Pros And Cons Of Capital Punishment

Throughout history, the death penalty has remained a longstanding decision with no likely end in sight. As it stands, capital sentencing is still highly discretionary allowing for the affluence of extra legal factors in determining its imposition. As a capital punishment, the death penalty is only applied in cases that involve murder and some form of aggravating factor that heightens the seriousness of the crime or a crime against the state. In the 1970s, the landmark case of Furman v. Georgia determined that the death penalty was unconstitutional and violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of cruel and unusual punishment (Wolfgang and Riedel, 1973). However, by July of 1976, Gregg v. Georgia reinstated the death penalty as a result of states rewriting their death statutes. Generally, the possible imposition of the death penalty follows after a jury has concluded that the defendant is guilty of an aggravated murder or capital charge. The jury is then presented with aggravating and mitigating circumstances during the penalty phase. In this phase, the jurors weigh the impact that both the above circumstances and external factors have on lessening or heightening the seriousness of the crime. After …show more content…
The topic of capital punishment is highly controversial and is also characterized by multiple court rulings that apply changes and restrictions on its implementation. Many argue that the statutes are rooted in unconstitutional and morally wrong foundations (Ehrlich, 1975). Despite the opposition, the Supreme Court as of 2017 continues to uphold that the death penalty does not violate the constitution and it is used in 31 states. Within research, the topic of capital punishment has remained prevalent since the 1970s and 80s. The current research focuses on the need to find and understand the implications that the disparities the imposition of the death penalty continues to be faulted