The death penalty is one of the most debated topics in our current time. Many people and politicians believe that the death penalty is “wasteful, it’s ineffective, it doesn’t work to reduce violent crime” (O’Malley). “Former Attorney General Eric Holder says that he does not support the death penalty because he realizes that men and women are the ones who decide who dies and who lives and people make mistakes” (O’Malley). Now on the other hand people like myself feel that it is an effective method of dealing these with these immoral criminals and can be used as a deterrent if we started using it more often and for other types of crimes. In this essay I am going to show you why we should use the death penalty more often; almost like Gov. Perry
…show more content…
If we also started executing people that have been to prison, especial federal prison on multiple occasions, then that too will a deterrent for repeat criminals to not want to commit a crime again. The reason this would reduce crime is because criminals would realize that if they go to jail one more time than they will be executed, this would cause them to be hesitant when thinking about committing another crime. Let’s look at eastern countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and even China they use the death penalty all the time there and that causes fear in people to not want to commit crimes. Now you can try arguing that places like Canada don’t have executions but lower crime rates, but Canada allows marijuana for recreational use, so how strict is the enforcement over there. And if the enforcement is strict over there, how strict is it? Here in the US we are sort of stuck on the fine line that prevents of from being able to say that we use it enough to cause a sense of fear. Now I only recommend this if the individual commits certain crimes like murder or something as serious as murder; I don’t want a person who committed a DUI to be executed because of his or her …show more content…
Well as stated earlier death row inmate’s cost more than the average inmate because of how our system tries everything possible to insure that we execute the right person, but all these trials, hearings, and retrials cost money but thanks to the generous taxpayers the inmate is charged nothing. I feel that the family of the prisoner should be charged all the expensive if they want to have all these extra trials; “but legally the state has to foot the bill”(DuBose). Another thing is everyone who is about to face the death penalty is allowed another trial right before the execution is about to happen. This gives the defendants some time to organize a case and fight to say whether or not the person even did the crime and or whether or not the person really deserves the death penalty. If we were to eliminate some of these processes then we could get the executions over and done with and there would be a smaller cost to pay but that would compromise the effectiveness of the state in insuring that the right person gets the proper punishment or verdict. So how could we speed this up; well we are in the modern era and it is time our court system was upgraded to be faster and more accurate. We could start using DNA testing for more if not every trial and that would help insure a correct sentencing is given to the right person and I’m sure we could also figure out another test
If we also started executing people that have been to prison, especial federal prison on multiple occasions, then that too will a deterrent for repeat criminals to not want to commit a crime again. The reason this would reduce crime is because criminals would realize that if they go to jail one more time than they will be executed, this would cause them to be hesitant when thinking about committing another crime. Let’s look at eastern countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and even China they use the death penalty all the time there and that causes fear in people to not want to commit crimes. Now you can try arguing that places like Canada don’t have executions but lower crime rates, but Canada allows marijuana for recreational use, so how strict is the enforcement over there. And if the enforcement is strict over there, how strict is it? Here in the US we are sort of stuck on the fine line that prevents of from being able to say that we use it enough to cause a sense of fear. Now I only recommend this if the individual commits certain crimes like murder or something as serious as murder; I don’t want a person who committed a DUI to be executed because of his or her …show more content…
Well as stated earlier death row inmate’s cost more than the average inmate because of how our system tries everything possible to insure that we execute the right person, but all these trials, hearings, and retrials cost money but thanks to the generous taxpayers the inmate is charged nothing. I feel that the family of the prisoner should be charged all the expensive if they want to have all these extra trials; “but legally the state has to foot the bill”(DuBose). Another thing is everyone who is about to face the death penalty is allowed another trial right before the execution is about to happen. This gives the defendants some time to organize a case and fight to say whether or not the person even did the crime and or whether or not the person really deserves the death penalty. If we were to eliminate some of these processes then we could get the executions over and done with and there would be a smaller cost to pay but that would compromise the effectiveness of the state in insuring that the right person gets the proper punishment or verdict. So how could we speed this up; well we are in the modern era and it is time our court system was upgraded to be faster and more accurate. We could start using DNA testing for more if not every trial and that would help insure a correct sentencing is given to the right person and I’m sure we could also figure out another test