The Death Penalty Serves Justice and is Applied Fairly Jennifer Lovell PHI 103 Informal Logic Instructor Jerry Voltura April 6, 2012 Introduction A. Thesis 1. The death penalty is just and applied fairly Argument #1 A. Deserving 1. Eye for an eye B. Decrease in crimes 1. Sentenced often 2. Applied quickly Argument #2 A. Over population B. Free, Easy Ride Counter Thesis Counter Argument A. Immoral and Barbaric B. Wrongfully Accused Response to counter argument A. Defense 1. Moral 2. Technology Conclusion The Death Penalty Serves Justice and is Applied Fairly The death penalty, or capitol punishment, is a punishment of death given to ertain criminals for a certain crime they committed. It is issued by the state in which the crime took place. A question that is often asked is whether or not the death penalty serves justice and is applied fairly. The death penalty is just, and not only is it applied fairly, it should be applied more often as well as swiftly. Every justice system in every state should use the death penalty on certain criminals for several reasons. Criminals sentenced to the death penalty because of certain heinous crimes they have committed are deserving of capitol punishment.
This is referred to as “ an eye for an eye. ” Prisons are over populated with criminals serving life sentences. Yes, this is a death sentence, but at the cost of the people. Those sentenced for long periods of time are getting a free ride in the state’s system for the remainder of their lives. These prisoners are no longer responsible for financial obligations, such as bills, debts, or taxes. At the same time, they are provided with room, board, food, and medicine. The crime rate would decrease tremendously if every person knew that the punishment would fit the crime.
Need essay sample on "Death Penalty" ? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $12.90/page
All criminals sentenced to the death penalty would be punished quickly instead of them sitting, waiting, on death row. Every one of these arguments can provide evidence that the death penalty serves justice and is applied fairly to the prisoners who receive that type of sentence. The death penalty is applied fairly to criminals whom receive death as a punishment. Some crimes are so horrible that the criminal deserves the death penalty. According to Trevor Sather (1999), “many Americans believe in an eye for an eye. ” If a person can take the life of another human being, then they are forfeiting their own life. A person who has committed apitol murder or multiple murders or unthinkable torture does not need to continue living. They took away the lives of innocent victims. Christ regarded capital punishment as a just penalty for murder. “Those who use the sword will die by the sword. ” (Matthew 26:52). “Our human rights are given to us as part of a contract – which says that we can do anything we want as long as it does not hurt anyone else. So if we take away the life of another person, then surely we forfeit the right to our own life” (Sather, 1999). That statement clearly means that a person who has killed someone deserves to die themselves, but in a justified manner.
Capitol punishment is applied fairly to murderers. People who are sentenced to the death penalty because of that type of crime deserve capitol punishment. Crimes and criminal acts would certainly decline in every state if each justice system were to apply the death penalty more often. Many criminals are sitting in prison for the remainder of their lives. If the system would enforce capitol punishment regularly to more criminals, then people would think twice before committing certain crimes. They would know that their lives are at stake. Potential criminals would think logically before going off, and committing murder.
They would know that every justice member and every politician would approve their sentence of capitol punishment. Many potential victims’ lives could be saved if criminals knew that they would be sentenced to death, and the sentence would be followed threw at a quicker rate. Potential criminals would then be aware that each state would apply the death penalty to their prisoners in a very quickly manner. The more capitol punishment prisoners there are in a system, the less time a prisoner has to sit and wait on death row years after their trials. A fixed time would be determined, and then executed.
Yet if a person does decide to commit a capitol punishable crime, he or she would be sentenced to death, and then executed quickly. That is when justice would be served. Therefore, if the death penalty was applied by every justice system more often, and that penalty is executed quickly, then crime and potential criminal acts would decrease. Since many prisoners are not put to death quickly after receiving a sentence of death, those prisoners are sitting in the penitentiaries, waiting to die. The criminal justice system, including every single subsystem, is completely overloaded (TX Monthly, 2008).
Death row inmates are crowding the prisons. For many years after their trials, they sit and wait. They are occupying cells that could be used for petty criminals who will be released some day. Death sentencers will never be released. They will, one day, die from the hands of the justice system. So instead of executing those prisoners quickly, other criminals are released earlier then they were sentenced. They have not served their time, therefore they have not learned their lesson. The prisoners sentenced to death are causing the prisons to be over populated.
Petty criminals get reduced sentenced or released early because death row prisoners are waiting for their execution, and there is not enough room to board every criminal. If petty criminals could serve their time, then they would probably learn their lesson by the time of their release, and not commit the crime again. Another valid argument for a death penalty sentence is the free, easy ride for the remainder of the prisoner’s life that they are not deserving of. A criminal sentenced to death could enjoy the prison life. They are no longer responsible for any thing, any person, or not even themselves.
They are told when to get up, when to eat, when to play or talk, when to wash up, and when to sleep. They are cared for every hour of every day. Their room, board, and food are given to them. They do not have to pay for it. Death row prisoners do not have to pay their utility bills or financially care for their children, if they are leaving some behind. Everything is given to these criminals. Yet the responsible taxpayer has his or her wages garnished every payday in order to make sure the prisoners are getting the necessary essentials they need to stay alive for who knows how much longer.
Even though they are already sentenced to death. A taxpayer would rather pay for something or someone who has potential improvement. They do not want to pay for a murderer. The death penalty is applied to many prisoners each year as a result of their crimes. A person that commits a capitol punishment crime is deserving of a death penalty sentence. They should not over populate the prisons, and they should not get a free ride for the remainder of their lives. Every society could use a decrease in other crimes, so they (prisoners) on death row need to be executed quickly.
