Capital Punishment In The UK It is clear from the statistics shown in figure 1 that the crime rate has increased dramatically since the abolition of the death penalty. As shown in the graph there was a decrease in crime and it then increases again at a very steady rate suggesting deterrent methods have become weak, and, or, crime is becoming more common in general. The graph is based on American statistics but it is clear that this represents the crime which is taking place in Britain. The protection of society is the key aspect of capital punishment, and the statistics show that an increase of crime would suggest that the more crime that took place would show the more society would become at risk. If capital punishment was to be brought back it would save the tax payers money. The table shown in figure two shows there is an increase suggesting there will be a rise in taxes so the country can house these criminals. In October 2001 the latest figure that had been published was 67,465 inmates. This represents an increase of over 400 since the end of August 2000. If this increase continues there would have to be more prisons built to house the prisoners, this means more of tax payers money going towards paying for the housing of criminals, but also toward the building of the prisons and their maintenance. The average cost of keeping a prisoner in custody is about £27,500. This
Amais Chouhdary Broad Street Cardiff CF5- 3NT The Editor 19/02/2005 Western Mail Cardiff Dear Sir or Madam: I am a Christian and would like to make clear a few points regarding the issue of Death Penalty, Which is quite often debated. I feel very strongly about this issue because if there was no death penalty than my faith and that of 120 million Christians wouldn't exist. Because, if the Jews had never had the death penalty then Jesus wouldn't be crucified and be resurrected and there would be no salvation through Christ. Firstly, I would like to draw attention to the historical fact that the capital punishment has been used by almost every church and denomination. For example the burning of the heretics across Europe in the Medieval times, which was whole heartedly supported by the churches. Also the punishment of the Joan of Arc of France, because she claimed to be divinely inspired, was not opposed by the Churches. I think that the churches never opposed the Death Penalty because no unequivocal statement in the New Testament forbids it. On the contrary, it is explicitly allowed in the Old Testament (an eye for an eye...life for a life) as was the custom of the Jews at the time of Jesus. The Old Testament portrays human life as sacred because "God created man in his own image."
Capital Punishment Are They In The Right? For many years the controversy of capital punishment has taken place in many different forms. Such as hanging, electric chair, lethal injections or gassing and there are many more ways. Are these the right type of punishments? Some people say that they took another life into their own hands, " an eye for an eye". However, the discussions about capital punishment have been endless, although capital punishment happens in some countries a lot of people are against it. Neil Bortz from Atlanta says, "turn on the juice, fry him, and don't let us hear his name again". Obviously, there are facts that innocent people have been on death row for doing nothing. More importantly the death penalty is also seen as a deterrent (a American totem), so they know there are strong punishments if they commit a serious crime, so it is used to warn them. Furthermore, the US prison population was 182,000. After the death penalty more than 510,000 of the population locked up, this results to over crowding and much more money spent. Moreover, a source of information was recorded in neighbouring states, and it clearly says that the states that have the death penalty commit much more crimes, than states that don't have the death penalty. E.g. Iowa a non-death penalty state that doesn't have the death penalty has a 30% less than Missouri a
Blatant Racism is seen and heard too often in the courtrooms in the country. In death penalty cases, the use of derogatory slurs kindles the flames of prejudice and allows the jury to judge harshly those they wish to scapegoat for the problem of crime. Capital Punishment is racially biased, includes risks in killing innocent people, and is inhumane. The race of the defendant is not supposed to influence whether a person is sentenced to death. Throughout history, race has figured heavily in the death penalty. . Before the Civil War, the slave codes mandated execution for any black who murdered a white, but allowed a mere fine for any white who killed a black. Postwar laws continued to require different sentences based on the race of the victim. Today, long after our laws have been stripped of such overt discrimination, the death penalty continues to be reserved overwhelmingly for cases where the victim is white. In the U.S, African Americans make up 12% of the population but 40% of death row. According to the Death Row statistics, if the victim was white the murderer would have one in ten chance of being executed, but if the victim was black the murder would only have one in a hundred chance of being executed. The death penalty must be imposed fairly and with reasonable consistency or not at all. The Proponents of Capital Punishment argues that Capital Punishment Deters.
Should Britain bring back Capital Punishment for Murder? Capital Punishment is the death penalty. In Britain the method of execution used to be hanging, but it was abolished in 1965. In olden day Britain if you stole something over fifty shillings you would be executed. This means that if you stole something for forty-nine shillings and ninety-nine pence you would not be executed. In some countries they still have the death penalty mostly for murder. In America the method of execution used to be the electric chair, the lethal injection or the gas chamber. Now they only have the death penalty in some states, but not all of them. Some think the death penalty should be brought back because it is the only way of ensuring a murderer will not be released or escape and then commit more murders. This is true but one can never prove someone will re-offend, even if it is likely. Most murderers rarley re-offend It is said that it will bring down the murder rate because people would think about the consequences, this is the deterrence theory (the idea that if you are thinking about murdering someone, you will hesitate because your death will be the consequence). This does not work because when Britain abolished the death penalty the murder rate stayed the same, and when Canada abolished it the murder rate went down. But the United States have the highest murder rate in the world and
"Everyone should enjoy their life and forget about what might happen next" Do you agree? There are a few reasons to agree with this statement. If you are an atheist and do not believe in any form of god then you must finds this very hard to believe. Most religions promise a life after death for its followers in some shape or form. If you believe religion is one big con then you are hardly likely to believe that what its promising you will actually happen. The thought of a life after death is so far fetched that some people may not be able to see it as possible. For there to be life after death there must first be death. Death is, in my opinion not when your heart stops beating or even when you stop breathing as people have been known to recover from both of these conditions. It is when you stop using your brains, when brain activity ceases to exist is in my opinion. To think that someone can be resurrected from the dead and their mind work properly again is more science fiction that religion. There are reasons to disagree with this statement. This is that according to the Bible there is a life after death. Jesus says to the good thief who dies with him on the cross "Today you will be with me in paradise" The rest of Christian teaching relies on the principle of life after death, otherwise there is no point in being Christian other than sustaining the moral high ground.
