Home » Capital Punishment » Essay on Death Penalty Thesis

Essay on Death Penalty Thesis

Authorities agree that the Death Penalty in the United States deters crime and reduces the number of murders. The Death Penalty needs to be consistently implemented or else the number of murders and homicides committed will be on the rise. A notable amount of homicides will be prevented when it is constantly enforced. Former Supreme Court Justice Marshall McComb revealed the files of the Los Angeles Police Department to display the deterrent effect of the Death Penalty on savage criminals. There are plenty of examples of murders not committed because of the deterrent effect the Death

Penalty has on criminals (Jacoby). In 1973, Isaac Ehrlich, an American economist who did extensive research on the deterrent effects of the Death Penalty, conducted a new type of analysis on Capital Punishment. The new analysis produced results showing that for every inmate executed, seven lives are saved. Criminals are deterred when met with the most severe punishment possible. States that have the Death Penalty and still have high murder rates would have even higher rates without the use of Capital Punishment (“Death Penalty Prevents”).

Dmitry Smirnov, a disgusting man who slaughtered he love of his life after she cut all communication, first checked whether the state she resided in utilized the Death Penalty. After discovering that Illinois had abolished the Death Penalty, he proceeded with brutally murdering this poor woman. Dmitry Smirnov is on record saying that he discovered Illinois abolished the Death Penalty “as recently as the morning of the murder,” and he later declared he knew what to expect because he said “Illinois doesn’t have the Death Penalty, so l’ll just spend the rest of my life in prison” (qtd. Jacoby).

Dmitry Smirnov is a perfect xample of how applying the Death Penalty will save lives. When there are more executions being utilized in reasonable ways there will be fewer murders. From 1995 to 2000, executions averaged 71 per year, a 21,000 percent increase over 1966-1980. During this period of time, the murder rate dropped from a high of 10. 2 murders per 100,000 to just 5. 7 in 1999. A 44 percent reduction, the murder rate was at its lowest level since 1966 (“Death”). The results are remarkably clear, murder rates increase significantly during periods of prohibition, and the death penalty deters murders.

Across all before and after comparisons, results are always constant regardless of the statistic regressions. Executions are proven to provide a large benefit to society (“Does”). Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University, Ernest Van Den Hogg, studied the Death Penalty and declared that statistics and common sense shows people that Capital Punishment will deter murder. People fear nothing more than death, and nothing deters a criminal more than death. Life in prison is not really feared among vicious criminals.

The United States needs to keep utilizing the Death Penalty as long as it is possible because the savage criminals’ execution protects citizens (“Top”). Federal Communication Commission economist, Paul Zimmerman, collected data from all 50 states from 1978 to 1997, and he demonstrated that each state execution deters an average of 14 homicides annually (Muhlhausen). When murder is punished with death, fewer criminals will murder. When prison is the only punishment for murder, more criminals will be encouraged to killI.

Margaret Elizabeth Daly, a woman who attacked Pete Gibbons with a knife, told authorities, “yeah, I cut him, and I should have done a etter job. I would have killed him, but I didn’t want to go to the gas chamber” (qtd. Jacoby). When Daly said she did not want to go to the gas chamber, Margret meant that she did not want to get the death penalty. In 2004, Michael Summers, professor of management science, conducted a study that examined the relationship between the number of executions and the number of murders for a 26 year period from 1979 to 2004.

The study revealed that when execution increase, the murders will decrease. In the early 1980s, the return of the Death Penalty was associated with the drop in murder rate. Since 2001, there as been a decrease in executions and an increase in murders. Naci Mocan, Professor and Chair of economics at Louisiana State University, investigated the impact of an execution, homicide arrest rate, commutation rates and the death penalty. He found a significant relationship among execution, commutation rates, and the rate of homicide.

Mocan revealed that each execution decreases homicides, and one additional removal from death row generates another homicide (“Does”). All penalties in the world have a deterrent effect. The harsher or costlier the penalty, the more of a deterrent effect I has on eople. An example of this is letting a parking meter expired which is a penalty of twenty dollars or parking in a handicap spot which is a penalty of 200 dollars. The penalty on the handicap spot would have a more deterrent effect because it’s costlier and has a more severe punishment than the parking meter penalty (Jacoby).

Modern referred studies have consistently shown the strong deterrent effect of the Death Penalty. Each execution deters between three and eighteen murders. Most criminals respond to sanctions and execution is the most severe sanction possible (“Does”). The cost of the Death Penalty may be somewhat high, but the deterrent effect yields a much more valuable benefit because it saves lives. A psychologist names David Lester of Richard Stockton College conducted a comprehensive review and study of capital punishment research.

Since 1975, almost all of the studies tracking effects of the Death Penalty have found deterrent effect (Muhlhausen). In California, there are currently 746 inmates in death row. Legal appeals and procedures make executions nearly impossible in the state. Studies have shown that the majority of Californians favor the Death Penalty. The state of California has not executed a criminal in ten years even with 746 inmates in death row. Proposition 66 will speed up executions with tighter schedules for court rulings and limits on appeals.

