Capital Punishment Essay Research Paper A Difficult

Capital Punishment Essay, Research Paper

A Difficult Decision (The capital punishment debate) The one subject that will affect us most throughout our lives is death. For this reason any issue dealing with such a matter should be treated with the utmost respect and seriousness. Hasty decisions cannot be made when life, regardless of whose, is at stake. All aspects and implications must be considered when this world’s most valuable possession lies in the hands of the imperfect man. Throughout history man has struggled to control the one inevitable factor of life. This has been done unsuccessfully. Currently the best example of such a trial is capital punishment.Capital punishment has been debated, used, and even considered routine in most civilizations, including our own. There are two sides to every argument capital punishment is no exception. In fact both sides have some extremely valid arguments which can be very convincing. When presented alone each side can cite many facts, figures, and beliefs that will make for a very articulate and compelling argument. Here lies the problem, because both sides are able to produce such an argument a person is easily swayed depending only on what he or she has not heard. Therefore, is necessary for every person to unbiasedly hear both sides of the issue. A large part of the controversy comes from this question: Do we as a society or even as the human race have the right to give a sentence as extreme as death? The answer, unfortunately, is unknown. Of course either side would tell you their answer is the correct one. A decision such as this, however, should be made only by what we as individuals think and believe. This will make the society you live in that much closer to your own. Those who oppose capital punishment argue that we do not have the right to judge whether a person deserves to lose their life. It could be argued that the only one who has the right to take a life is the one who gives it. Granted many lives are taken by people who do not have such a divine right, however, this is not the argument. The argument is that we as a society cannot condone such actions, and by using the death penalty we are doing so. In essence we are saying it is all right to kill those who have killed. This may sound somewhat reasonable, however, it also conveys the message that in some situations murder is not a bad thing. Is revenge so important in our society that we are willing to make this statement? Due to the diverse background of values and beliefs in our society the issue of morality can also be used to fight for the death penalty. Is it wrong to kill? The answer is a resounding yes. Do we as a society make it a practice to exercise punishment for the wrong doings in our world? The answer? Also, yes. With this in mind, should we not consider it our responsibility as a society to do all that is in our power to keep crimes as horrific as murder from occurring? What kind society would allow its members to live in fear of those who are willing to take a life? A society such as this should not be considered free or just. We know that where there is philosophy there is also practicality. No argument should be viewed using only morals and ethics. Who can say which belief is right. Our values are for the most part relative. Because of this we must learn to see the practical sides of an argument. As with the issue of morality, practicality is also offered from both sides. When it comes to issues of practicality money always seems to be at the top of the list. It seems likely that it would cost more to keep someone in prison for life than to execute them. However, this particular case is somewhat deceiving. The average cost to obtain and carry out the death sentence is approximately 2.2 million dollars (Johnson, 1990). It has been estimated that this is more costly than the incarceration of a prisoner for one hundred years (Johnson, 1990). Activists for capital punishment argue that the majority of this expense is due only to the appeals process. To fix the problem we simply need to make new laws limiting the number of appeals and the length of time one can be on death row. Another issue falling in the practicality category is that of rehabilitation verses incapacitation. It can be argued that execution is the only sure way to prevent a killer from killing again. However, those against the death penalty disagree contesting that life imprisonment is sufficient in this prevention.

Many argue that a punishment as severe as death would prevent a number violent crimes from being committed. If the sentence were used more, it may succeed in being used as a scare tactic to possible murderers. The other side of this argument is that the people who commit these crimes are often too enraged or mentally perturbed to reason or consider the consequences of their actions. It can also be argued that a sentence of life in prison is just as, if not more, deterring that a sentence of death. Statistics show that death may be a successful deterrent. There were 56 executions in 1995, the most since 1957. The same year the total number of violent crimes dropped to the lowest point since 1973 (U.S. Department of Justice, 1996). It is true that this relationship could be a mere coincidence, however, it is possible that these two statistics are directly related. If so this would mean that capital punishment does effectively serve as a deterrent to potential criminals. An issue