Here is a chance for you to think about where you stand on another major issue.
The economic argument in favor of the death penalty is rather simple. Economists assume that individuals weigh the expected costs and benefits when deciding to undertake any activity. Thus, rational individuals considering criminal activities would weigh the expected benefits against the expected cost of the criminal endeavor. The expected cost of any given crime is affected by the probability of being detected, the probability of being convicted given detection, and the expected penalty that results from a conviction. Since the death penalty provides a higher cost than alternative punishments, it is expected to generate a larger deterrent effect, ceteris paribus.
Go to the website and use two sources to justify whether you are for or against the death penalty.
I am against the death penalty for reasons other than stated in the articles, but what the ACLU states about it going against the 8th amendment means much when dealing with a citizen, or any human being. Also, the fact that many of the convicted "criminals" who suffer the death penalty were innocent to begin with. This causes the system to wrongfully murder innocent people yearly.
ReplyDeleteOopsie
DeleteForgot to put sources in parentheses
Although as a whole I am in favor of the death penalty (when applied properly), it should only be used when there is irrefutable evidence that somebody committed a particularly heinous crime. Society as a whole has largely forgotten the idea that someone is "innocent until proven guilty" (not the other way around), and, as a result, it has sentenced to death too many innocent individuals. If we were to follow the procedures recommended by the American Bar Association (Source #1) to "minimize the risk of convicting an innocent person," we could as a whole be far more content with the death penalty knowing that we weren't killing people left and right that were innocent all along. But, as of now, we cannot be confident in the current system at all because according to a local ABC news report derived from the Death Penalty Information Center (Source #2), 96% of people on death row were wrongly convicted. Ultimately, while I may be in favor of the death penalty for those that we can be completely sure committed horrendous crimes, its application needs to undergo a serious review across the country to make it far more effective than it currently is so that innocent people aren't sent to their deaths.
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am for the Death Penalty as it serves well to efficiently save costs of life term inmates, positively routing tax money to something more important to current citizens. The reimbursement from essentially investing our tax dollars into prisons is ridiculously inefficient with advanced human rights regulations, forcing payment for unnecessary needs of inmates. Cases without the death penalty cost $740,000, while cases where the death penalty is sought cost $1.26 million. Maintaining each death row prisoner costs taxpayers $90,000 more per year than a prisoner in general population (source 1). The capital punishment is a legal penalty in the United States, currently used by 31 states and the federal government for the reasoning that it is immoral, yet it is indisputably less costly (source 2).
Arij Moiz (period 2nd)
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am for death penalty since it can address the problem of overpopulation in the prisons and overpopulated countries. Plus, I think if we let them live then they would just escape and cause crimes. Also, if there's strict punishments within the society then people would tend to work hard rather than finding short-cuts which would make the crime rates to decrease. Furthermore, economically thinking the cost to take care of an inmate is much higher. According to The New York Times article, "the city paid $167,731 to feed, house and guard each inmate" in the year of 2012 and the cost keeps on increasing causing the taxes to increase too. Adding on, a study by Lewis & Clark Law School and Seattle University have stated that Oregon taxpayers have to pay average of $2.3 million in total including the cost to maintain jails.
1.)https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/nyregion/citys-annual-cost-per-inmate-is-nearly-168000-study-says.html
2.) http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty
I am in favor of the death penalty. There are some human beings out there who have proven themselves an absolute danger to society, and instead of spending our money on keeping them in jail, the problem should be taken care of at its root. Although a death row case can cost almost $2 million dollars over the course of six years, equivalent criminal cases can cost about $5.5 million for a life sentence (http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#D.Cost). It is such a taboo concept, since taking another person's life is not an easy decision, but it is barely implemented nowadays anyways. The only reason it doesn't provide a larger deterrent effect is because it only affects a small portion of murderers (https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty?redirect=library/case_against_death.html). If the consequence of death was to be a more palpable reality, I believe it would deter more premeditated crime. Being sentenced to life in prison gives the brightest crooks time to plan other nefarious deeds, even escape, if they so choose. It shouldn't be used lightly, but death penalty also shouldn't be frowned upon the way it is, as it gets rid of the biggest threats.
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
DeleteI am for the death penalty for many reasons.Let the punishment fit the crime. People who oppose of the death penalty wrongly see revenge and justice, because they both would cause pain and suffering on those who have cause suffering and pain on others.
ReplyDeleteRevenge has no limits, Justice must have some restrictions and be appropriately directed: The punishment MUST fit the crime.We should only execute those who most deserve it. We should review the sentences of everyone on death row.
1) http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000
2)http://deathpenalty.procon.org/
Hannah Abie Period 2
DeleteI am for the death penalty. I think that the person on trial should be for sure guilty of their crimes, because some people have been accused and punished for crimes they have not committed. but certain people should be given the death penalty because if they are imprisoned then there is a chance for them to escape, and break the law again then the safer option would be the death penalty. Giving people the death penalty saves a lot of money for tax payers everywhere, (1) Marc Santora from the New York Times says that "The annual average taxpayer cost [is] $31,286 per inmate" which is alot when there are multiple people in prison. The Death penalty is also an incentive to not break the law ever since the death penalty has been in affect in the states they are in crimes that deserve the death penalty has decreased. This is shown in the death sentences chart on the death penalty fact chart (2). These are the reasons why I think the death penalty should be used.