A UC Berkley poll shows users backing with the new proposition having 76% of people in favor of it and only 24% against (Jacoby). Abolitionists against the Death Penalty say that states that use Capital Punishment have higher crime rates than states that don’t have it, but they do not understand that these states have cities with a larger urban environment, and with an mmense population are more likely to have more crime. Without the Death Penalty, these states would have an even higher crime rate (“Death”). The Death Penalty is proven to deter crime by the most intelligent professors in the world.

Capital Punishment is moral, and the public’s attitude today still supports the Death Penalty. The act of murdering an innocent civilian is the most profane crime there is, anything less than the death penalty is an insult to the victim and society. It shows that we don’t value the victim’s life enough to punish the killer adequately. Punishment is the only way in which society xpresses its denunciation of wrong doing. Murder cannot be taken seriously if the penalty for it is not as serious. The crime done should only be as severe as the punishment that follows.

By exercising the highest penalty for taking a human life, it shows that we affirm the highest value for human life. The Death Penalty being persecuted hurts more lives than it saves, so it is only moral to punish the murderers accordingly (“Death”). A society that is not willing to demand a life of somebody who has taken an innocent life of somebody else in deliberate fashion is immoral. Someone who has done a heinous crime should be equally punished (“Is”). It is essential that the punishment inflicted for grave crimes should adequately reflect the revulsion felt by the great majority of citizens for them.

Some crimes are so outrageous that society insists on adequate punishment, irrespective to whether it is deterrent or not (“Death”). Homicide is a horrifying, vicious crime, and there are very few innocent on death row. The vast majority of inmates that did, in fact, commit the crimes that they were found guilty on. These killers brutally took the lives of innocent victims. By ot recognizing the lives of their victims as sacred, they cannot claim their own lives are sacred. The Death Penalty is an individual punishment for an individual crime Punishment is the only proven method to enforce the law.

Every American agrees that murder is a crime, and we agree there must be punishment for the crime. We disagree over whether the Death Penalty is a necessary punishment. If you recognize the sanctity of human life, there is no debate. The ultimate crime deserves the ultimate punishment (Bowman). Capital Punishment should not be abolished because it is infinitely less repulsive than the acts one to invoke it. The Death Penalty is necessary to promote peace and prosperity in the United States and to get rid of the people that commit the most heinous lives.

Capital punishment is an inevitable and unavoidable consequence of every civilized society. No executed murderer has ever been released to kill again. People cannot say the same about those sentenced in prison because many eventually get out with parole and begin to murder again (“Death”). The crime of rape, torture, kidnapping, and murder pivot on moral code that escapes the government, and instead of utilizing the Death Penalty, the overnment punishes the criminal with a life sentence in prison for even the worst crimes.

Abolitionists argue that the death penalty is immoral because the government should never take a human life no matter what crime, but the Death Penalty honors human dignity by treating the defendant as a free moral actor able to control his or her destiny for good or for bad (“Top”). Each year hundreds of American citizens are murdered by released and pardoned criminals. There are many serious flaws in life sentences that abolitionists believe are trivial to nonexistent. There is no doubt that keeping murders alive is far more dangerous than putting them to death (“Death”).

Currently, there are thirty-eight states still practicing the Death Penalty, and these states only implement it for the most heinous crimes. So, it is definitely moral to just use it for first degree murder, rape or torture because it relieves the victim’s U. S families and gets rid of a murderer that could potentially kill other people if pardoned. Even if there was a first degree murder, it still requires an extensive review process to prove the criminal is actually guilty (Pearce).

One reason why governments exist is to defend citizens from vicious criminals and when it fails to do that, the government becomes of little use to its constituents. When society ignores their moral duty to defend the safety and security of their decent citizens and leaves them at the mercy of violent criminals, they are not being civilized. They are being negligent. The Death Penalty is moral because it protects citizens from murderers, and if a criminal does take an innocent life, they need to be punished equally to their crime committed.

Abolitionists claim the Death Penalty is unconstitutional and immoral by quoting the eighth amendment which forbids cruel and unusual punishment, but our founding fathers have never defined it. In several Supreme Court cases, justices rule that Capital Punishment is an acceptable remedy by the constitution for the worst crimes possible. An example of the Death Penalty being moral is a serial killer named Allen Mcduff. He was first sentenced to death, was later sentenced to life in prison by the Supreme Court in 1972. Mcduff was eventually pardoned in 1989 and two years later, he murdered another innocent life.

This shows that Capital Punishment is the most moral way to take out the worst criminal (Pearce). As of late 2010, the Death Penalty is the third most morally acceptable issue in the U. S to Americans. Only gambling and divorce had a higher percentage of people supporting it. There are currently 62% supporting it and 30% against it. Even though there has been a decline to the support of the Death Penalty, the majority of the public is still for it rather than not (“Death”). Capital punishment is morally required, not for retributive reasons, but rather to prevent the taking of innocent lives.

States are obliged to maintain the death penalty option for that reason (“Is”). In a 2013 survey from Harris Polls, pollsters found that 63% of those voted supported Capital Punishment, with 7% undecided and 30% against it. Republicans strongly favor the death penalty with 78% favoring it. Capital Punishment is morally acceptable and polls show that it is still morally acceptable to the public today (Evans). The Death Penalty costs significantly less than life in prison, it is done in the most humane way possible, and retribution is needed for the victim and their family for the heinous crimes the criminal has committed.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this essay please select a referencing style below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.