Ever since it was introduced, the death penalty has caused much division among the people of the United States. There happen to be a large amount of people in favor of the death penalty, but at the same time there are a large amount that are against it. As of today, there remain 33 states that have held on to the death penalty and 17 that have gotten rid of it. In my opinion, I have always believed that the death penalty should be a legal form of punishment throughout the entire country. A few of the reasons I believe this should be are proper retribution, a good form of crime deterrence, and more. On the other hand, it is easy to see that the arguments from the opposing viewpoint do not add up, and it can be easily refuted that the death penalty
…show more content…
Those who tend to side against the death penalty will claim that it is cruel and unusual and by definition goes against the eighth amendment in the constitution. But is the death penalty really cruel or unusual? The recipient on death row is treated 100% fairly and receives no tortuous punishment at all. They even receive anesthesia in order to completely numb the pain when it all goes down. When the injection is given it can be considered a little painful, but it is in no way enough to be deemed unconstitutional. In cases where this has reached the Supreme Court, the ruling has always been deemed constitutional. For example, in the Furman vs. Georgia case the Supreme Court upheld the ruling of capital punishment claiming that nothing about the death penalty was inhumane. It's never occurred that the Supreme Court has found the death penalty to ever go against the means of the Constitution so those who say that it is immoral are just wrong. Those who deny the death penalty also will say that there is always a chance that you are killing off somebody who did not commit the crime. This argument cannot be backed up much, however, due to the fact that this is a SUPER uncommon occasion and has not actually even happened since 1976, over 40 years ago. On ProCon.org, Steven Stewart argues against this logic by those who are against the death
Those who tend to side against the death penalty will claim that it is cruel and unusual and by definition goes against the eighth amendment in the constitution. But is the death penalty really cruel or unusual? The recipient on death row is treated 100% fairly and receives no tortuous punishment at all. They even receive anesthesia in order to completely numb the pain when it all goes down. When the injection is given it can be considered a little painful, but it is in no way enough to be deemed unconstitutional. In cases where this has reached the Supreme Court, the ruling has always been deemed constitutional. For example, in the Furman vs. Georgia case the Supreme Court upheld the ruling of capital punishment claiming that nothing about the death penalty was inhumane. It's never occurred that the Supreme Court has found the death penalty to ever go against the means of the Constitution so those who say that it is immoral are just wrong. Those who deny the death penalty also will say that there is always a chance that you are killing off somebody who did not commit the crime. This argument cannot be backed up much, however, due to the fact that this is a SUPER uncommon occasion and has not actually even happened since 1976, over 40 years ago. On ProCon.org, Steven Stewart argues against this logic by those who are against the death