ReplyDeleteDevin Laird Period 2
DeletePeriod 2
ReplyDeleteI am in favor of the death penalty. If there is concrete evidence for a heinous crime the inmate should have the death penalty. Not every inmate can have life sentences or resources for inmates would start to deplete. But the death penalty is not just a matter of heinous crimes, racial bias has seemingly been a factor for numerous incidents. In present day, majority of America feels as if Daniel Roof who initiated the Church Massacre of 2015 is easily avoiding the blunt force of the death penalty. Racial bias is such a sensitive topic that "[r]ecent studies concerning racial bias and wrongful convictions have lead the governors of Maryland and Illinois to introduce a moratorium on the application of the death penalty in their states" (South-Western College Publishing 2003). If the crime is as uncaused as was Roof's then there should be no way of escaping the death penalty. I believe people would be more in favor of the death penalty if they understood true injustice. To apply such a harsh sentence should involve extensive examination of the accused to ensure that innocent people do not die. Phil Porter addresses this as he "notes that the death penalty is fallible (a substantial number of innocent people have been convicted), and has historically been applied in a discriminatory manner" (Phil Porter, "The Economics of Capital Punishment").
Neelam Patel
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
I am for the death penalty. These should really be sentenced/given to the person that are guilty with strong evidence because many people that have never committed the crime get accused of committing it. Over time, "we have proven that the criminal justice system fails to protect the innocent and persons with serious mental disabilities and illnesses from execution" which shows that the death penalty and serious sentences go to people who do not deserve it (Source #1). Furthermore, there have been examples that deserved the death penalty but haven't got it. For example, a 13 year old girl was shot in her bed in North Charleston, S.C. by her neighbor "who had already served 10 years of a life sentence for murdering his half-brother Charles in 1970" (Source #2). He should have already got his death sentence when he murdered his half-brother. This is one example where the death penalty should have been used but was not.
1. https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty
2. http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/
Tracy Colbert
ReplyDelete2nd period
I am for the death penalty. Though it would be interesting to let the victims loved ones' choose the outcome of the situation.With capital punishments " We must think about the lives that all... murdered victims affected. Every one had families, friends, relatives, co-workers, neighbors. The combined loss is incalculable" (source 1) . When thinking about how the victims loved ones feel and are going though I would absolutely support the death penalty. however one can argue "time and time again, we have proven that the criminal justice system fails to protect the innocent and persons with serious mental disabilities and illnesses from execution"(source 2) which I do think that the death penalty should only be for cases with complete certainty and no mental illness associated.
1. http://www.prodeathpenalty.com
2. http://www.aclu.org/death-penalty
Kylee Brouwer
ReplyDelete2nd period
I am against the death penalty. This country wastes too much money on the people that care the least about America if they are willing to disregard the rules. The Denver, Colorado District Attorney Beth McCann says "life without the possibility of parole ... gets to the punishment piece, but doesn't cost the taxpayers those millions and millions of dollars that could be used to prosecute other cases." (1) I also believe that there are too many people who are wrongly accused and sit on death row, most-likely because their attorney was unable to provide adequate support. There have been a total of 156 exonerations and takes way too long to prove them innocent because attorneys have to dig up so much covered up secrets (2).
1. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
2. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty
Janelle Rodriguez
ReplyDelete2nd period
I am against the death penalty. Whether you are religious or not who are we to judge those on their crimes. Of course justice should be taken into consideration, and the criminals should be responsible for their actions, however death is not the solution. If we punish those murders through death what are we learning? that it is okay to murder if he or she did is a murderer. If we are supposed to obey the constitution, then criminals have "equal protection under the law" (ACLU), just like everyone else. Furthermore, to use the death penalty its cost is "larger than the costs associated with providing lifetime imprisonment"(1). We should not spend more money on criminals than we already do lifetime imprisonment should suffice. Also these victims could be falsely accused, and if they are dead they cannot come back to life to receive justice.
1. http://www.swcollege.com/bef/policy_debates/death_penalty.html
2. https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty?redirect=library/case_against_death.html
i am against the death penalty. what gives any of us as human beings the power to decide whether someone lives or die? as far as im concerned, all humans have the right to life liberty and pursuit of happiness and this is clearly in violation of that. what we should replace the death penalty with is rehabilitation. if we rehabilitate our criminals we can give them a second chance to contribute to society and those that cant will just simply serve a life sentence. furthermore, this could prevent a huge number of innocent deaths that couldve asily been avoided. in short, our emotion isnt more important that helping humanity as a whole thrive
ReplyDeleteJoel George
ReplyDeletePeriod: 2nd
I am all for the death penalty, I agree that violent criminals who've commited heinious crimes should be executed. As the policy debate states "Individuals weigh the expected costs and benefits when deciding to undertake any activity", thus aware of their actions, there should be retribution for their crimes. While there are certain clauses that exclude criminals from federal punishment, criminals who fit the criteria should be punished. The only problem I have with it, is the cost (which is being taken from our taxes). We should think of cheaper methods of administering capital punishment for as the article states "Since the death penalty provides a higher cost than alternative punishments", we should think of more cost effective ways to eliminate these criminals.
