ktmeng/mec huggingface dataset:
Topic: death-penalty

are another reason this practice must be outlawed. “The Registry’s annual report on exonerations revealed a record 166 exonerations in 2016—and a record number of exonerations involving police or prosecutorial misconduct. 54 of the 2016 exonerations—nearly a third—involved wrongful homicide convictions. “At least 13 of these cases involved the wrongful use of the death penalty—meaning that the death penalty played a role in nearly a quarter of the 54 homicide exonerations in 2016.” Many of these wrongful convictions are due to false eye witness testimonies, false confessions, evidence issues, and inadequate defense systems that are not up to par when defending their clients. The Innocence Project, founded in 1992 by Peter Neufeld and Barry Scheck at Cardozo School of Law, exonerates the wrongly convicted through DNA testing and reforms the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice. The innocence project does everything they can to prevent innocent people from being executed and spending time in prison but they can not help the ones that have already been executed. If executions were deemed unconstitutional then the innocence project would have a chance to save many more lives.
Topic: death-penalty

A large majority of Americans support the death penalty. Most people are in favor of capital punishment believe that the penalty only applies to some of the various crimes, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in 2011. Many Americans have a great lack of information when they choose to decide how they fell on the topic. “By contrast, the question of whether executions discourage criminals from violent acts is not up to the conscience to decide. Despite extensive research on the question, criminologists have been unable to assemble a strong case that capital punishment deters crime. ‘We’re very hard pressed to find really strong evidence of deterrence,’ said Columbia Law School’s Jeffrey Fagan. States have been executing fewer and fewer people over the past 15 years.” Many states have recently abolished any and all forms of capital punishment.
Topic: death-penalty

In favor of Capital Punishment argue that execution is the only just punishment for those who have killed others or committed violent crimes. Those that are against Capital Punishment argue that the system is inconsistent and unfair. Supporters against abolishing the Death Penalty have protested it for its entire existence, but their numbers have increased over time. Many U.S. states do not have the Death Penalty anymore and the United States is one of the few countries that practice it at all.
Topic: death-penalty

Zoë Hitzig wrote “Death in the Heart of Texas: Reflections from America’s Death Penalty Capital” in 2014 and James Acker from the University at Albany, wrote “The Death Penalty: An American History” in 2003. Throughout the “Death in the Heart of Texas: Reflections from America’s Death Penalty Capital”, Hitzig interviews several individuals from Huntsville Texas leading up to the execution of Willie Tyrone Trottie, a prisoner from the Huntsville Unit.
Topic: death-penalty

Some of those that were interview showed support for Capital Punishment, while others had a different opinion. In “The Death Penalty: An American History”, Acker also looks at both sides of the debate but focuses more on the reasons why people support the Death Penalty. Although two distinct arguments exist, there is one major point of this issue that the two sides can agree on and share common ground. The side for Capital Punishment and the side against Capital Punishment both agree that the current system is flawed.
Topic: death-penalty

Both sides argue about what is considered “fair”. The side in favor of the Death Penalty argues that Capital Punishment is the only fair punishment for the worst of the worst criminals. Acker states that the Death Penalty is “justification for punishment, is simply premised on giving an offender his or her just deserts”. This argument suggests that those that are handed the Death Penalty do not deserve the right to live and that they gave it up when they took the lives of others. One of the people that Hitzig interviewd in” Death in the Heart of Texas: Reflections from America’s Death Penalty Capital”, looked at the concept of “fairness” in a different way. She questioned “The crimes are in the past; does that mean the criminal doesn’t deserve any future at all?” This interviewee brings up the point that one evil crime does not determine an evil person. This point also leads into the question of “What gives us the right to decide who should die and who should live?”. It is an enormous responsibility to determine whether the life of another should be taken, even if that person supposedly “deserves it”.
Topic: death-penalty

Besides both sides sharing the importance of “fairness” as one of their core values, they also both care about progressing the legal system to one that is the most beneficial and efficient. Both the side in favor of the Death Penalty and the side against the Death Penalty can agree that inconsistency exists within the current system. Scott Dornbush, another one of Hitzig’s interviewees, gave his input and explained that “some people deserve to die, but the state of Texas lacks the power to discern and the uniform metric of justice to approxi­mate who those people are”. Basically he is saying that although some criminals may deserve the death penalty, our legal system is not good at and consistent in deciding who receives it and who does not, and therefore Capital Punishment should be abolished. New York University law professor Robert Blecker, a huge supporter of the Death Penalty was another person that Hitzig spoke to. Even though Blecker was in favor of Capital Punishment he still recognized that the court has made decisions to put people to death that have not necessarily made sense. For example, criminals are often executed because they are a threat to society and may kill again if they are released, but Becker questioned “What is the evidence that Trottie would kill again within thewalls of the prison?” Both the side in favor of the Death Penalty and the side against the Death Penalty acknowledge that there is always a chance that mistakes and unfortunate events can occur. Two examples would be convicting people who are wrongfully accused and then executing them and complications resulting from lethal injection. Hitzig cited that at the Huntsville Unit there had already been “three botched executions that occurred earlier this year”.
Topic: death-penalty

The death penalty is a cruel and inhumane punishment given to people regardless if they are innocent or guilty, Most cases of the death penalty are rushed solutions to “Close” a case. The government thinks if someone takes the blame for it the case is closed. They’re plenty of examples of people being put to death with no substantial evidence or reason to believe that they were even the ones who did the crime, for instance David Wayne Spence was put to death in 1997 for allegedly killing 3 teenage girls in Texas.
Topic: death-penalty

He was allegedly hired by a convenience store clerk to kill someone, but killed the wrong person. The supervising police lieutenant and The lead homicide detective both agreed that they believed he was innocent. The supervising police lieutenant even went on to say “I do not think David Spence committed this crime”. Which then the lead homicide detective responded with “My opinion is that David Spence was innocent. Nothing from the investigation ever led us to any evidence that he was involved.
Topic: death-penalty

The death penalty should be abolished because in my system of beliefs and morals the use of it is improper. I dont believe the way America deals with the Death penalty is very amicable because America only sentences people for treason, espionage, murder, large-scale drug trafficking, or attempted murder of a witness, juror, or court officer in certain cases. I feel America has wasted a lot of innocent peoples time and lives over a bunch of allegations, since the very beginning the death penalty it has been flawed to kill innocent people. From 1870’s and 1960’s a large amount of black on white victim allegations never saw the light of a courtroom. The Tuskegee Institute Archive says around about 3,500 lynching deaths of African Americans.This was just the beginning because throughout history many innocent people have been put to death with no substantial evidence against them, there are plenty of examples like the
Topic: death-penalty

“A fight occurred between black and white boys on a freight train traveling through the town of Scottsboro, Alabama. The police rounded up all black boys riding on the train and ultimately arrested nine black boys, ranging in ages from 12 to 19 years old. Two white girls then came forward alleging that they were gang raped on the train.”. To no surprise “All nine defendants claimed innocence. After four separate one-day trials with all-white juries, eight of the nine were convicted and sentenced to death.”
Topic: death-penalty

The death penalty in the United States is used only for charges like treason, espionage, murder, large-scale drug trafficking, or attempted murder of a witness, juror, or court officer. This says nothing about Phedophiles, Child Molestors, Rapists or Human traffickers. There are plenty of cases from the death penalty that where proven innocent but still executed, such as Nathaniel Woods. Nathaniel Woods was a 43 year old black man when he was executed by the state of Alabama. Even though Alabama knew Nathaniel Woods was an innocent man they held him from June of 2004 till March 5th 2020 when he was wrongfully executed. Woods was in a crack house with his co-defendant Kerry Spencer sleeping when 4 police officers raided the house. Spencer heard the police coming so he opened fire, while Spencer was killing 3 police officers and injuring another Woods was running as if he was the one getting shot at. Woods had nothing to do with Spencer shooting those 4 police officers but he was blamed. Even Kerry Spencer said he shot and killed the police officers but the racist governor refused to listen, Gov Kay Ivey didn’t listen to anyone. She did not listen to Martin Luther King III, Bart Starr Jr. and Woods’ attorneys when they asked her to commute his sentence. With the only evidence of Woods was 2 .22 caliber bullets in his pocket he was sentenced to execution. The same Governor that refused to commute Woods’s charges is a known racists since her college days. When she participated in a skit of black face while she was a senior in college.
Topic: death-penalty

Now since we talked about Nathaniel Woods’s case we can talk about how the death penalty gives rise to vigilantism. One story of this that is even more recent than Nathaniel’s is the sad story of Ahmaud Arbery who was shot down by two white men while jogging. They racially profiled Arbery as a suspect in a string of robberies in their neighborhood, so they took it upon themselves to grab their shotguns and chase him down in their pickup truck. Gregory McMichael and his son Travis McMichael murdered Arbery for simply jogging. They thought they were doing the right thing chasing him down and “stopping a robbery” instead of just calling the police they decided to attempt a citizen’s arrest on Arbery. On top of all this it took the Alabama Police office 2 months to convict them of murder. Most people are calling this a “Modern day lynching” but this just vigilantism. David Jacobs Ohio State University Stephanie L. Kent University of Nevada, Las Vegas and Jason T. Carmichael Ohio State University – Main Campus all agree that the death penalty replaced and sparks a rise of vigilantism. Many scholars have claimed that the current death penalty is a partial replacement for vigilantism used in the past to maintain this caste system.
Topic: death-penalty