The death penalty is a way of justice being served, and is applied fairly to the criminals sentenced to that type of punishment. The death penalty needs to be, and should always be a form of punishment to criminals of heinous and wicked crimes. Just as there are many valid arguments for capitol punishment, there are also arguments against the use of capitol punishment. There are many people in our societies that do not believe the death penalty serves justice, and is not applied fairly to criminals. People against the death penalty feel that it is immoral and barbaric.
A worry that is often over looked is whether or not the criminal is 100% guilty of the crime that they are on death row for, or that there could be a chance of a person being wrongly accused. People in societies that are against the death penalty feel that a state or justice system does not have the right to take another human being’s life just because that criminal took someone else’s life. Capitol punishment does not serve justice. Two wrongs do not make it right. The death penalty is a form of torture, and is wrong, from what the Bible preaches and from our moral values. It is a barbaric act to kill your own species.
A murderer may be considered inhumane and barbaric, but that does not mean the systems need to perform the same actions. How can a physician willingly kill a person because of an act they committed, and not be considered barbaric? How can a judge tell someone that they are going to die by the hands of the state, and still be considered moral? Killing that criminal by death will not bring back the victim, so how is justice being served? What if a person is sentenced to death row, is executed, and then new evidence was recovered from their case, and that person was really innocent? At least 23 innocent people were executed in the US in the twentieth century. The execution of an innocent person can never be justified” (The Editors of Idea, 2003). What is the justice system or state suppose to do if that were to happen? Nothing. It is too late. That “criminal” has died because of a crime he or she did not commit. Just so that justice could prevail? There is no turning back once a criminal has been sentenced to death, and then executed. The state cannot apologize and release that prisoner. They’re dead. Every piece of evidence, every person to interview, or every test to run can take time.
If the system took the time to investigate the crime, then a sentence of death would be more accurate. But it will never be 100% in the time allowed investigating a crime. There is not one thing that is ethically or morally right about killing a person, no matter how evil they are. In the eyes of those who are against the death penalty, capitol punishment is not a way for justice to prevail. It is a way for justice to fail. Some people in society may believe that the death penalty is immoral and inhumane, but it is, in fact, a way for justice to be served.
It is applied fairly to the criminals whom get the death penalty as a type of punishment. Capitol punishment is moral. The Bible does state thy shall not kill (Exodus 20:13), but in the days of Jesus there were forms of capitol punishment. Stoning, crucifying, and hanging were all applied to the people. When a person was accused of a crime and found guilty of that crime, they were punished. Death was a type of punishment. The Bible also states love your neighbor, as you love yourself (Matthew 22:39). If a person does not love their fellow human being, then they do not love themselves.
That is a way of saying that they do understand that they are sacrificing their own lives for the lives that they took from victims. In a speech that Dudley Sharp gave, he stated that “God gave to government the legitimate authority to use capital punishment to restrain murder and to punish murderers. Not to inflict the death penalty is a flagrant disregard for God’s divine Law, which recognizes the dignity of human life as a product of God’s creation. Life is sacred, and that is why God instituted the death penalty. Consequently, whoever takes innocent human life forfeits his own right to live” (Sharp, 1997).
Therefore, the death penalty is moral and humane. It is morally ethical to punish another human being by death when that human being caused the death of another. In today’s society, there is so much new technology that it does not take near as long as it use to in order to solve a murder. There are many labs and equipment that are designed specifically to help solve a criminal case. DNA is tested and retested. Fingerprints are tested and then retested. Computers can reenact a crime scene. The modern day world is designed to eliminate the kind of worry as to whether or not a criminal can e wrongly accused. The chance of that to happen is slim. As long as everyone investigating the case does their job to the best of their ability, the accused will receive the proper conviction. A judge and jury review every piece of evidence before making a decision, such as a person being wrongfully accused, or sentencing a person to death. Great effort has been made in pretrial, trial, appeals, writ and clemency procedures to minimize the chance of an innocent being convicted, sentenced to death or executed (Sharp, 1997).
There is no room for a mistake to happen when it comes to life or death. Capitol punishment is a just and fair type of punishment for certain crimes. A sentence of death to prisoners that commit heinous crimes is the one true way that will help decrease future criminals of that type. Prisoners on death row are deserving of their punishment, and need to be executed quickly in order to maintain the population of the prisons and the taxpayer’s money. They are not entitled to a financially free ride for the remainder of their lives.
The death penalty is a just way of punishing crimes, and it is applied fairly to those deserving criminals. The death penalty is an effective form of criminal punishment. It needs to be executed in a timely fashion. It is the best way a justice system can uphold the law, and to make sure a person is held accountable for their actions. References Anonymous author. (February 2008). The Gritty Truth: A criminal justice reform activist in Texas on overcrowded prisons, Tulia, the Texas Youth Commission, and the criminalization of mental illness.
Texas Monthly. Retrieved from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1441797231). Editors of Idea, The. (2003). The Debatabase Book: A Must-Have Guide for Successful Debate. Retrieved from http://site. ebrary. com/lib/ashford/Doc? id=10039196&ppg=47. Sather, Trevor. (1999). Pros and Cons: A Debater’s Handbook. Retrieved from http://site. ebrary. com/lib/ashford/Doc? id=10017606&ppg=17. Sharp, Dudley. (1997). Justice for all: death penalty and sentencing information. Retrieved from http://www. prodeathpenalty