Presenting: Wednesday, Dec. 7
The United States federal government (in comparison to the separate states) applies the death penalty for crimes: treason, terrorism, espionage, federal murder, large-scale drug trafficking, and attempting to kill a witness, juror, or court officer in certain cases.
Definitions
Treason- the crime of betraying one 's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
Terrorism- the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
Espionage- the practice of spying or of using spies, typically by governments to obtain political and military information.
Federal Murder- A Killing Committed During Bank Robbery (18 U.S.C. Section 1111) Generally, the felony murder …show more content…
the Fifth Amendment can be read as evidence that the Founders inherently supported the death penalty... If a person can never be deprived of life by the state, why is the clause 'without due process of law ' necessary?
The cost of the death penalty vs. the cost of life in prison
End rate of cost of life in prison: 5.53 million
End rate of cost of the death penalty: 1.91 million
Over the years the death penalty costs less then it would to keep a prisoner of life in prison
recent research shows that each execution carried out is correlated with about 74 fewer murders the following year
Boston Marathon- Terrorism: three people dead, 264 injured
Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev
Ran brother over with a SUV(killed) trying to escape from police
Associated with Boston Bombings
Shot police officer
Recieved Death …show more content…
Should taxpayers money be going towards criminals?
Good citizens of the USA are basically paying for these people who have killed poeple, attempted murder, and terrorists.
These murderers could, after their sentence, be set free, Why would we keep murderers out on the streets?
If they are not sentenced to life in prison eventually they are back on the streets. Some people might try to avenge their
Isn 't the Death Penalty necessary as just retribution for victims ' families?
The family can have a choice to whether or not the criminal dies, but for mass killings it is obvious that the person can be dangerous and threaten lives of other people.
“Cruel and unusual punishment" those are strong words, but aren 't executions relatively swift and painless?
No execution is painless, but now there are injections which are cheaper, and more humane.
Introduction:
The Death Penalty first started in the Eighteenth Century as way to stop minor and major offenses such as murdering, spies and minor offenses such as trading with the Indians and killing a chicken. Today the death penalty has evolved to something that is used for only major offenses and a more humane way to execute
The United States federal government (in comparison to the separate states) applies the death penalty for crimes: treason, terrorism, espionage, federal murder, large-scale drug trafficking, and attempting to kill a witness, juror, or court officer in certain cases.
Definitions
Treason- the crime of betraying one 's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
Terrorism- the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
Espionage- the practice of spying or of using spies, typically by governments to obtain political and military information.
Federal Murder- A Killing Committed During Bank Robbery (18 U.S.C. Section 1111) Generally, the felony murder …show more content…
the Fifth Amendment can be read as evidence that the Founders inherently supported the death penalty... If a person can never be deprived of life by the state, why is the clause 'without due process of law ' necessary?
The cost of the death penalty vs. the cost of life in prison
End rate of cost of life in prison: 5.53 million
End rate of cost of the death penalty: 1.91 million
Over the years the death penalty costs less then it would to keep a prisoner of life in prison
recent research shows that each execution carried out is correlated with about 74 fewer murders the following year
Boston Marathon- Terrorism: three people dead, 264 injured
Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev
Ran brother over with a SUV(killed) trying to escape from police
Associated with Boston Bombings
Shot police officer
Recieved Death …show more content…
Should taxpayers money be going towards criminals?
Good citizens of the USA are basically paying for these people who have killed poeple, attempted murder, and terrorists.
These murderers could, after their sentence, be set free, Why would we keep murderers out on the streets?
If they are not sentenced to life in prison eventually they are back on the streets. Some people might try to avenge their
Isn 't the Death Penalty necessary as just retribution for victims ' families?
The family can have a choice to whether or not the criminal dies, but for mass killings it is obvious that the person can be dangerous and threaten lives of other people.
“Cruel and unusual punishment" those are strong words, but aren 't executions relatively swift and painless?
No execution is painless, but now there are injections which are cheaper, and more humane.
Introduction:
The Death Penalty first started in the Eighteenth Century as way to stop minor and major offenses such as murdering, spies and minor offenses such as trading with the Indians and killing a chicken. Today the death penalty has evolved to something that is used for only major offenses and a more humane way to execute