Even in the courtroom to determine the death row sentence the government tries to limit the amount of black people on the jury. North Carolina didn’t include African-American citizens in jury pools in a meaningful way until the mid-20th century; prosecutors then often used peremptory challenges to eliminate black jurors, according to James E. Coleman, Jr., a professor at the Duke University School of Law. Then James even went on to say  Taking black people off the jury lowers the standard of proof for the prosecutor, Coleman said, because white jurors will be more willing to accept any kind of evidence if the defendant is black.. There are plenty of stories about how they take 50% or more of the black people on the jury off the case or ask them inappropriate questions to make their job easier. Take the case of Quintel Augustine who was charged with shooting a police officer in 2001 a Cumberland County prosecutor dismissed every qualified black juror in the jury pool.. The prosecutor even wrote in his notes that the black people were “thugs” and “blk wino”, but when it came to a white juror with a DUI conviction he was “country boy- ok”. On Top of it all  Augustine’s prosecutors had also attended a seminar that taught North Carolina district attorneys how to give race-neutral explanations for striking black jurors, and had a handout of accepted reasons like “hairstyle.”. It’s a proven fact that prosecutors across the state removed qualified black jurors at more than twice the rate of non-black jurors. Even Judge John Dickson said “implicit bias is a part of the legal system.”. It’s truly sad when “Over 90 percent of North Carolina’s 152 death row inmates filed Racial Justice Act challenges.Only four—all from Cumberland County—were heard by a judge in 2012. That judge initially granted relief to each of the four Cumberland County defendants, resentencing them to life imprisonment after ruling that race was an “overwhelming” factor in their death sentences. ” As The Marshall Project stated.
Topic: death-penalty

Most people when arguing about the death penalty like to bring up the fact that some major religions call for the death penalty to be used for certain crimes, Religions such as Islam, Southern Baptist Convention, and Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. As it says from the Quran “And We rained upon them a rain [of stones], and evil was the reign of those who were warned’”. Which is basically saying those who where given warnings and did the crime again got the death penalty. That being said not all religions agree with the death penalty, actually most religions dont agree. One particular religious leader named Pope Francis actually commented on the death penalty and he said “This conclusion is reached taking into account the new understanding of penal sanctions applied by the modern State, which should be oriented above all to the rehabilitation and social reintegration of the criminal. Finally, given that modern society possesses more efficient detention systems, the death penalty becomes unnecessary as protection for the life of innocent people.”. Pope Francis is trying to express that we have no need for the death penalty which is simply not true, he says we should be able to rehabilitate and social reintegrate the criminal which in some cases just can not happen. For example phedophilia can not be cured. As Harvard Health Publishing states “There is no cure, so the focus is on protecting children”. Phedophilia currently is not a crime that can give you the death penalty in America.
Topic: death-penalty

Do you know why we use the death penalty in America? Well most of you guys are probably saying because it lowers the crime rate or it gives the victims family closer, Which is wrong as ACLU states “there is no credible evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than long terms of imprisonment. States that have death penalty laws do not have lower crime rates or murder rates than states without such laws. And states that have abolished capital punishment show no significant changes in either crime or murder rates.”. Then the Death Penalty Information Center goes on to say “Murder victims’ families hold a variety of views on the death penalty. Studies suggest the death penalty does not bring closure and interferes with their healing process. Now do you want to know the real reason we use the death penalty? We use the death penalty because our society believes the death penalty is the only way to deal with certain crimes such as treason, espionage, murder, large-scale drug trafficking, or attempted murder of a witness, juror, or court officer. Using the death penalty isnt morarly wrong abut its how we use it. Some of these are good reasons to call for the death penalty and in cases like murder most peoples morarls consist of the phrase “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” so if you murder someone it says in your morarls that they should be murdered to. Honestly the death penalty should only be used for rape and murder, random killings, and phetophiles and even in these cases it is hard for a society to kill these people with justification when we can just in-prison them and let them meet their own justice. Apparently most states agree with me because they have abolished the death penalty. Even though most states agree there are still states like Arkansas who executed four people on death row in the span of a week just so their expiring supply of lethal injection didn’t get wasted. Did you know “In January 2003, researchers at the University of Maryland concluded in a study commissioned by the Maryland Governor that defendants are much more likely to be sentenced to death if they have killed a white person.” as stated by ACLU.
Topic: death-penalty