Yeah, sorry I was kinda dark ~(^_^)~
Carina Hung, 6th Period
ReplyDeleteI stand opposed to the death penalty, for this punishment for ending life unlawfully is ending life unethically. Although the death penalty does exist in the United States, it does not dissuade individuals from committing a crime such as murder (Bedau). The punishment encourages humanity to believe that a person’s right to exist can be revoked more easily than a person is given life, possibly leading more individuals to rationalize the idea of murdering. It is statistically proven that capital punishment does not deter violent crime, so the taxpayer funds used to carry out this form of punishment would be used more efficiently to reduce such crimes if directed to alternative forms of civil protection (Bedau). In addition, discrimination plays a factor in deciding who becomes victims of the death penalty. Seventy-six percent of those executed since 1976 had killed at least one Caucasian victim (American Civil Liberties Union). Although murderers are still murderers, the lack of inequality in the criminal justice system is atrocious. The death penalty acts as a veil; it creates an illusion of increasing safety where there is none. The costs outweigh the benefits of the death penalty.
Sources:
http://www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html
http://www.aclu.org/death-penalty/
Sarah Rassam
ReplyDelete6th Period
I am opposed to the death penalty due to the flaws that are associated with this punishment. I believe that the death penalty should be abolished within the United States because of the fact that it won't put a stop to criminal acts. Although I do believe that criminals should be punished according to the severity of the crime they committed, I strongly believe that taking one's life away is not the way to solve problems and is morally wrong. The loss of a life in return for the loss of another is not away of accomplishing anything. In addition, the FBI claims that the states who practice the death penalty experience the most rates of murder. Also, I believe that the death penalty is strongly racially biased due to it being used on individuals who are in the minorities as well as discriminating them upon their social status. The death penalty kills people for crimes which they have not actually committed; in fact, there is always one innocent person out of seven convicted people. In conclusion, it has not been proven that the death penalty decreases the rate of crime.
Sources:
https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty?redirect=library/case_against_death.html
http://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj.html
Mervin Cherian
ReplyDeletePeriod: 2
I am against the death Penalty. One reason why I am against the Death Penalty is because there are many innocent people that die due to the death Penalty. They accuse one person and give them the death Penalty. After they are killed, it is found out that, he was innocent. Saying sorry at this point does not bring the dead back to life. Many times innocent people have been killed this way. What we need to consider at this point is their families. When we blankly charge an innocent person with the death penalty, we dont see the mental pain and suffering his family go through. Sometimes a son or a daughter loses their father or mother. One thing we need to realize is how precious human life and we should not be so careless when we charge someone with the death Penalty. Sometimes a mentally ill person is charged with the death Penalty. They don't even have the capability to fight or have the capability to hire a good judge. They might have killed someone, but they did not purposefully do it. They did not go through and look at if killing this person will have more marginal benefit than marginal cost. They dont have that capability.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty#current
Joel Sibi
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
I see both faults in the death penalty but also in the system which people push to keep inmates in prison for life. Both systems have heavy taxation on the economy and truly in the end both are very flawed in certain regards. I however decided to be against the death penalty purely due to the fact that innocent people are at risk of being put in death row. An innocent citizen's life I believe shouldn't ever be at risk of being snuffed out, it'd be the epitome of injustice. At least with a life time sentence there'd be time and if the innocent given this ruling was later exonerated they could go free. There wouldn't be the taking of an innocent life on top of the victim of the murder or crime that already took place. Since there is a lot of money problems on both keeping criminals in prison or executing them i believe for the sake of the innocent the death penalty should be done away with.
Sources:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-and-death-penalty
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty#current
Nathan Schaper
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
I am for the death penalty, but I feel like it has been misused and misunderstood many times. We need to understand that taking the life of someone is a serious matter, and the risk that they could be innocent is even greater. The ideas that one is innocent unless proven guilty needs to be reinforced much more, and unless there is overwhelming evidence against someone, Life in prison should the the action taken. The up front costs of the death penalty is significantly higher than for equivalent Life without parole cases, but over the lifetime of the inmate it is much cheaper choice, from $1.2 to $3.6 million cheaper. While it is cheaper, this is not always the best option and all other options must be taken into account. The death penalty should not bee a go to option for any crime or any person. The issue of mental illness is also something that comes up in death penalty cases. Trying to figure out if a person is really ill or acting such is quite difficult. In my opinion, If a person is mentally ill, there will be some record of it before the crime. Whether it be history of medication, doctor visits/records, or observations from family/friends.
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#D.Cost
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty#current
Athul Johnson
ReplyDeletePeriod: 6
I am for the death penalty, but based on how serious the murder is or how the case has been. If a person tortures, rapes, etc. before the murder they deserve the death penalty. If a person does a murder and admits it, they should be locked up for a long time. Also if a person is proven to be mentally unstable then they should not receive death, rather be taken to a mental facility. Without the death penalty taxpayers will also have to pay more money. As long as an inmate is in prison, the people that are working have to pay to keep these prisons running. Basically the death penalty is very useful. Yes, we should limit the number of people we put on it, but if they did such a cruel crime they do deserve it.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=issues/death/isdp.html
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
Neethu Thampy
ReplyDeletePeriod: 6
I am opposed to the death penalty because it primarily depends on factors like the person's race, where it took place and the attorney's skills. Many innocent people are wrongly convicted due to such cases. It also violates basic human rights under the due process and equal protection laws (source#1). Having death penalty as a capital punishment does not reduce crime rates or prevent people from doing violent crimes. The costs of trail and imprisonment of a convicted in a murder case that results in a death penalty is double the cost of one that results in a sentence of lifetime imprisonment (source #2). This greatly affects the taxpayers as they are the ones paying the costs. Death penalty does more harm than good and having punishments that help prisoners realize their mistakes would be more efficient.
