Did Abraham Lincoln Free The Slaves Essays - Penology,

Did Abraham Lincoln Free The Slaves? Is capital punishment wrong? In my opinion capital punishment is wrong. The death penalty is the center of much debate in society. This is due, in part, to the fact that people see only the act of killing a criminal, and not the social effects the death penalty has on society as a whole. Upon reading about the death penalty, it was found to be an unethical practice. It promotes a violent and inhumane society in which killing is considered okay. Since there are alternatives, the death penalty should be abolished. Some people believe capital punishment to be cruel and unusual. Others believe that a person who kills, should themselves be killed. This statement alone raises the question, How should they be killed? The question that should really be asked is, Should we kill at all? Would it be morally correct to kill someone just because they have killed someone else? In 1972, capital punishment (in any form) was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. The decision was reversed in 1976, when new methods of execution were introduced. These new methods included death by lethal injection. Does this mean that it is okay to kill as long as we use a method that is not considered cruel or unusual by society? The death penalty is considered the harshest form of punishment enforced today. Once a jury has convicted a criminal, they go to the second part of the trial, the punishment phase. If the jury recommends the death penalty and the judge agrees that this punishment is deserving of the crime, the criminal will face some form of execution. Contrary to popular belief, the electric chair is not the most common way of executing somebody. Death by lethal injection accounts for the majority of the executions today. Among the arguments employed have been deterrence, cost, retribution, rehabilitation, uncertainty, social defense, and whether or not punishment by death is cruel and unusual. Retribution is a popular term when discussing the death penalty. This is a term which brings both sides of the death penalty argument together. Both the retentionists and the abolitionists agree that the notion of imposing the death penalty because the wrongdoer deserves it leaves an uneasy feeling with lawmakers and community leaders. This creates an image in society where a punishment is based on what a jury feels a criminal deserves as opposed to what is best for society. Retribution plays an important role for the friends and families of murder victims. They want the murderer to lose his/her life just as he/she took the life of someone they loved. Unfortunately, this is not always the best solution. If the crime was committed in the heat of the moment, perhaps due a momentary lapse of insanity, then there i s a likely chance that the criminal can be rehabilitated. Why waste a life? Appeal trials leads to the next issue surrounding the death penalty, uncertainty. Putting a convicted criminal in jail is not a permanent action. They can always be set free if they are later found to be innocent. However, when a convicted criminal is killed, it is very unlikely that they will be able to be brought back if they are later found to be innocent. This bothers the legal community, as well as the families of the accused. When discussing whether or not a punishment fits a given crime, one must look at the punishment's effects not only on the criminal, but also society as a whole. Many studies on the effects of the death penalty have shown that capital punishment creates a false sense of security within a community. People feel better knowing that the death penalty is always an option for a severe crime, whether or not the punishment is actually used. The principles of retribution suggest that a murderer should be executed because he or she deserves or has earned the sentence of death. Those who base their opposition to the death penalty on moral grounds argue that life is sacred and killing is always wrong, whether it is done by an individual or by the state. In addition, people have questioned whether we as individuals