Capital punishment also known as the death penalty, in the simplest terms, is the act of executing a person for crimes that they have committed. As far back as we can go humans have killed each other. We have systematically killed each other for centuries, whether is it was genocide or execution; humans have ended life at the discretion of their peers. One might ask why we still hold these terrifying traditions to this day. The death penalty is unjust because it is a horrendous thing to do to a human, it is more expensive then imprisoning them and it does not always bring satisfaction or relief to family members of the victim.
The death penalty can be administered in many different ways. The most common way is through lethal …show more content…
Some feel it provides justice or scares criminals from committing crimes. Others say they would rather not pay for the criminal to be in jail, or that they don’t feel they deserve to be let off easy. They say that if the prisoners were to escape they would be a threat to society. They feel that there is no way to save these people from their dark and evil ways. An article written by the LA times states, “Every legal argument against the death penalty begins with the 8th or 5th Amendment. The 8th bars "cruel and unusual punishments," and the 5th guarantees "due process of law" before a person can be "deprived of life, liberty or property." But there is no serious constitutional argument against the death penalty.” They take the argument of it being constitutionally legal. According to the Supreme Court this is true. Although this is true, that does not mean that it is just. The Constitution may be the law of the land, but it is not the moral compass. It was written in a different time when slavery was legal and humans’ rights barely existed if at all. We live in a new day and age, one where we can make changes for the betterment of society. Some people simply do not see it that …show more content…
They would also say that there are interest groups based on victim’s families who didn’t want their aggressor to be executed. The second, which is the largest misconception, is that it is in fact cheaper to put someone in jail for life then to execute them. For example California could save over 1 billion dollars over a five-year period if it eliminated the death penalty. In an article released by USA Today they said, ‘"It 's 10 times more expensive to kill them than to keep them alive," though most Americans believe the opposite, said Donald McCartin, a former California jurist known as "The Hanging Judge of Orange County" for sending nine men to death row.”’ In California he average process takes over twenty years before and execution is carried out. That us twenty years of paying for the housing and feeding of these criminals and paying for the legal system to process all the appeals. This wastes millions of taxpayer dollars. The third is that some victim’s families feel that the execution does not bring them justice; it in fact brings them the feeling of the responsibility of the loss of more life and robs them of the chance of ever finding forgiveness in their heart, which is essential to the grieving process. Some argue that it is deterrence but many studies show that a criminal who does these awful acts rarely have any value of their own life. If they don’t
The death penalty can be administered in many different ways. The most common way is through lethal …show more content…
Some feel it provides justice or scares criminals from committing crimes. Others say they would rather not pay for the criminal to be in jail, or that they don’t feel they deserve to be let off easy. They say that if the prisoners were to escape they would be a threat to society. They feel that there is no way to save these people from their dark and evil ways. An article written by the LA times states, “Every legal argument against the death penalty begins with the 8th or 5th Amendment. The 8th bars "cruel and unusual punishments," and the 5th guarantees "due process of law" before a person can be "deprived of life, liberty or property." But there is no serious constitutional argument against the death penalty.” They take the argument of it being constitutionally legal. According to the Supreme Court this is true. Although this is true, that does not mean that it is just. The Constitution may be the law of the land, but it is not the moral compass. It was written in a different time when slavery was legal and humans’ rights barely existed if at all. We live in a new day and age, one where we can make changes for the betterment of society. Some people simply do not see it that …show more content…
They would also say that there are interest groups based on victim’s families who didn’t want their aggressor to be executed. The second, which is the largest misconception, is that it is in fact cheaper to put someone in jail for life then to execute them. For example California could save over 1 billion dollars over a five-year period if it eliminated the death penalty. In an article released by USA Today they said, ‘"It 's 10 times more expensive to kill them than to keep them alive," though most Americans believe the opposite, said Donald McCartin, a former California jurist known as "The Hanging Judge of Orange County" for sending nine men to death row.”’ In California he average process takes over twenty years before and execution is carried out. That us twenty years of paying for the housing and feeding of these criminals and paying for the legal system to process all the appeals. This wastes millions of taxpayer dollars. The third is that some victim’s families feel that the execution does not bring them justice; it in fact brings them the feeling of the responsibility of the loss of more life and robs them of the chance of ever finding forgiveness in their heart, which is essential to the grieving process. Some argue that it is deterrence but many studies show that a criminal who does these awful acts rarely have any value of their own life. If they don’t