Death Penalty in America
The 8th Amendment protects you against cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court, however, has held (in Gregg v. Georgia) that the death penalty is acceptable. What do you think?
posted by JLBinChicago @ 9:50 AM
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Contributors
- Emma
- Kfranks
- Adam F B
- Trumpet14
- Savan Kadakiya
- Jessica Tsenver
- A. Chan
- Samantha Wei
- Alexandria Lee
- Jordan Eselevsky
- connieeee :)
- leah ludwig
- LH
- AShemesh
- cyaffe
- Geoff
- Sang Lee
- Unknown
- Vishhvaan Gopalakrishnan
- B4tt1enet
- LGregorcy9
- tschwa
- IuliaP
- Z Alli
- Stella Yi
- aprilyuj
- Nathaniel (Hugo) Cha
- Amy L.
- K.S.
- Corey
- Cici
- Mike
- Mike Pastore
- becca1012
- Shelby Mason
- southernheritage
- MelissaMoseley
- Leah Ludwig
- LW416
- Thatguy
- Stephanie Hunter
- Captain America
- Adam Arvan
- sarahwickman
- Spence L.
- davey
- Chihiro
- Sean Madden
- Unknown
- alexandra_tejan
- SRobert
- Sarah
- Michaela
- jylchristolini
- Wes Olker
- Unknown
- Unknown
- Unknown
- AK
- mricchio
- hrshykiss107
- delaney widen
- Julie Penteris
- Steve Wolf
- Prinston Varghese
- joycelee
- A.K.A.CORNELIUS
- Brian Barker
- Cweiss
- T-Rimmy
- Jordan Borkan
- Justin S.
- Jennifer
- Kevin Welter
- Elizabeth Reeves
- Carolina Freier
- drebnord
- AlisaT
- Pat Howard
- Joey Tran
- karen yan =)
- Jamie
- Margaret
- Jabrum
- Unknown
- Elisabeth
- Gabby Gordon
- Jpo
- Nickey S
- Alexa Helmboldt
- crazycat
- jannipoo
- cliffordjho
- Michelle Flaksman
- Denis
- Marc K.
- mnguyen8
- Unknown
- JLBinChicago
- Zach
- NaomiD41
- katdavis
- Eunice C.
- Art
- LivWoz
- Joe Weiner
- Deena
- secretly psycho
- sfrankle
- jfeeny8
- Daniella Brutman
- david j
- ClaireMoller
- S Anna
- sarahquinn
- Elissa
- Devin
- Brandon Palmer
- Hanna Lee
- Amy
- Wayne Glickstern
- Imagine91
Previous Posts
- A New Year....
- Review Sessions
- AP Test
- Gerald Ford
- Election Day 2006
- Who's #1?
- Out of Touch?
- Time to Trash the Electoral College?
- Illinois Governor's Race
- The "Vote or Die" Generation
15 Comments:
having the death penalty is wrong although i can see how it is put to good use. there are the people that say and eye for an eye although thats not how the justice system works. first there is a trial and then from there they decide if the punishment fits the crime. having the death penalty i do think is right and that it is morally ok because there are people who actually deserve it and if it is moral for them its moral for the government.
I actually did this for my junior research paper, therefore, can provide some evidence and stats as to why the death penalty needs to be abolished. First off, over 120 individuals have been exonerated and sent home after being sentenced to death. Some people weeks away from being executed when they were proven innocent. Its unconstitutional to even leave the chance that an innocent person is killed by the state. The second main idea that deals with the constitution is that it goes against our 6th, 8th and 14th ammendments, rights which are guaranteed to us as Americans. The sixth amendment entitles the right to an effective assistance of counsel. Low-paid, inexperienced and incompetent lawyers, however, represent many suspects. This results in unfair representation, which should not be allowed when one’s life is at stake. The eighth amendment rules out cruel and unusual punishment. As previously stated, lethal injection can be cruel, and all cases where death is the punishment is unusual as well. The 14th amendment guarantees every citizen the right to life, liberty, and justice. There is no asterisk in the Constitution that states “except for murderers.” A murderer is still a human and has a right to life. Therefore, the death penalty in the United States contradicts everything the U.S. constitution stands for. One final example to show how inhumane the death penalty is, is from a case that took place in Ohio last year: Joseph Clarke awoke during his execution and screamed "its not working, stop it, its not working." The studies done afterwards proved that many executions allow the patient to slowly suffocate while conscious and unable to communicate. Clearly unhmane and goes against our rights as Americans.
It is a difficult subject to dicuss. I feel the death peneltay should be used to some extent. Keeping someone in prison for several years then finally deciding to kill him is not the way this system should work. In the movie "Dead Man Walking" starring Sean Penn, he is killed at the end of the film. Although it was a sad scene, I somewhat felt he deserved it after raping and killing the boy and girl. It is a sensitive subject that will always be discussed.
I'm not really sure where I stand on the death penalty. Of course, executing an innocent person would be horrific. But if a person were really guilty beyond a doubt (which is how they were convicted, right?) and there were a way to humanely end a life, I would be inclined to accept the death penalty.
But there's no way to be 100% sure on the first part, and it's pretty much impossible to argue that the death penalty is humane. So I guess I don't support the death penalty. But in cases like one in the Tribune a few days ago about a man getting the death sentence for knocking on a door for others to kill the victim, the death penalty is obviously not the right choice.
I personally do not believe in the death penalty, because yes, ending a life is the worst thing you can do to someone, but if a criminal committed an act so horrible that it warrants the death penalty, I think that a better punishment would be to let them sit in a jail cell for the rest of their life, living with what they did. I realize that there are flaws to this plan due to the overcrowding of prisons, but in an ideal situation (there is no ideal situation w/ regards to the death penalty, but you know what I mean) there would be a special place in jail for those to stay who have committed such inhumane acts.