Even though I morally dont agree with how we use the death penalty in America I respect the arguments supported by many, with that being said did you know that “Released sex offenders were three times as likely as other released prisoners to be re-arrested for a sex offense.” as Wendy Sawyer from Prison Policy Initiative states. Even with that being said we still use the death penalty to execute innocent people like Nathaniel Woods and David Wayne Spence, and we let these racist white men chase a innocent Ahmaud Arbery because the death penalty inspired them to be vigilantes, and we are letting these states sentence people to unfair sentences. When we get older and look back at these things we will realize the grave mistakes that we have witnessed and didn’t speak up about them.
Topic: death-penalty

Among all penalties, the death penalty is the most severe and cruel. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is the process in which the state executes a person due to a criminal act performed by them using various methods of hanging, lethal injection, lethal gas, electrocution, and fire squading.The death penalty takes one’s most valuable right– the right to live. Human life has value regardless of the situation. The death penalty is inustice in the legal system because the racial and economic application of the death penalty is uneven, the extreme cost of the death penalty process, and the possibility of executing an innocent person.
Topic: death-penalty

The death penalty must be abolished because of the extreme cost taxpayers have to pay for the execution process. After an individual has been given the death penalty, an extensive process of appeals must be started. This process can vary from several months to several years. During the wait time for the appeals, the correctional facility not only needs to hold up under the cost of the prisoner waiting for the death penalty, but, necessities to deal with the cost of lawyers, judges, courts, similarly as other real perspectives and charges.
Topic: death-penalty

For those sentenced to capital punishment, it costs $775,000 for the trial, $263,000 for a penaly phase, $565,00 for state appeals, $96,000 for federal appeals, and $1,316,000 for prison, Ultimately, this would add up to $3,017,000 spent per person on capital punishment; three times greater than for those who were sentenced to death penalty but unsuccesfully sought and those who were not sentenced to the death pealty (Times).
Topic: death-penalty

These $3,000,000 could pay 77 firefighter salaries, buy approxiamately 40,000 new algebra textbooks for highschoolers, pay 15 EMT salaries, pay 71 teacher salaries, give nearly 500 children access to Head Start, and 1 month of essential services to 10,000 elderly Colorodans. All things considered, it has been found that it would be considerably less expensive to spare a convict in jail for an astonishing leftover portion than to put that individual waiting for the death penalty and eventually getting executed.
Topic: death-penalty

In addition to the extreme cost of the death penalty, the racial and economic application of this system is flawed. For 14 years, the state of Florida has been trying to execute Clemente Aguirre-Jarquin, an undocumented immigrant from Honduras, accused of a gruesome double murder–even after someone already confessed to it. Florida eventually disclosed its defect in this crime and dropped all charges against Aguirre. Politicians don’t seem to acknowledge that this problem happens every 18 months in Florida. Instead of encouraging reform for the flaw in this legal system, Florida promotes acts to execute people faster and more effectively (Maxwell). When innocent individuals of minorities and low income situations are accused of a crime, they most likely don’t have the money to pay for proper defense attorneys. This will eventually lead to their punishment without accurate justification for this decision. The legal system is clearly flawed and this situation has happened more than once which should be enough for the state to repeal the death penalty.
Topic: death-penalty

While the death penalty has many reasons for its abolishment, the possibility of executing an innocent person may be the most important.This can imply that there can be errors made that can result in sending an innocent person to death concerning execution. A few cases have risen over the past numerous years in which true convicts confessed to their crimes after the accused perpetrator was already executed. In 1983, Carlos DeLuna was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to capital punishment by lethal injection in the state of Texas. Although DeLuna maintained his innocence throughout the trial, he was found guilty and ultimately declared dead after lethal injection. Two years after DeLuna’s execution, Carlos Hernandez confessed to the crime (Peitzmeyer). Carlos DeLuna’s story has occurred many times throughout history and still hasn’t caused the state to have second thoughts on whether or not to abolish the death penalty. During 1974, “160 men and women were convicted of capital murder and sent to death row. They have since been acquitted of charges related to those crime” (Peitzmeyer). About 1,473 people had been sentenced to execution since 1976 including the 160 men and women released — roughly 10% of those executed, were innocent. This is possibly the most important reasons why the death penalty must be repealed, as it can incite true criminals from being punished. Whether or not one innocent person is executed because of out of line conviction, it should be enough to identify and fix the flaws in the legal system and result in the death penalty being abolished. Society teaches its generations that crime in general is wrong, but society contradicts itself by using the death penalty. Though there should be some sort of punishment for those who commit a crime, they should live with their mistake and understand how their decision affected the public.
Topic: death-penalty