1. https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty redirect=library/case_against_death.html
2. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/past/16/2016
Rushil Mistry
ReplyDeletePeriod: 6th
I am for the death penalty, but it should be based on how serious the case is and how much evidence is provided. In the past years many innocent people have been give death penalty because of lack of evidence. I also think depending on the crime they should be given the death penalty, if the crime is not that serious then they shouldn't be given a death penalty. People say that the death penalty is "every dreadful" for the criminals, but if the criminal has already committed such a dreadful act of killing someone then giving them the death penalty won't matter (Source 1). I also think that the "punishment [Should] reflects the severity of the crime" that the person commits and if the crime is dreadful then they should give the person the death penalty (Source 2).
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
http://www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html
May Liew-Period 2
ReplyDeleteI am against the death penalty because contrary to many people's beliefs, it has been proven that each death penalty prosecution cost approximately 1 million more than similar cases where the death penalty wasn't sought for. It would save more of taxpayer's money if the death penalty was abolished. Personally, I would rather see to it that a person suffers an eternity in person rather than experience the relief of death. Also, many death row prisoners suffer from intellectual impairments and mental disabilities. I don't believe this is fair as most of these individuals have suffered trauma that has led them to be in that state where they have no control over their mental judgement, so therefore they should not be punished for something they can't control (1). In addition, many of these cases regarding the death penalty rulings are based heavily on the skill of their attorneys or how much money people have. It wouldn't be fair for many as verdicts can be swayed based on matters that should not affect the true judgement of guilty or innocent (2).
1)http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
2)http://www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html
Isabella Gallegos 4th Period
ReplyDeleteI am against the death penalty for many reasons. Economically, it has been proven that life in prison is a more cost effective measure than execution (www.aclu.org/death-penalty). Also if more evidence were to come to light regarding the case the individual would still have the opportunity to be freed, rather than being six feet under. The unequal treatment of non white criminals is also a reason I support banning the penalty because it has been proven many times that people of color are more likely to be given the death penalty compared to those who are white (www.deathpenaltyinfo.org). Personally, I feel as if the crimes someone has committed are violent enough to bring up this question in the first place, life in prison is far worse and more difficult than death.
Sources:
Deletewww.aclu.org/death-penalty
www.deathpenaltyinfo.org
Jacob Gassmann : Period 2
ReplyDeleteI do not support the death penalty because of how many factors have to be put into consideration during the process that ultimately lead to bias or error in the end result. Whether it be something as simple as the race of the criminal or economic status (1), or if it is a case where important information was later discovered at a point where it was too late. Aside from the issue of the higher cost for taxpayers, a lifetime in prison can be seen as a slow and painful death in itself rather than limiting it to a quick and easy way out. With a lifetime in prison, it still gives a chance for those that need to be exonerated to do so, and avoid other certain situations. (2)
1. https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty?redirect=library/case_against_death.html
2.http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org
Zoe Leibowitz Period 2
ReplyDeleteI have been and am still opposed to the death penalty because it is not a morally right concept. Although people that are placed on death row have done morally wrong and inexcusable things, that still does not make it right to kill them. If people could just commit crimes and be killed for their actions, I don't think they would endure any real punishment because they wouldn't TRULY have to live with the consequences of their crimes. Martin Luther King Jr. also states that he does not "think that God approves the death penalty for any crime, rape and murder included.... Capital punishment is against the better judgment of modern criminology, and, above all, against the highest expression of love in the nature of God." (Source 1: deathpenaltyinfo.org). Another thing to consider is the fact that, in some cases, innocent people are convicted for crimes of which they never actually committed. According to the ACLU, "between 1973 and 2015, 148 innocent death-row prisoners in 26 different states were exonerated and released" (Source 2: https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty). Although this may seem like a high number of innocent prisoners exonerated, this doesn't account for all of the innocent death-row prisoners. There have still been prisoners who were innocent that were executed through the death penalty.
