Abolish the Death Penalty
In the article “The Death Penalty Deserves the Death Penalty,” by Lincoln Caplan, Caplan is explaining his side on the death penalty. Caplan goes on to discuss different cases specifically Glossip V. Gross which is a case in Oklahoma with death-row inmates that are opposed to the three drug protocol chosen by the state to execute death sentences. Caplan supports his opinion with another case back in 2010, with Jeffrey Landrigan who was scheduled for execution after being convicted of murder in Arizona. The reason Caplan brought up this case is due the fact that the United States had a shortage of the drug needed to execute Landrigan and obtained some non F.D.A approved drugs from a German company in Austria. In Ladrigan’s trial his lawyers wanted confirmation on the effectiveness of the drug and wanted to make sure that their client would not suffer and the state refused to provide …show more content…
Ever since the Supreme Court brought back the death penalty there has been about fourteen hundred people put to death since then and with about nine out of ten of the deaths by lethal injection. Caplan goes on to explain another major event in which supports his argument on how he feels about the death penalty, the case of Clayton D. Lockett in Oklahoma. Caplan argues in the execution of Lockett it was the first time the anesthetic a sedative called midazolam was used. It was over an hour before the executioner could find a vein in Lockett’s groin which made him unconscious and he did not die until quite of bit of time later. The rest of the article he discusses his personal opinion and why he feels we need to abolish capital punishment. He closes his article with this statement “ while capital punishment has negligible benefits to American criminal justice, it has imposed enormous, ever- increasing, and terrible
In the article “The Death Penalty Deserves the Death Penalty,” by Lincoln Caplan, Caplan is explaining his side on the death penalty. Caplan goes on to discuss different cases specifically Glossip V. Gross which is a case in Oklahoma with death-row inmates that are opposed to the three drug protocol chosen by the state to execute death sentences. Caplan supports his opinion with another case back in 2010, with Jeffrey Landrigan who was scheduled for execution after being convicted of murder in Arizona. The reason Caplan brought up this case is due the fact that the United States had a shortage of the drug needed to execute Landrigan and obtained some non F.D.A approved drugs from a German company in Austria. In Ladrigan’s trial his lawyers wanted confirmation on the effectiveness of the drug and wanted to make sure that their client would not suffer and the state refused to provide …show more content…
Ever since the Supreme Court brought back the death penalty there has been about fourteen hundred people put to death since then and with about nine out of ten of the deaths by lethal injection. Caplan goes on to explain another major event in which supports his argument on how he feels about the death penalty, the case of Clayton D. Lockett in Oklahoma. Caplan argues in the execution of Lockett it was the first time the anesthetic a sedative called midazolam was used. It was over an hour before the executioner could find a vein in Lockett’s groin which made him unconscious and he did not die until quite of bit of time later. The rest of the article he discusses his personal opinion and why he feels we need to abolish capital punishment. He closes his article with this statement “ while capital punishment has negligible benefits to American criminal justice, it has imposed enormous, ever- increasing, and terrible