(A1) Outline Christian teaching on Wealth and Poverty Christians believe that wealth is neither completely good nor bad. Wealth can be a big advantage to those in need an example of a good use of wealth would be building houses and shelter for the homeless, wealth can also promote corruption in our world, providing the incentive for some to abuse their wealth, an example of a bad use of wealth would be buying weapons to commit violent acts. Other sinful things that are cause by wealth are drugs, gambling and prostitution. When people have a lot of wealth they usually commit some of these sins or all of them. Christians also believe that wealth is a good thing, but greed is not. If a wealthy person becomes greedy they start hurting the people among them in order to earn more and more wealth. It is easier for a poor person to give up £1000 if that's all they have than a greedy person to do so. Christian teach that wealthy people should be good stewards with their wealth. By this they mean that people have to use their wealth for everyone in need. Also they believe that a persons possessions have a rightful owner which is God. "Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!. The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard is it to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a
Naquib Rupawalla Myth and Meaning Learning Log 04th March 2002. The Libation Bearers & The Eumenides In the Libation Bearers I do feel that there is a certain parriality between Orestes and his mother. She, too, appeared in public proudly displaying the body of her victim. She, too, declared that the murder was in the name of justice, and that finally the cycle of violence was over. She, too, displayed the robe that ensnared her husband. Orestes does all of these things as well. Although he confidently proclaims that he has done what needed to be done, but this time around the chorus agrees with his doings, whereas they had not agreed with his mother, Clytemnestra. Orestes himself says, that his reasons for killing his mother are strong. She murdered his father. She had disinherited Orestes and his sister, and the god Apollo has commanded Orestes to kill her, threatening punishment if Orestes does not follow through with the act. But duty is not as easy in this case. Orestes was still committing a morally repulsive act. He would not escape punishment. I feel that The Furies are symbolic of a simple justice, that the murderer must be punished. In The Libation Bearers I also felt that the spotlight was more intensely on the house and its characters. In my view the ending of the trilogy is more than merely an happy ending, it is an optimistic ending that points to a great
Against Death penalty *Who are you to decide the life of one man. No man has the power to do so, only god does. This is why I , and fortunately many other people, do not agree with the act of sentencing an man to death in general. If men are equal then they must live in an equal way. If you cannot kill a man neither can the jury or the judge or the queen. I think that death penalty should be abolished because it is senseless, heretical and unorthodox. God did not give us the choice to choose the end of a mans life. In the bible he teaches us to forgive, not to blame or condemn a simile. He wants us to live in peace and love and if he asks so we must try to obey his call. I think, that the electric chir, the gallows, the guillotine, the gas chambers and the lethal injections have all been, along with the creators and users, one of the darkest pages of history. ( SHOW PHOTOS) *This is what happened to millions of people in the world and unfortunately in some nation it still does. America should be the country, the nation, the world but still in it a barbarian way of living is used.(SHOW MAP). As you can see from the map out of 50 states only eleven have no death penalty, 18 use lethal injection, 8 use electrocution, 5 use lethal gas, 2 use hanging and 1 still uses firing squad. *Now I will show how a man that is sentenced to death by lethal injection will pass his days.
Justice and punishment in two short stories 'The Black Veil' and the 'Melancholy Hussar' draw the reader's attention to justice and punishment. In 'The Black Veil' a widower goes to a doctor, dressed in a black veil, and asks him if he can heal her son, he accepts and goes to her house and saw that her son had been hanged. The 'Melancholy Hussar' is about a woman who falls in love with a man from the Navy and he wants to her flee with him and his friends, but on the morning they are suppose to leave, her ex-lover comes back and she doesn't go along with the plan, the men were caught and shot, two of his friends were flogged. The aspects of justice and punishment in the 'Melancholy Hussar' is in the Navy, and you could be demoted for being two minutes late, and shot if you tried to desert the Navy, and in' The Black Veil', the aspects are retribution (a repayment, especially in the form of punishment) Charles Dickens is writing about the cruelty of state punishments, and if you were poor, you weren't allowed to steal food for your family, because the law came down on you very seriously. The punishments were severe because it was a violent age, so the law believed in punishing harshly. E.g. if you set fire to a haystack you would get hung. The law weren't interested in fairness it reflects the harshness of the time because there was no welfare state to help the poor. Poverty