In some countries such as China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and North Korea where capital punishment is still prevalent, citizens are executed based on the crime and judges do not have the opportunity to consider the circumstances of the crime before passing judgment. Thus, according to the speaker, the death penalty is an irreversible and cruel form of punishment that should not be used in the United States. The main purpose of the talk is to convince the audience who are eligible to vote to raise and let their voices be heard by voting for the repeal of the death penalty in the upcoming popular vote in the State of California.
Topic: death-penalty

Moreover, the speaker targets Californian citizens who are eligible to vote in rejection or repealing capital punishment. It is important because categorizing the target audience is crucial to advocacy and campaigning. Communication and mobilization of the target audience through talks would advance the narrative that the death penalty was outdated and barbaric. On the other hand, the speaker bases the context of his talk on the high number of advanced democracies that have since abolished the death penalty while the punishment was still applicable in the United States. The audience needs to understand that over 100 countries across the globe have abolished the death penalty, 60 countries no longer use it but it is still legal in 28 countries. In the United States, 19 states have abolished the death penalty.
Topic: death-penalty

Additionally, the speaker appeals to the audience by tapping into the power of reason, emotion, and credibility. The reason, emotion, and credibility focus on the speaker, the argument and the audience respectively; together, it allows a speaker to persuade effectively and powerfully deliver the meaning of their speech (Varpio, 2018). First, the speaker uses appeals based on reason by asking “I am an engineering professor so why would I get involved in this?” (McKeown, 2016). He answers that by re-counting “when I was at college in England, I volunteered for Amnesty International and wrote letters on behalf of prisoners of conscience” (McKeown, 2016). On the other hand, the speaker draws out feelings from the audience by arguing that “if you stand up, speak out and say something, even a little something, it could make quite a difference” (McKeown, 2016). Moreover, the speaker appeals to logic by using statistical facts and trends. He argues “there are 1 million African Americans in prison in America today, six times the rate of whites, but if that trend continues one in three black men born today will go to prison” (McKeown, 2016). Together, these examples become powerful and effective persuasion tools available for the speaker in this situation.
Topic: death-penalty

Similarly, the speaker strongly utilizes statistical evidence to strengthen the credibility of his arguments. For instance, evidence on the number of countries where capital punishment is still legal, those that no longer use it and those that have abolished it as 28, 60 and 100 respectively. The evidence is credible because it is based on Amnesty International data, which is a credible source of information. Besides, the speaker uses the court’s statistics from the State of California as evidence to back up his claims and enhance credibility. Additional information worth knowing about capital punishment in America includes the cost of executions, the average time spent in death row and the percentage of innocent individuals who end up executed.
Topic: death-penalty

Overall, the speaker’s introduction is compelling because he uses statistics to ground his speech and bring reality to it. The use of a statistic to introduce his powerful talk is an effective method to grab the audience’s attention from the beginning. It is important because it establishes the topic in a credible, memorable and emotionally effective way that offers the audience something to grasp. On the other hand, the speaker uses a concluding device to end his speech. Using a famous Martin Luther King Jr quote on hate and love, he asks his audience to turn up and vote for a repeal of capital punishment in California. The use of a concluding device gives the audience the final thought and a sense of closure of the talk.
Topic: death-penalty

It is time for the United States to mandate the death penalty for the crime of murder in all 50 states and to carry out the executions of those sentenced to death. Capital Punishment is the lawful infliction of the death penalty. In England, by 1500, only major felonies carried the death penalty: treason, murder, larceny, burglary, rape, and arson. The American colonies adhered with Englands’ view on the death penalty, for there was little they could do about it. However in the 1750’s reform movements spread through Europe, and in 1847 they reached the United States.
Topic: death-penalty

Alexandra Brito Phi 231/Bulnes Final Paper The Death Penalty Retribution is defined as a justly deserved punishment. Mainly used as a term that justifies the death penalty. In Retribution, the connection between punishment and guilt is that punishment is what justice feels that the criminal deserves for their crime. While guilt is when the criminal is sentenced and ensures that the punishment is sufficient to deter the guilty person from committing the same crime. The connection between punishment and guilt is that legal punishment must always be a response to guilt.
Topic: death-penalty

It is believed that the government should be responsible for instilling good values in its citizens, and not kill them off when they stray from the principles of such values. By murdering a criminal, the “eye for an eye” theory has accomplished nothing, for it has not genuinely made them experience self-hate or retribution. The 8th amendment states “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. ” This says that nothing that should be brought upon the offender should be in an excessive amount.
Topic: death-penalty

It is legally and morally wrong to use a punishment in which it is degrading to human dignity. Burton Leiser thinks otherwise. Leiser’s argument on capital punishment is that it is morally okay for at least one punishment. If the crime committed is severe enough than the death penalty should be used upon the offender. This will create more utility to the victim, the victim’s family and to its society if the offender was to be put to death. Simply, condemning a criminal to life imprisonment with or without the possibility for parole just isn’t enough for those who believe that the death penalty is right.
Topic: death-penalty