I do not believe in the death penalty because I personally feel that it is taking the easy way out. The criminals that are put on death row are sick human beings who are acquitted for disturbing crimes. Crimes so morbid and inhumane that, most of the time,they are mentally deranged and literally accept death. It is simply too easy. I believe that criminals who pursue these horrific crimes should be forced to rot in a prison cell for the rest of their lives. This also eliminates the chance of executing an innocent person. If criminals at a the "death row" level of punishment are forced to stay in prison forever, that allows time for them to be proven innocent if possible. So eliminating the death penalty would be the best option for our society.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/history-death-penalty
Personally, I am neither for nor against the death penalty. The death penalty is a punishment set for those beings that commit horrible and terrible crimes. These people have done something so tragic to the point where the death penalty is the correct and only punishment right for them. By "giving a killer the death sentence [it] will stop them - and others - from doing it again" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/15007511). On the other hand, it "now costs much more to execute a killer than to lock him up forever" (http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21601270-america-falling-out-love-needle-slow-death-death-penalty). The decline of the death sentence is in part because of the major exspenses it takes to complete the job. On a medical standpoint, sometimes the death is not always as simple as one may think and be a lot more painful then estimated. There are flaws with the death penalty yet it also make some sense to do it in other cases.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21601270-america-falling-out-love-needle-slow-death-death-penalty
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/15007511
Period 2
Meyer Wilson
Period 6
ReplyDeleteI am for the death penalty, no matter the severity of the case. If the valid evidence is clearly shown and proves the defendant guilty without any doubt, he/she should be given the death penalty. In addition, the criminal's time before leading up to the execution should be determined by the seriousness of the crime. The main issue is that people "misjudge their character and release them too soon" (http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html). Even though the "poor quality of the defense lawyers" is thought to be a factor(https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty#latest). If the evidence is undeniable, what is the point in fighting against it. If it is possible to prove that the defendant was acting in self defense or any other reason that may prove him/her innocent, by all means fight. Otherwise accept the crime they have done and move forward, because in my opinion, or from what I have seen some of these obvious cases take up too much time that could be put elsewhere.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty#latest
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
Jane Hua
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
I am opposed to the death penalty because of its unethical nature. Since individuals convicted of capital crimes frequently have little education, there is no way of proving whether they had the rational means to determine the costs and benefits of their actions. Innocent individuals are too often wrongly convicted, making the death penalty particularly unacceptable. Between 1973 and 2015, there were more than 140 innocent people released from death rows in 26 different states (Source 1). Lifetime imprisonment is a sufficient alternative to the death penalty, costing less on average and allowing individuals to be exonerated if the evidence becomes available. The use of lifetime imprisonment would also free resources since the death penalty has little to no public safety benefit. According to the National Research Council, studies claiming that the death penalty serves as an impediment to murder rates are “fundamentally flawed” and the two factors have little correlation. In 2014 and in previous years, the FBI Uniform Crime Report also proved that states in the South had the highest murder rates even though they accounted for over 80% of executions (Source 2). Therefore, the death penalty is neither an adequate use of our resources nor a moral form of punishment in the criminal justice system.
http://www.aclu.org/death-penalty/
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
I do not support capital punishment. I personally believe the government's power should not extend to taking human life under any circumstances. Also, In addition to being ethically wrong, I believe that the death penalty sets a terrible example and to some extent is hypocritical. We should not kill people to prove the inhumanity and atrocity of killing people. There is also vast amount of evidence suggesting that "the race of the accused or the victim" can play a contributing factor in the perpetrators sentencing and that the death penalty "has historically been applied in a discriminatory manner". Overall capital punishment is based around a prejudiced and immoral system that should be disbanded and at the end of the day life in prison seems to be a far worse punishment than death.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty
http://www.mindspring.com/~phporter/econ.html I.
Period 4
ReplyDeleteI am in opposition to death penalty on the grounds that it is both uneconomical and ineffective. When compared to death penalties life sentences are actually less costly. The death penalty process is costly and extremely drawn out. Convicts will frequently appeal multiple times stacking up dept within the court systems in addition to prosecution costs. In reality the penalty affects such a small portion of murders that i has little deterrent effects undoubtedly less than life sentences. Not to mention an instance that too commonly take place when death sentences are administered: the frequent discovery of evidence that exonerates those convicted of capital offenses. Therein Lies an ethical issue where United States is essential convicting innocent people of crimes significant enough to be awarded a death penalty possibly sending them to their deaths. This process is thus inherently unethical and ineffective due to its inconsistent application.
http://www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
Taylor Mott
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
I am against the death penalty because of how much the cons outweigh the pros. The death penalty system is a costly process that in reality does not do much to deter spontaneous crimes because when a crime is not premeditated the perpetrator is not thinking about committing a crime let alone the consequences of one. However, the death penalty does prevent some serious premeditated crimes. But the system is unfair because two people, a wealthy person and a middle class citizen, could commit the same crime but the one who is more wealthy would be able to afford a better attorney who could get their client out of the death penalty while the criminal who was unable to afford a quality attorney is left to pay for it with his life. Since not everyone who commits a crime is punished with the death penalty but most are faced with jail time, the possibility of imprisonment is a more effective deterrent of crime than the death penalty. Therefore, I am primarily against the death penalty because it is the more expensive method but is less effective.
http://www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/
Truth Thomas
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
I am against the death penalty because the benefits do not outweigh the drawbacks. One reason is due to the possibility of putting an innocent person to death. Since 1973, more than 140 people in 26 different states were released from death row when more evidence proved these people to be innocent instead of guilty (https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty?redirect=library/case_against_death.html). If this amount of individuals are innocent and being released, there can be an even larger amount of innocent people being put to death. Another reason that I oppose the death penalty is that the cost of putting someone to death is far more than the cost of putting someone in prison. The average cost of a death penalty trial in Kansas is $400,000 compared to $100,000 if the death penalty is not considered (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/). Looking at these factors and other similar factors, the death penalty is unnecessary, therefore I am against it.
