murder. Murder is an offensive act. Death penalty, however effective it may be and through whatever ignorance it may be resorted to, is strictly a defensive act. Since it is better to kill a murderer to save innocent lives than to allow the deaths of innocent people to preserve the life of a murderer, capital punishment is a practice our society must have. It is a fair trade-off to execute murderers on the chance that innocent lives will thereby be saved. If we only save one precious life, capital punishment is justified. The death penalty ultimately saves precious lives and serves a definite purpose. However in order to serve its purpose it must be adjusted and made more effective and efficient. The world needs a uniform standard for deciding who receives the death penalty, the death penalty should be decided by a jury, the death penalty should become the standard punishment for murder, and the death penalty should be helped to truly deter crime. Fear of death deters people from committing crimes proponent say.  They also believe that if attached to certain crimes, the penalty of death

Join now!

exerts a positive moral influence by placing a stigma on certain crimes like manslaughter, resulting in attitudes of disgust and horror to such acts. Furthermore, retenstionsists insist that the deterrent influence of the death penalty reaches across state lines into jurisdictions that have abolished it, and so all benefit by its continued use. Perhaps this is the intended goal of the Violent Crime Control And Law Enforcement Act of 1994. It "establishes constitutional procedures for the imposition of the death penalty for federal crimes. It applies to federal statute's that previously carried the death penalty and creates many new capital ...

This is a preview of the whole essay