Leiser’s argument relies on the Purely Retributive Justification. He believes that every crime deserves their punishment under the principle jus talionis or “eye for an eye. ” Leiser thinks the same if it was the criminal was either handicapped or a child. If the child or handicap (whether insane or physically handicap) doesn’t care about human worth or dignity, then why should anyone else care about the criminal. This is where Marshall and Leiser’s thoughts come into disagreement when the problem with human dignity and value is called upon.
Topic: death-penalty

If the criminal kills someone and then he is killed afterward for his crime then it means that we, as the community, have failed to recognize his value as a human being. Marshall says that killing someone is just wrong. Regardless of their crime, putting someone to death is just a ‘cruel and unusual punishment. ’ We human beings are made from flesh and bone and neither one of us has the right to take away anyone’s life. Whereas, Leiser thinks that if a criminal takes away someone’s life, then it should be done to them also.
Topic: death-penalty

It seems like Leiser takes the Golden Rule, “do unto others as you would have them done to you,” word for word. In Kant’s Concept of Person, it is connected with the concept of dignity in which no one calls the dignity of a person into question. Treat all persons as an end and not as a means only. “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, in whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end” (Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals [1785] (1993)).
Topic: death-penalty

The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic value is that something has intrinsic value if it is valuable in itself. While something with extrinsic value is valuable as a means to something else. In other words, never use a person to only obtain something in the end because this lowers the person’s respect and dignity as a human being. What gives a person their intrinsic value is their freedom of will. Through autonomy persons have the right to distinguish right from wrong and make their own decisions.
Topic: death-penalty

Kant mentions that doing what is right for the right reason is important, especially for a Kantian. Kantian morality is not significant, which means that actions are based on the will of a person, and not on the consequences that comes from the action. For example, Kant believes that lying is wrong no matter what situation, even if it means to save someone’s life. I think Kant contradicts himself when he says that lying to save someone’s life is wrong, since he looks only at the act of lying and not at the motivation which is good will.
Topic: death-penalty

Kant relies on the notion of Free Will in grounding the value of persons. According to Kant, under no circumstances, no person can be forced to abandon the three moral virtues–God, freedom and immortality– unless the person chooses to do so. Every person has the right to believe in these three morals. I believe that the death penalty should not be used because according to Kant’s ethics killing is always wrong. It isn’t right for a criminal to have killed their victim, so what gives us the right to take his life away too; whether it was an act of vigilance or under capital punishment.
Topic: death-penalty

Everyone has a right to live no matter how severe their crime was. He also said that lying is always wrong. If they take the same steps to use the death penalty on a criminal as they would with lying, then that would mean that as punishment, we would have to lie to the person who lied to us in the beginning. With this reason Kant contradicts himself because if we should live our life by the Golden Rule, then the killing will never end because you (government) would seem to expect that someone should kill you too.
Topic: death-penalty

I anticipate gaining the trust of my audience by making clear that I do not propose this position lightly. The major counter-argument stems from the value of human life: if I value the life of a victim, how can I justify ending the life of the suspect? Additionally, opponents argue that once the victim’s life is lost, putting the suspect to death will not bring that victim back; therefore, they question whether or not justice is being served and whether or not the Death Penalty is a deterrent to violent crimes. To counter these arguments, I intend to show that while relevant, each of these positions is outweighed by justice being served.
Topic: death-penalty

A decent human being is not going to want to take the life of another person, and this points to two important issues: first, a murderer isn’t a decent human being; and second, the average American is going to balk at being involved in the death of another person. The latter issue is the reason the parameters of capital punishment need to be revisited: we need to ensure that this ultimate punishment is reserved for the most egregious of crimes when no doubt of guilt remains.
Topic: death-penalty

There is no going back once a death sentence is carried out, so there must be no doubt of the suspect’s guilt when capital punishment is meted out, and legal loopholes and positioning cannot factor into this decision. Often, eyewitness accounts are a major factor in determining the guilt or innocence of a suspect; however, “numerous psychological studies have shown that human beings are not very good at identifying people they saw only once for a relatively short period of time. The studies reveal error rates of as high as fifty percent — a frightening statistic given that many convictions may be based largely or solely on such testimony.
Topic: death-penalty

These studies show further that the ability to identify a stranger is diminished by stress (and what crime situation is not intensely stressful? ), that cross-racial identifications are especially unreliable, and that contrary to what one might think, those witnesses who claim to be “certain” of their identifications are no better at it than everyone else, just more confident” (CITE Dorf). Technology has provided one of the best means to ensure the guilt of a suspect: DNA testing.
Topic: death-penalty