Taylor hunter
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
I am for the death penalty for heinous crimes. However I do not believe that it is an effective punishment in deterring criminal activity that should lead to such punishment. The NCPA "found that a 50% increase in the probability of incarceration has a deterrent effect." While it may have a deterring effect, in my opinion it is not effective. Though it does not deter criminal activity significantly, I do not believe that it should be just thrown out, it has signifigance. There are some cases where there is irrefutable evidence such as the Charleston, SC Dylan Roof situation. The death penalty will be used in this case because it is appropriate. The use of the death penalty is extremely rare which I believe contributes to its ineffective deterrent of committing a crime. "Since 1967, there has been one execution for every 1600 murders, or 0.06%" this percentage is very very small.
http://www.ncpa.org/bg/bg148
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP
I am against the death penalty because I believe criminals should suffer even more extreme consequences. To make them go through such an easy process is not worth it. The death penalty is too lenient. They need to sit in jail cells so they can fully understand what they did wrong, and if there is still time to prove that they are not guilty. Even though murdering someone is "horrific and inexcusable", it does not make capital punishment justifiable. In addition, if the death penalty isn't really a "deterrent" for murder, then we're not really decreasing the amount of murderers, we're increasing it because we become killers ourselves. All in all, the death penalty is an evil societal construct and needs to be destroyed.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.swcollege.com/bef/policy_debates/death_penalty.html
http://crime.about.com/od/death/i/dpissue1.htm
While I do believe that certain crimes deserve a more severe punishment than others, I am against the death penalty unless it's the worst possible crime committed. One in every 25 defendants sentenced to death is likely innocent, and the possibility of someone being killed for something they didn’t do doesn’t sit right with me. Also, the death penalty hasn’t decreased the amount of capital crimes that are committed, like murder, so it is not proving itself effective.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
http://www.aclu.org/death-penalty/
period 6th
Hunter Bergfeld
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
I am against the death penalty for several reasons. The first of which is because the death penalty is not always decided by the crime, but by how good the defense is. This allows wealthier people to get out of death penalty either. I am also against the death penalty because it cost more to pursue the death penalty than to give a life sentence.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/09/29/the-death-penalty-saves-lives-by-deterring-crime
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty
Prasun Dhawan | Per #2
ReplyDeleteI believe that the death penalty is not an efficient deterrent to murder. Firstly, people put on the death row too often come from low income communities anf are rarely educated enough to have any knowledge of the consequences of their actions (aclu.org). Thus, contrary to what economists believe, these individuals are unable to weigh the cost of their actions. Secondly, even law enforcement and FBI surveys and studies show that life imprisonment are better deterrents to murders than the death penalty (aclu.org). Lastly, up to 1 in 10 people are exonerated because they are innocent. Therefore, because of a lack of holistic consideration of circumstances and a narrow minded approach to justifying death penalties (as demonstrated by death penalty proponent John McAdams in http://www.prodeathpenalty.com), I believe that the death penalty is not an efficient deterrent to murder.
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com
https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penaltyredirect=library/case_against_death.html
Humdaan Balagamwala
ReplyDeletePeriod 4
I am against the death penalty. There have been several cases where innocent people have been executed, many others spend their lives in jail because of a bad defense attorney or judge. One man was on death row before his case was brought before another judge who noticed that there was no physical evidence, and his supposed accomplices had given contradicting testimonies. He was released after spending 21 years on death row. Race also plays a major role in whether a person receives the death penalty. Studies have shown people are more willing to give the death penalty to people of color. Prosecutors routinely try to prevent people of color from serving on the jury. Not only are many people who receive the death penalty innocent, it also ends up being more expensive and time consuming for the government.
Sources:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty
I am for the death penalty but at the same time I believe that this form of punishement should only be used for brutal crimes. Because of the many faulty accusations, the death penalty should only be used if there is clear evidence that proves that the verdict is guilty otherwise the death penalty should not be used. I believe that everyone has a right to live a long and prosperous life and if someone has the power to take away a life they should be ready to take away theirs. Although the death penalty may not be economically satisfying I believe that these evil people should be gone. In the case of the mentally ill I don't believe that they should be punished with the death penalty but at the same time I believe that the government and family should be responsible for taking care of these type of people instead of allowing them to take the lives of innocent people. “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword"-Mathew 26:52
ReplyDeletehttps://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=issues/death/isdp.html
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
Edwin Cabrera
ReplyDelete6th period
I am pro death penalty because it is an "important tool for preserving law and order, deters crime, and costs less than life imprisonment." The government could be saving lots of money of they decide to go with death penalties instead of life sentences. There are some crimes that require more than just a life sentence. if it were implemented more often than an immense amount of money could be saved for the tax payers. "93% of executions in 2015" were conducted by only 4 states in the United States. imagine how much money could be saved if all states implemented the death penalty instead of life sentences.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/19/us/death-penalty-fast-facts/
http://deathpenalty.procon.org/
Sarah Johnson
ReplyDelete2nd Period
I am against the death penalty because there are more cons than pros. Capital punishment is a costly process which shows that executing prisoners can be three times as expensive as life in prison, primarily due to the higher costs of capital punishment trials, automatic appeals, and the heightened security on death row with lower staff-to-prisoner ratios. Also the system is unfair through it's judgement as some people are able to afford better attorneys to defend them while others draw the short straw and are only given the bare minimum. Since not everyone who commits a crime is punished with the death penalty but most are faced with jail time, the possibility of imprisonment is a more than the death penalty. The death penalty is a luck of a draw for not everyone will be picked. Therefore, I am against Capital Punishment because it is the more expensive method but is less effective as it is "cruel and unusual punishment".
