Electric Chair Pros And Cons

Good Essays
The death penalty has been in the United States since the first settlements were built. In that time an estimated 16,000 criminals have been put to death since the first recorded execution, back in 1608 (Ford). A amount of those criminals had killed at least one person, and good portion of them would not stop killing until they were stopped. Luckily, the criminals that were planning on never stopping, or were not able to stop, were caught and brought to justice. When the criminal is convicted, the family can feel some measure of relief about what has happened and that justice has been served knowing the criminal is off the streets. They deserve to feel some relief and a good measure of hope after all the pain they have felt. They had someone …show more content…
The electric chair has been continued to be in use since then up to the present day. “The electric chair was first made as a method to carry out the death penalty in Ohio in 1896 ... Today Nebraska is the only state that requires death by electrocution. Adopted in 1913, the electric chair has been used 15 times for the state, most recently in 1997” (Delfino and Day 16). The electric chair works a bit similar to when static shock occurs, but it is much more powerful. “The passage of the current from the machines through the human body, even by slightest contact produces instantaneous death ... From then on the electrodes would always be placed on the lower leg and the crown of the head [they had tried to see if running the shock through the arms and torso instead of the whole body, it did not work.]” (Galvin 19 and 71). The electrodes are placed on the calf, lower leg, and the crown of the head. Between the skin and electrodes there is a wet sea sponge to ensure that the condemned does not become lit like a match, the sponge can not be fake because those will catch fire. Since the electrodes are placed at opposite ends of the human body it ensures that the electrical current goes through the entire body while hitting every major point in the body. That way it ensures that the condemned is put to …show more content…
“Officials in California delayed the execution of 46-year-old Michael Morales, sentenced to death for a 1981 murder. His lawyers argued that a lethal injection would constitute cruel and unusual punishment, prohibited under the US constitution” (Hooper). But, that is not true, the Supreme Court along with the people who give and handle the ways the death penalty is given have stated that, yes, sometimes the death penalty and the way it 's done will cause some pain. They also state that the death penalty is not unconstitutional just by the fact of how much pain is given along with the penalty. As stated earlier the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty is humane and that cruel and unusual punishment is only when excessive torture is given. Most of the ways the death penalty is used is not torturous. The people in charge always ensure that the most humane way possible is given. They will always find a way to make it so condemned will not feel as much pain as many people think, even though it might be deserved in some cases. “One of the arguments of opponents of the death penalty is the inevitability of sending innocent people who are wrongly accused to death row and eventually execution“ (Green Garage). This is very not true because first off they always generalize that everyone who goes to death row is innocent they did

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    He stands firm on his first argument, saying that the death penalty is not only the best but the only deterrent to crime. Ernest says the objection of life imprisonment is a light slap on the wrist and is not geared enough. Imprisonment only gives murderers more time to plot and scheme it does not change other criminal minds about making the same mistake. Some opponents of Haag stand argue that people have a right to life and morally we should not use capital punishment. An objection that Haag uses is that the right to life is forfeited if the crime that is broken is severe enough.…

    • 1380 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The convicted killers even admitted that they had no hesitation in killing the first time and they would have no hesitation killing again. We need to consider our safety and stop these killers from committing more murders. Many people who are against the death penalty, of course, may want to question whether there is an alternative way to protect society without the use of capital punishment. Such as, putting the criminals in prison for life. Though I concede that putting away the felons can help, I still insist that murderers get the death penalty because it is the only way to 100% guarantee that they will never kill again.…

    • 1122 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    There is no room for vengeance and a revenge stance in our justice system. The arguing stance for the death penalty says it deters murders, but in reality, the death penalty just leads to another loss of human life - regardless of the murder being an execution. When somebody tortures another human being, the government does not decide to torture that person in return. It’s the same for a rapist; the government does not rape the rapist. So, why does the government decide to murder the murderer?…

    • 1393 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Death Penalty Punishment

    • 1092 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Many argue that keeping the life of a murderer is unjust for the life that is lost. These people have the ideology of “an eye for an eye”, since the criminal took a life, his life must be taken as well. Even though I agree that the criminal must pay for the crime, killing a murderer automatically makes you a murderer, yet the government claim that the execution is humane, so it cannot compare to murder. However, there is no humane way of executing a living person. You do not have to punish a criminal with the same crime.…

    • 1092 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Lethal Injection

    • 1135 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Although the Death Penalty is cost effective and could save the lives of innocents, the Death Penalty actually goes against the First Amendment, in many instances has executed the wrong person, and goes against many religious and moral views; and additionally is becoming a problem in our own state as the penalty is being rushed in order to make sure the necessary drug does not expire. One of the most controversial arguments is the Eighth Amendment vs. Lethal Injection argument. While lethal injection is proposed as a quick, efficient, and painless way to end the life of those convicted, this is not the case. Lethal injections can be faulty, there are many reports of individuals surviving or needing a second attempt.…

    • 1135 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Bruck states, “I don’t claim that executions of entirely innocent people will occur very often. But they will occur” (Bruck 495). Bruck wants assurance that if the death penalty is going to put to action, to at least be sure that the person being convicted of the crime is truly guilty. Imagine all those people who were executed and were innocent. Like Koch and Bruck, justice should be equal for all, but in Bruck’s defense, justice wouldn’t be equal for all if innocent people were killed for a crime they did not commit and the sad part is that you can’t fix it because they would be already…

    • 834 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The main reason why capital punishment is an acceptable thing is because it makes families feel better knowing that the bad guy will no longer hurt anyone else. Therefore, criminals who commit murderous crimes fell deserve to die and not stay in jail. To support this, Koch mentions in his essay that most of the times the death penalty is more lenient rather than living in prison for many years (Koch 486). When a person takes someone 's life, the my lose their own rights. Yet the death penalty opponents would have supporters feel guilty as citizens when the state puts a killer to death for his crime of crimes (Kenny 27).…

    • 707 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    So, I do not recommend the death penalty for people who have done only one killing. Nevertheless, I have seen lots of evidence almost every year people have committed several murders (e.g., serial killers), or have committed crime even after captivity. For such people, I recommend the death penalty. It must be a limit to which community should put up to. If somebody does not realize that going around murder people is incorrect, then I trust, that letting such people live is not only a great threat to the society, but also a great problem.…

    • 1259 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Pro Capital Punishment

    • 1293 Words
    • 6 Pages

    This way, the criminal would then realize the severity of his actions and would pay for whatever he/she had done. Many believe that the “risk of a person being wrongly accused is almost nonexistent and is just an argument that opponents of the death penalty use to abolish the death penalty” (Kenneth 2005). “Supporters of the death penalty emphasize that opponents can’t prove that someone in modern time who was executed was actually innocent” (Kenneth 2005). On November 18 1998, Robin Lovitt was tried and sentenced to death on the count of murder (Kenneth 2005). Prosecutors said that an officer had “thrown away evidence [in a very intentional way]” which caused Lovitt to go back to court because of this solid piece of evidence that might have been the murder weapon which needed to be tested for DNA (Kenneth 2005).…

    • 1293 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The quote not only supports capital punishment, but it also says that it is "fair and equitable". The price of someone taking another's life, should be having theirs taken also. More families like Mark Klaas' will be able to get closure if the death penalty proceeds for all murders. Dismissing the death penalty would lead to families living in constant fear and never being able to move forward with their lives. The Los Angeles Airport Peace Officers Association said it like this, "Giving up on the death penalty would mean giving up on justice for crime victims and their families."…

    • 632 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays