Capital Punishment in the United States

Capital punishment is one of the problems that has left the United States in pieces and with different opinions by the people. Since there are numerous supporters of it, there also exist some form of resistance. As of now, there are some states that have capital punishment as being lawful. According to the information from the death penalty information center, there are more than ten expresses that have been nullified. There are many reasons with reference to why I trust capital punishment ought to be sanctioned in all states, including prevention, reprisal, and profound quality; and in light of the fact that contradicting contentions don’t hold up, I will negate the thoughts that capital punishment is illegal, unavoidable oversights are made, and that there is a disproportionality of race and pay level.

According to one philosopher known as Isaac Ehrlich in 1973, it can be seen that in every execution that regards criminality, there have been few lives of casualty that have been spared. This is information according to the Death Penalty Curricula for High School. This was because of other conceivable killers being prevented from carrying out murder after acknowledging that other culprits are executed for their wrongdoings. Ehrlich’s contention was at some point moved down by studies taking after his that seemed to have different opinions that were contrary to his. Capital punishment, on the other hand, does acts of revenge legitimately. According to Budziszewski“Merited discipline ensures society ethically by re-establishing this simply arrange, making the transgressor pay a value equal to the mischief he has done.”Capital punishment puts the equilibriums of equity back in adjust after they were arbitrarily angled towards the criminal.

Capital punishment can be said to have existed for quite some time. Individuals who have been accused and witnessed this type of punishment have had their opinions that it is unfair for the legislature to bring to an end the life of somebody under unclear circumstances. This notion has been disapproved by one Immanuel Kant who says that “a general public that is not willing to request an existence of some individual who has taken another person’s life is just indecent.” According to (ProCon.org) it is indecent to not reasonably put-down somebody who is not rightfully accused of any issue. Once a criminal has been accused in a court of law, there is no pity, and thus he/she faces the act of law definitely. According to Bosner, before the criminal is subjected to a difficult condition, the criminals are given enough time to expand their territories and defend their cases before the final decision has arrived. It is a memory for the United States people to get individuals being exposed to hanging or hot seat.

The eighth amendment to the United States Constitution aims at preventing indiscipline that arises from individuals. According to opinions from people who are against this law, it is seen that the judgment is abusing the constitution since individuals are murdered in cold blood before their expectations. The Supreme Court has in many cases stood firm in some of the punishments that they have managed. According to Furman v. Georgia, he expresses his view by saying that, ”The discipline of death is not coldblooded, inside the importance of that word as utilized as a part of the Constitution. It suggests there is something more brutal and savage, than the negligible extinguishment of life“(Lowe). The highest court has also been seen not to be practicing a fair deal with the culprits since it does not view this form of punishment as being against the law.

Another reason being advocated by the freedom fighters and the advocates for the minority is the chances of the court executing an honest individual mistakenly and being caught unaware.

Stewart one of the philosophers has tried to call attention to this type of punishment and thus holding it at a higher standard. The cases for the individuals accused by the court may take a little bit longer before a decision is arrived at because the court needs to be certain and ensure capital punishment is awarded to the right individual. This is a relief to individuals who may have been wrongly convicted and placed mistakenly in mistakes they may not have committed. On the other side, Stewart argues that in case some mix-ups has arrived at the court, the capital punishment should not be terminated. It is then necessary to correct errors that may arise, and this will promote peace and harmony in the society by decreasing the level of errors that may arise.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be seen that there is no fair proportional understanding from the court of law. It is then clear that some races and classes are favored when it comes to capital punishment. Those with huge rewards can easily corrupt and get relieved from their punishment while the low and those with less income lack a way of meeting the rewards needed to be relieved of punishment. There is no difference arrived at when races and classes are considered in a court of law to be deprived the capital punishment. Capital punishment can, therefore, be of great importance when rolled out to individuals with full proof that they committed some violations which are unethical to any society.

Reference

Bosner, Kevin. ”How Lethal Injection Works.” How Stuff Works. Web. 29 March 2013.

Budziszewski, J. ”Capital Punishment: The Case for Justice.” OrthodoxyToday.org.August 2004. Web. 29 March 2013.

Death Penalty Curricula for High School. ”The Death Penalty Prevents Future Murders: Agree.” Michigan State University Comm Tech Lab & Death Penalty Information Center. Web. 30 March 2013.

Death Penalty Information Center. ”States With and Without the Death Penalty”. Death Penalty Information Center. 2013. Web. 28 March 2013.

Green, Melissa S. ”The Death Penalty: Specific Issues.” Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage. 24 March 2005. http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/death/issues.html>

”Justifications for Capital Punishment.” Justiceblind.com. Web. 30 March 2013.

Lowe, Wesley. ”Pro Death Penalty Webpage.” Wesleylowe.com. Web. 30 March 2013.

ProCon.org. ProCon.org. Web. 28 March 2013.