Sources:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty
I am against the death penalty for the reason of the case of innocent people being executed simply because their Lawyer was not strong enough to defend the case. Such incidents allow guilty folks to dodge a punishment and make others suffer for their sins. Also, race should not be a factor of concern. It is the crime committed which should determine punishment, ethnicity is not a crime. Economically, it is shown that life imprisonment is a much better punishment financially, backed by FBI and Law Enforcement(Source 1) . There is a $300000 net cost between pursuing death row for 400000 and deterring it, 100000 per case. In Texas, it costs about 2 million per death row execution, three times the cost of life imprisonment. Economically, death row is definitely not logical, nor is it logical morally. (Source 2)
ReplyDeleteSource 1: https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=issues/death/isdp.html
Source 2: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/FactSheet.pdf
Alexus Guevarra
ReplyDeletePeriod 2
I oppose the death penalty due to circumstances where innocent victims may be prosecuted for a crime they did not commit because of the poor quality of the defense system. "Between 1973 and 2015, 148 innocent death-row prisoners in 26 different states were exonerated and released.Research suggests that the actual number of innocent people who have been sentenced to death is far higher and that one in every 25 defendants sentenced to death is likely innocent." When executing citizens on death row, the system takes a risk in executing a possibly innocent being. In many cases they have released prosecuted people in situations where there is "consistently presented incomplete and misleading accounts of evidence."
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty#current
"
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
Asia McDonald 6th
ReplyDeleteI am against the death penalty because I do not believe that people should know exactly when they are going to die. It should not be our choice to decide if and when someone should die either. There are also other reasons such as; what if they are killed "before exonerating information is discovered?" (source 1). If the death penalty is still going to be a form of punishment, then there should not be "Racial bias' and wrongful convictions" at all (source 2)!
2nd Period
ReplyDeleteThe death penalty is absolutely wrong because it implies that we are owned by the state. When the justice system gets to arbitrarily decide who is and isn't allowed to live, we are nothing more than government property.
Source: Ron Paul
Vinay Abraham P.4
ReplyDeleteI believe that the death penalty is inhumane. Killing people makes us like the murderers who most of us so despise. It is not only about what capital punishment does to those killed, but also what it does to those who do the killing and those in whose name the killing is done. It’s bad enough that we are victimized by crime in our society; we don’t need to be further victimized by by becoming perpetrators and enacting the death penalty and then living with the unfortunate consequences.
Sources:
http://www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html
http://www.aclu.org/death-penalty/
Gloria Contreras
ReplyDelete2nd period
I do not agree with the death penalty. If someone has committed a crime worthy of the worst punishment, then they should be kept alive to live the rest of their lives behind bars where they can do little more than regret their choices. In addition to being the more severe punishment, the swith from the death penalty to the life-long penlaty will eliminate the mistake of killing innocent people and saves states millions.
1.http://www.swcollege.com/bef/policy_debates/death_penalty.html
2.http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/about-dpic
I am against the death penalty due to several points. Not only is the penalty violating the eigth amendment in the bill of rights, which states that the US government is prohibited from preforming cruel and unusual punishment but it is also imposing the idea that using manslaughter as a punishment is okay. By creating this idea people will most likely copy execute it and use it as point to help defend them in court. Also there is a chance that the person who has been accused and is death row may be innocent and could be in turn the last piece of evidence in making their innocence be proven. Not only that but by eliminating them the actual perpetrator of the crime would still be walking free in the roads of america.
ReplyDeletesources:
http://www.aclu.org/library/case_against_death.html
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty#current
Chandler Jaobs P.2
ReplyDeleteI feel like the death penalty is an efficient deterrent to murder as " the majority of studies that track the effects over many years and across states or countries find a deterrent effect" (Source 1). I believe it is ok for a murder as this society believes in justice and an "eye for an eye", so let the punishment fit the crime (Source 2).