People who commit horrendous murders do not feel regret. The death penalty is the only way to inflict proper justice in these cases.
I believe that, even though the death penalty can be seen as cruel and unsual, that it's not like the people who get the death penalty get it after committing one crime. The death penalty is used for the people who commit horrible things over and over again and not that putting people to death will solve anything. but if these people are allowed to live who knows what else they may do. and also many people can look and say "im not going to do that look at so and so they were put to death for doing that. so i dont think its used to punish these people i think the government is trying to scare others so that these things dont continue to happen. But the death penalty shouldnt be used to quickly but in some instances it should be put to use to prevent the individual and to try and reduce the amount of other people from committing the same crime
I strongly disagree with the death penalty. With extreme cases such as execution, I really don't believe that two wrongs make a right. Punishment can be found in other ways. Wouldn't you think that someone would feel more punished living the rest of their life in a prison than having to face just one unbearable day? The death penalty almost seems to me like the easy way out. Someone who commits a heinous crime should be punished, but to take away their life would also allow for them to experience their guilt and learn a lesson.
Not only is the death penalty not a sufficient punishment, but I do believe that our right to be protected from cruel and unusual punishment should protect citizens from being executed. As previously stated, a more fitting punishment for serious crimes could be life in prison or something like that. The government should definitely reconsider their stance on the death penalty.
Personally, I believe that the death penalty is wrong just because a normally moral person is forced to actually give the injection or flip the electrical switch. Although they may deserve it, I do believe that making another person commit another crime (although not considered one in court) is wrong. And a few years ago I heard about some of the ways they go about lethal injections for those on death row. Basically, I understood it to be that 3 different people give one person 3 different injections. Although only one person actually gave the lethal injection, the 3 personel don't actually know which of them is killing the man. To me, it seemed like 3 men were forced to dealwith the guilt of killing a man, when actually only 1 was the true "killer". For me, I don't look at the convicted when considering the death penalty, because if that were the case I would have no problem giving the death penalty to someone who raped and murdered another. But rather, I look at those who actually go through with finding "the justice."
- Tovah Schwartz Period 6
As cruel as it may sound, I do agree with the death sentence. I think some clause should be put in it stating that there can be not even a slight chance whatsoever that the rulling was incorrect (like the case with Scott Peterson: there was no sound, 100% DNA evidence) (Although I do think he was guilty). But they do have the whole appeals process and 20 year waiting period so hopefully no one if wrongfully accused... With that said, it's also important to consider the financial aspect of it all. Our current prison system is clearly failing and overcrowded. With the death sentence fully in effect, there could possibly be a significantly lower number of murderers' lives to sponsor in prison.
I disagree with the death penalty. Even though they might have did something wrong, we shouldn't have to slum to their level. Some of the people that are put on the death penalty later find that they are innocent. And if we sentence them to death arent we breaking are own laws of commiting murder. I know some people say that putting them to the death penalty saves us money, nut a life is worth so much more then money.
I think that the death penalty is definitely wrong and qualifies as "cruel and unusual punishment." There should not be an exception to the American guarantee of life, liberty, and property for everyone. No matter the crime, we shouldn't be reverting to primitive punishment of punishing individuals by death. Even though new forms of lethal injection seem to be more humane, making a human being wait for months on death row knowing they will be executed, is truly inhumane. In the worst case scenerio, a death row inmate is wrongfully accused. It would be absolutely horrible to wrongfully execute individuals of crimes that they didn't commit.
However horrible of crimes someone has committed, they are still people and deserve to live no matter what.
While I do not think the government should spend so much money incarcerating people as they do now, I certainly do not believe the government should spend money on executing people as the alternative. Paying more for someone to live (life in prison) is better than paying less for someone to die (death penalty).
Is the death penalty cruel and unusual? It could be. The methods for killing someone are imperfect, and the people carrying out the execution could screw something up. But "cruel and unusual" is obviously debatable, and many people consider death to fit this term. Although it is up to the courts to make the final judgment, I don't think death is decision that can be made. Neither majority opinion in the courts or even in the entire country can make this decision. Death might be a consequence in war, but it cannot be a punishment nor should it be an intended consequence on anyone. This is something that I consider to be an absolute truth: that death is not a verdict to be handed out...in a perfect world it should only occur naturally.
Another relative issue would be whether someone should be allowed to die based on their freewill (suicide). I believe in strong social freedoms/choices, and although suicide is a personal choice, committing this act inhibits a person's ability to make further choices. Without the death penalty, if some don't want to live the rest of their lives in prison, inevitable many people will get creative.
An interesting list to look at is the final meal requests of death row inmates from Texas. Some of them have very elaborate or large meals, while others made simple requests like "Cool Whip and cherries" or even stranger "1 bag of assorted Jolly Ranchers." One of them made no request but finally chose a hamburger at his mother's recommendation. Another simply requested "something to drink," a very profound indifference. While you can debate the merits of the death penalty all you want, when it gets down to the last meal someone is going to eat before they die, I think everyone's last meal request is heartbreaking whether it is unique or fairly standard.
I feel that this is a very difficult topic to talk about. There are some aspects that I agree with and some that I do not. I feel that it is not fair that someone deserves to live when they have taken another's life from them, especially because they usually do not regret it. Letting them live would only allow them to feel the satisfaction of getting away with what they did, but there are the cases where the "guilty" actually did not commit the crime or are not represented fairly, so in those cases I think that the death penalty is unfair. It is very controversial and difficult to determine.
Post a Comment
<< Home