Unfortunately, this technological advance isn’t being used to its full potential: “Among the reforms being sought are enforceable standards for defense counsel in death penalty trials and assured DNA testing for death row inmates who challenge their convictions” (CITE Jost 2001). No one can sit back and ignore the gravity of capital punishment, so all available means to assure the guilt or innocence of those sentenced to death (whether in prison or on trial) must be used. DNA testing is a reliable means of proving a suspect’s guilt and/or innocence.
Topic: death-penalty

Most Americans drive and can imagine themselves in the position Mr. Cosby faced: changing a flat tire. Murder is an unforgivable crime, but the crime itself is only part of the issue. Not only has the victim’s life been stolen, but also, violent acts like these expose law-abiding citizens to the unreasonable fear of what could happen to them. Although human life is a precious thing, and taking a suspect’s life will not bring a victim back, the Death Penalty is a necessary evil to ensure the overall peace of mind of America’s citizens: criminals who kill and create fear in the daily
Topic: death-penalty

A decent human being is not going to want to take the life of another person, and this points to two important issues: first, a murderer isn’t a decent human being; and second, the average American is going to balk at being involved in the death of another person. The latter issue is the reason the parameters of capital punishment need to be revisited: we need to ensure that this ultimate punishment is reserved for the most egregious of crimes when no doubt of guilt remains. There is no going back once a death sentence is carried out, so there must be no doubt of he suspect’s guilt when capital punishment is meted out, and legal loopholes and positioning cannot factor into this decision. Often, eyewitness accounts are a major factor in determining the guilt or innocence of a suspect; however, “numerous psychological studies have shown that human beings are not very good at identifying [strangers. . . ] and reveal error rates of as high as fifty percent [. . . and . . . ] show further that the ability to identify a stranger is diminished by [the] stress [. . . of a] crime situation” (Dorf, 2001). Technology has provided one of the best means to ensure the guilt of a suspect: DNA testing.
Topic: death-penalty

Unfortunately, this technological advance isn’t being used to its full potential: “Among the [capital punishment] reforms being sought are [. . . ] assured DNA testing for death row inmates who challenge their convictions” (Jost, 2001). The Death Penalty cannot be taken lightly, so all means to prove the guilt or innocence of those sentenced to death (whether in prison or on trial) must be used. Replacing fear of criminals with fear of the justice system is unacceptable. Admissions of guilt and DNA tests should be the deciding factors when a suspect’s life is on the line. Absent these things, alternative sentencing (e. . life without the possibility of parole) should be the maximum possible sentence. There is no reason to take the life of a suspect if any doubt remains: it serves no purpose. Conversely, suspects who are found guilty of capital crimes should be executed swiftly to help right the overall feelings of fear these acts place into the minds of law-abiding citizens. When a suspect is found guilty of a Death Penalty offense, the sentence needs to be carried out in a timely manner: Capital cases should be subject to one complete and fair course of collateral review in the State and Federal system, free from the time pressure of mpending execution, and with the assistance of competent counsel for the defendant. When this review has concluded, litigation should end. (Coats, 1990) Taking a life—even the life of a convicted felon—is a grave matter, and as a society, America needs to ensure that the Death Penalty is carried out only when the suspect’s guilt is proven absolutely. While it is true that the execution of a criminal will do nothing to return the dead victim, it is a necessary evil to help law-abiding citizens feel safer, and to ensure that the greatest possible justice is served.
Topic: death-penalty

” Immanuel Kant. About 2000 men, women, and teenagers currently wait on America’s “Death Row.” Their time grows shorter as federal and state courts increasingly ratify death penalty laws, allowing executions to proceed at an accelerated rate. It’s unlikely that any of these executions will make the front page, having become more and more a matter of routine in the last decade. Indeed, recent public opinion polls show a wide margin of support for the death penalty. But human rights advocates continue to decry the immorality of state-sanctioned killing in the U.
Topic: death-penalty

S., the only western industrialized country that continues to use the death penalty. Is capital punishment moral? Capital punishment is often defended on the grounds by the government, that society has a moral obligation to protect the safety and the welfare of its citizens. Murderers threaten this safety and welfare. Only by putting murderers to death can society ensure that convicted killers do not kill again. Second, those favoring capital punishment contend that society should support those practices that will bring about the greatest balance of good over evil, and capital punishment is one such practice.
Topic: death-penalty

The case had all the ingredients to make it one of the country’s most memorable: A beautiful blonde nightclub hostess, her dashing race car driver lover and a so-called crime of passion that led Ruth Ellis to become the last woman executed in Britain. On Tuesday, lawyers delved into transcripts from the decades-old trial to argue that Ellis was severely provoked into killing lover David Blakely as he left a London pub in 1955, and that her murder conviction should be overturned.
Topic: death-penalty