1) http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=002000
2) http://listverse.com/2013/06/01/5-arguments-for-and-against-the-death-penalty/
Christopher Yee
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
I am against the death penalty because it would be an inefficient method of using the justice system. What would be the measure for who gets executed and who does not. Some murder cases are not as violent as others. A few may even be accidents such as a car crash. There would also be many mistakes when convicting individuals because of the possibility executing innocent people. "In a world of imperfect information, innocent individuals may be convicted and executed before exonerating information is discovered" (Source 1) "The death penalty is uncivilized in theory and unfair and inequitable in practice." (Source 2)
http://www.swcollege.com/bef/policy_debates/death_penalty.html
https://www.aclu.org/other/case-against-death-penalty?redirect=library/case_against_death.html
Oluwamuyiwa Peters:Period 2
ReplyDeleteI don't support the death penalty because even when proven guilty it is not 100% proven.but the main reason i dislike it is because"it is used disproportionately against the poor or against racial or ethnic minorities -- the United States is no exception"The system is already corrupt,it classifies all minorities as poor and needy and makes them targets for racial profiling, through the use fear they can convince people to say anything, just to close a case it is for this reason many cases have been thrown out due to "prosecutorial misconduct"Secondly lab analysis that convict people of crimes that sends them to death row aren't always accurate.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org
http://www.patweb.com/dpquiz/index.htm
Priyanka Ranchod
ReplyDeletePeriod 6
I am in opposition of the death penalty primarily for the reason that I believe in serving your time and dealing with the ramifications of your actions directly. I believe that by granting someone the death penalty one is simply allowing that individual a means to escape their punishments. In addition, I personally do not agree with the matter of death being an act of punishment. I do not find it reasonable that one can choose to exonerate a crime by committing another one at the hands of "law". Jermaine Wright and Isaiah McCoy are two individuals who were placed on death row, but later received a retrial. In both cases there were issues with defendants and evidence being withheld. This example alludes me to believe and see that the current system appears to be corrupt and an individuals life, regardless of the crime, should not be in these hands. Another example, and reason that death row is not good is because some people sentenced to death row are actually innocent bystanders. "Between 1973 and 2015, 148 innocent death-row prisoner in 26 different states were exonerated and released." This goes to show that the death row rulings can be very wrong, and sentencing someone to something so fatal is not always the answer.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty
Regarding the argument over the death penalty, I approve with it being legal. The reasons behind sentencing a criminal to the death penalty must be very grave and for those people to be thrown into jail is a crime towards society. These people took away a life from someone that could have revolutionized the world but now they can’t. Like Alex Kozinski, a Circuit Judge in the US Court of Appeals, once said, “…I would say it is immoral for us not to,” sentence the death penalty. Another reason is that the number of criminals in the world continuously rises and this uses up money due to prison maintenance. If the criminals who deserved the death penalty were to receive it, the opportunity cost would be much more beneficial than keeping them in prison all their life. New York Times wrote in their news coverage that the “annual average taxpayer cost in these states was $31,286 per inmate.” With one less criminal, the marginal benefit is around $30,000. This could be used in many other ways than giving someone a life when they took away someone else’s. http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001324
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/nyregion/citys-annual-cost-per-inmate-is-nearly-168000-study-says.html
Stephanie Urbina
ReplyDeletePeriod: 6
I am for the death penalty. If a person tortures or does any crime before the murder they deserve the death penalty. If a person confesses the crime,they should be in prison.if a person is sick ,mentally , then they should not get the death, rather be taken to a mental facility. Without the death penalty , people that pay taxes will also have to pay more money than what they are use to paying. As long as criminal are in prison, the people that are working have to pay to keep these prisons running. Of course we need to limit the amount of people we transfer into jail/prison but if they did such a cruel crime they do deserve it.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=issues/death/isdp.html
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
In regard to the death penalty, I believe that it is a form of punishment that is a bit extreme. While certain crimes like murder warrants for such a punishment, I believe that instead of a death sentence a more suitable punishment would be time behind bars. It is important to look at the data to understand the ineffectiveness of the death penalty. First off, It's still killing someone. It won't reverse whatever they did and it's not helping anything, and on average it's more expensive that keeping someone in prison for the rest of their life. It is not an effective way to prevent or reduce crime, costs a whole lot more than life in prison, and worst of all, risks executions of innocent people.
ReplyDelete1.http://www.aclu.org/death-penalty/
2.http://www.cybervillage.com/ocs/penalty.htm
Per. 6
ReplyDeleteI fully support death penalty. I agree that it is the most efficient way not only to deter murder and crimes, but also serve justice to the society. Understanding that even though the cost of obtaining a death penalty conviction is more than obtaining a lifetime imprisonment, I believe that the higher cost of executing the penalty is worth its benefit of preventing potential murders. "This effect represents those potential murderers who did not murder under specific circumstances because of their fear of execution." Death is one of the biggest fears of all human beings. The execution can be served as a negative incentives which prevent murderers from practicing killing and other crimes. There are legitimate arguments against death penalty and point out the cons of the penalty. However, I still believe there is no other way better or more efficient than death penalty in terms of deterring murder and crimes.
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment?redirect=death-penalty#latest
Heather Bennett: Period 6
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am against the death penalty. No one deserves death regardless of how heinous the crime. It is not the place of a judge or jury to take ones life. I believe that by killing a criminal is giving them "the easy way out". But economically I am for it. For example, the average annual cost of housing an inmate in Texas is $18,538 per inmate. Meanwhile the cost of executing someone on death row by lethal injection costs taxpayers $86.08 per criminal.
Sources
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/methods.htm
http://www.texascjc.org/basic-facts-1
Aside from the moral arguments against death penalty, I do not believe the death penalty serves as a deterrent to crime. If it were, murder rates would be significantly lower than they are now, not counting accidental homicides. Criminals do not rationally weigh the pros and. one of murdering someone, they often act emotionally. There is also the consideration that they may not be caught and will be able to completely evade punishment.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5866
http://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj.html
I do not support the death penalty. Aside from the morals and values of that are related to this capital punishment, I do not believe it is a good deterrent to a crime,as It may even be seen as an easy way out. A criminal must endure the punishments for the extents of his crime and killing them will only solidify some criminals who "have nothing to lose".
ReplyDeletehttp://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org
http://www.americanbar.org/groups/committees