Robert Blecker's Five Ways To Improve The Death Penalty?

1671 Words 7 Pages
For millennia, humans have executed people as punishment for mild to severe crimes. Recently, in the United States, there has been a lot of controversy regarding whether the death penalty should be abolished or kept as a form of punishment. However, sentencing somebody to death is not the only form of punishment in response to crime. There are various questions regarding the issue: Does it decrease crime? If not abolished, what kind of crimes are deserving of the death penalty? If abolished, what kind of punishment could be delivered? Two experts argue why it should be abolished and why it should not be abolished and present a few alternatives and alterations to the regime to make it more agreeable. Abolishing the death penalty is moral and …show more content…
In “5 ways to improve the U.S. Death Penalty” Blecker expresses his concern over keeping the death penalty but altering it in various and particular ways. He has 5 main points that include fitting the punishment to the crime, adopting another execution method, caring to not wrongfully convicting the innocent, altering prison life, and looking at the reason behind the crime. He argues that we should only penalize certain people for the death penalty and not everybody behind a murder. For example, those who are mass murderers, terrorists, sadistic serial killers, or hired assassins. However, the jury should consider the defendant 's reason behind the crime and try to humanize the defendant before arriving to a conclusion. In addition, he conveys concern on how sometimes criminals such as drug dealers have crimes that are weighed as heavily as murder, and that their crimes should not be so heavily penalized. He also points out that the victim should have a say behind the punishment if …show more content…
Nevertheless, in the state of Washington a death penalty trial costs, on average, $1 million dollars more than in a trial where it is not sought.(J. Sullivan). This pertains to be the case in the majority of states when comparing cases where the death penalty was not sought versus when the death penalty was. This money comes from taxpayers pockets! Really, is it fair that the money that could go to funding education, improving security, and helping the homeless actually go to killing a non-deserving criminal? Moreover, instead of spending money on the death penalty we could invest our money into solving murder cases and preventing violence. Issuing life in prison without parole is the better and worse alternative because it reduces costs and offers a worse punishment as they are kept alive to suffer until their death due to their equivalently odious crimes. Not only is capital punishment expensive and tedious but it is a punishment that we can not weigh as we are unaware of the circumstances after

Related Documents