The Ellis case remains one of Britain’s most famous. It has inspired several books and a film, “Dance with a Stranger,” starring Miranda Richardson as Ellis. Mansfield said Ellis and Blakely had a tempestuous relationship, with Blakely alternating affection with abuse. Ten days before she shot him six times outside the Magdala pub in northwest London, Ellis suffered a miscarriage after Blakely, the baby’s father, punched her in the stomach.
Topic: death-penalty

“This wasn’t one or two incidents. This is plainly a pattern of violence,” Mansfield said. He contended that Ellis “snapped” after a weekend during which Blakely deserted her despite promises to take her out, and ignored her telephone calls and attempted visits. “It was obvious that when I shot him, I intended to kill him,” Ellis testified at her trial. Mansfield argued that the intent did not rule out the defense of provocation.
Topic: death-penalty

But Lord Justice Kay noted that 50 years ago a defense of provocation meant a “sudden and temporary loss of control.” He asked how that could apply to Ellis, who carried her gun for 90 minutes before shooting. Mansfield said the question should have been left to the jury. David Perry, the lawyer acting for the Crown Prosecution Service, maintained there was no unfair trial on the basis of the law as it then existed. It was not a crime of passion, but a “calm, deliberate, premeditated killing,” he said.
Topic: death-penalty

Ellis’ sister, 81-year-old Muriel Jakubait, said outside the court that she believes she is fulfilling her sister’s dying wish by pursuing the appeal. “She always said the truth would come out and that is what we have been trying to do,” Jakubait said. A medical expert is scheduled to give evidence Wednesday, the second and last day of the hearing. A ruling is to be delivered at a later date.
Topic: death-penalty

How can there be so different reactions to the execution of Karla Fay Tucker, a pickaxe murderer? There are arguments for and there are arguments against capital punishment. These arguments are of different types; some are religious, others emotional, judicial or prevention. To start with the religious argument, we should be aware that this is not to be neglected in the American society. The impact from conservative Christians is important and many people try to find answers to all questions in the Bible. The truth is that the Bible favours the death penalty, not only for murder but also for several other crimes. So if religion means anything and if the Bible is still valid, the death penalty has to be maintained.
Topic: death-penalty

The emotional argument is that the victims and their family have a right to vengeance. That is exactly what Mr Tony Thornton expressed. Why should he be denied the ultimate suffering of a criminal monster that in cold blood had battered his beloved wife to death with an axe? It is easy to understand that his long suffering and mourning need to be released by the murderer’s execution. When he expressed that his dead wife finally had found peace, it also meant that he himself had got it.
Topic: death-penalty

The death penalty also expresses that justice must be done. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth and a life for a life. (4) If Carla Tucker killed a human being, justice means that she, in turn, must be killed by humans. An even stronger argument is the necessity of preventing other cruelties from being committed. Society has to act with fervour against any horrendous act whatsoever. Only the death penalty shows how terrible a homicide is. If we do not answer with fervour to the most bestial crimes, how will youngsters ever learn good behaviour and be prevented from becoming brutal beasts? The fact that an executed criminal will never be able to reproduce his terror is enough to defend the capital punishment.
Topic: death-penalty

On April 21, 1868, in opposition to a bill banning capital punishment, John Stuart Mill convinced the British Parliament that the death penalty is far more humane than lifetime prison. “As my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton (Mr. Gilpin) has remarked, the most that human laws can do to anyone in the matter of death is to hasten it.” (5) Was he not right? Is it not true that the death penalty in point of fact is a very humane punishment?
Topic: death-penalty

No, John Stuart Mill was not right about human capital punishment. In reality, the death penalty is horrendous and I will now show why. Let me return to the Bible. What those conservative Christians, supporting the state’s killing of people, have forgotten when they quote the Bible is that there is more to find in it. They do not even read the whole passages. While quoting “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” they stop reading just before this comment of Jesus: “But what I tell you is this: Do not set yourself against the man who wrongs you. If someone slaps you on the right cheek, turn and offer him your left.” (6) So it is not only that the Bible interpreted by Jesus is against the death penalty, it is also evident that vengeance is opposite to true Christian faith.
Topic: death-penalty

Not even the judicial argument can be supported. Why so? Is it not the legislatures’ purpose to decide about laws and punishments? It certainly is. However, it is a fact that the poor and racial minorities are over-represented among the executed. Worse, innocents are sometimes sentenced to death. As long as errors like that can happen, there is no justice in taking a man’s or a woman’s life. An erroneous prison punishment can be rectified. An executed innocent can never get his life back. Death is definitive. Killing can never be just!