1 sources cited length: 12 words 3.5 double spaced pages rating: red free death penalty needed to protect society the death penalty is an issue that will continue to be debated over for many years to come. Some believe the death penalty should be abolished while others believe the death penalty should remain an option. The death penalty should be administered to those who commit heinous crimes, whether it involves murder or not lopez, camilla p.1. One can look at judicial history and tell that just because someone is sentenced to the death penalty does not mean it actually happens. People have become so liberal that they are willing to give everyone a second chance. People want to give the man who raped and murdered ten women in a matter of days the same second chance as the little boy who stole a candy bar from the grocery store. It might just be me, but i see a huge difference in the effect of those crimes on the rest of the population.

Women are not going to live in fear about going to the grocery store because a little boy stole a candy bar, but they are going to think twice about going shopping by themselves at night when they've heard that a serial rapist and murderer is among them. I think all crimes should have an equal punishment, but i do not necessarily believe in the eye for an eye way of thinking. Remorse can so easily be faked which is why, i think, punishments and sentences have been lightened over the years.

There are many cases and points that opponents to the death penalty bring up, but there are also several good points that pro death penalty believers argue. Opponents of capital punishment believe the death penalty is not beneficial, but we execute those who commit these atrocious crimes so that they do not have the chance to kill again lopez, p.1. Heinous crimes seem to be no big deal and no shocking occurrence, like they used to be, which makes me very sad.

The headlines are covered with people who have committed terrible crimes and sit on television laughing about what they've done, knowing they're not going to receive the death penalty for their crime. The government and the judicial system has now become a joke to people just as jail houses have become jokes to people living in them. Now, jails have all the luxuries of living at home with mom and dad, so why not go there? jail, to some people, is a refuge where they can escape from the harshness of life. I believe one fourth, if not one half, of the crimes committed sending people to jail deserve a harsher punishment and in some cases, the death penalty.

The crime a person has to commit in order to receive the death penalty has dramatically changed over the past several years. I don't understand the need to 'think about' determining whether or not a mother who has drowned all of her children or a man who has been confirmed in having raped, dismembered, and killed five boys under the age of ten in a matter of weeks should receive the death penalty. I believe there should be no questions asked and no second thoughts about putting those kinds of people to rest. I support the idea of the death penalty, but i disagree with some of the procedures taken to actually make it happen.

There have been so many times when a judge sentenced the death penalty and, still, twenty years later the convicted murderer was sitting on death row. I support the death penalty and agree that we should keep it, but if it is not going to be carried out within a reasonable amount of time, everyone is just wasting their time and money, paying tax dollars for letting the prisoner drag his/her case on lopez, p.2. Even with jail sentences, that seems to be what happens most of the time anyway, so i think with the death penalty at least there is some hope to try and prevent heinous crimes from occurring again. I think if the death penalty was a true deterrent to heinous crimes, we would not have so many problems. I do not believe the death penalty is a deterrent to any crimes, but i do believe it is a reasonable punishment and sentence that more people should receive for the crimes they commit. People have such a lack of respect for the government and the laws it sets that it seems the only way to deal with such people is to kill them. I know putting to death one serial rapist or murderer is not going to stop rapes and murders from happening, but at least there will be one less person out in the world committing heinous crimes than there was before.

I believe the death penalty was originally created to be a deterrent to crime and i believe it could get back to being that if people could see the government taking steps in that direction. Jail houses have all the luxuries of living at home and i believe that if the death penalty is abolished people will kill because they want to kill, rape because they want to rape, and steal because they want to steal knowing that nothing too terrible could possibly happen to them. Jail might not be their first pick of places to be, but it's certainly not their last when they know they're going to have food, clothing, and shelter. I do not think the death penalty is used enough to be called our most effective method of solving crime. I think if the government actually made people stay in jail for the amount of time they were assigned in their sentence, a lot less crime would be happening. People are getting sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole and in less than ten years are back on the streets again. How is that safe for the society and how is that holding to the sentence given them by the judge? that is a lot of the reason why i support the death penalty.

It seems that both sides are being taken lightly but sometimes, if we're lucky, the death penalty is actually carried out and the thought of that person harming another innocent individual can be out of our heads for good. Putting someone behind bars for committing a heinous crime for ten years and then releasing them back to society should not comfort anyone. Over the years, my opinion on the death penalty has wavered, usually according to how emotional i was that day. I am not an advocate of killing by any means, but i've learned that in order to better protect society you might have to go to an extreme. In some cases 'extreme' can be bad, but when talking about the death penalty, i think this is one of the best extremes there is. It is used today and was used during ancient times to punish people with a variety of offenses. The bible also advocate death for murder and other crimes such as kidnapping and stealing.

An Essay About Computer

Here in the philippines, we used to have death penalty, but i believe this capital punishment should be issued in all states for those people who commit great crimes. Death penalty should be issued because death is being feared, it gives justice, it is a fact that there's no proof of an innocent being executed and there are some quotations from the bible that seem to respond this. If we have death penalty and a murderer dies instantly, the homicide rate would decrease because no one likes to die. Death penalty is important because it could save the lives of thousands of potential victims who are at stake. I have seen people being interviewed because one or some of their relatives died.

People who oppose death penalty claim that in the implementation of this capital punishment, innocent men are wrongly executed. Moreover, our criminal justice system takes extra precautions to be sure the innocent are protected. What's the use of the judges who were trained in this field? they also want to make sure who is guilty and not. Death penalty helps curtail future murderers and because of this we can save more lives.

If death penalty exists, repeat murderers are eliminated and future murders are deterred. If death penalty wouldn't be issued now, then when? when there are more criminals lurking? it is said that every minute, there is a chance that an innocent man could get murdered. At first, i really don't have an idea whether death penalty is legal or not here in the philippines. introduction the rate of violent crimes in the united states is one of the highest in the world despite the fact that the us has one of the harshest penal systems in the world. To this end, the us criminal justice system has been on the receiving end of numerous criticisms with regard to its effectiveness in controlling crime.

Contract Law Research Paper Topics

The subject of contention relates to the form of justice adopted and determining which method is effective between restorative, retributive and punitive punishment models. Intertwined with this is the issue of the use of the death penalty as a form of punishment for high profile crimes johnson and johnson 517. Should the criminal justice system adopt a more lenient approach and abolish the use of the death penalty for capital offenses, or should it embark on a more restorative form of justice? this paper argues for the use of the death penalty in the criminal justice system as a form of administering punishment to capital offenders. The first reason why the death penalty is a justifiable form of punishment is because it guarantees public protection. Mandery 147 maintains that the main appeal of the death penalty is that it guarantees that capital offenders will never get their way back to the streets. In addition, the death penalty addresses the potential loopholes associated with the prison system in this regard, the death penalty guarantees that capital offenders are incapacitated completely and will never escape out prison.

In the light of this view, mandery 147 argues that the death penalty is a surer sanction. In addition, mandery 148 argues that the only way that the streets can be free of capital offenders is through the death penalty, which in turn, guarantees public safety and protection. The second reason why the death penalty should be incorporated as a form of punishment for capital offenses stems from its retributive power. Hodgkinson and schabas 178 assert that capital offenders such as rapists, violent robbers and murderers require sufficient punishment because of the monstrous nature of these capital crimes. In this regard, hodgkinson and schabas 178 maintain that the death penalty matches the gravity of the capital offenses committed. The underlying argument is that capital offenders need to face an execution that has an equal gravity as the crime committed. Since human civilization, humanity has always viewed taking another person’s life is only punishable by death.