Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    Rogerian Essay

    Uploaded by

    api-358090729

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Rogerian Essay

    Uploaded by

    api-358090729
    1K views4 pages

    Original Title

    rogerian essay

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views4 pages

    Rogerian Essay

    Uploaded by

    api-358090729

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 4

    Hennelly 1

    Lexie Hennelly

    Mrs. Pettay

    ENG 112, 2A

    30 March 2017

    Locked in For Life

    An eye for an eye. A statement used to defend the death penalty, but is taking ones life

    the best way to get justice? Many debate if capital punishment should be allowed in our

    progressive society. Only a handful of countries, including the United States, still implement the

    death penalty, but many wonder if this punishment is an effective way to handle capital offenses.

    Several people chime into the debate on the ProCon website, which discusses the positives and

    negatives of controversial topics that are relevant to our society. These opinionated commenters

    discuss the issues of the death penalty, such as assessing the differences of a life sentence in

    prison versus the penalty, the constitutionality, the morality, and how the penalty affects crime

    rates.

    Supporters of the death penalty argue that this punishment is a useful way to deter crime,

    and most importantly is supported by the Constitution and certainly a moral way to deal with

    heinous crimes. Michael Summers, who is a Professor of Management Science at Pepperdine

    University, explains that a study conducted by his research team shows that each execution leads

    to about 74 fewer murders in the following year (ProCon). Many studies show there have been a

    decrease in murders while the death penalty is used. The validity of the studys results is

    questionable, mostly because of the various factors that affect murder rates. Joseph Blocher, a

    Professor of Law at Duke Law School, writes in his academic journal article titled, The Death
    Hennelly 2

    Penalty and the Fifth Amendment, how many Supreme Court justices defend the morality of the

    death penalty because it is stated in the Constitution, commonly called the Fifth Amendment

    Argument (Blocher 277). Justice Scalia even stated that not once has this Court ever

    suggested the death penalty is categorically impermissible (qtd. in Blocher 277). He is referring

    to the Eighth Amendment that states, cruel and unusual punishment is illegal and the Framers

    never considered capital punishment as that. Both sides can agree with Justice Scalia, that

    nowhere in the Constitution does it say the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment.

    However, Blocher explains that it does not need to be explicitly stated to be considered cruel

    punishment (Blocher 285). The supporters of the death penalty have valid points and many

    families affected by murders feel as an execution would bring justice (ProCon). However, an

    execution is a consequential decision and many factors need to be analyzed before our nation

    takes another life.

    I believe that the death penalty is hurting us as a unified nation. Life in prison is a better

    choice than capital punishment, the Fifth Amendment Argument is not a valid reason for

    keeping the penalty, and ending someones life is a serious immoral decision. The American

    Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) stated that the death penalty costs more, delivers less, and puts

    innocent lives at risk (ProCon). The ACLU defends the point that a sentence of life without

    parole would be a better option. Additionally, the Fifth Amendment Argument does not

    provide a reason to keep the death penalty and it is now considered a legally prohibited cruel

    and unusual punishment (Blocher 293). When ending someones life by capital punishment, it

    is basically committing a similar crime that this criminal just carried out. This is where the

    saying an eye for an eye comes from. If a person kills someone, they will then be killed. This

    logic seems backwards if one of our nations goals is to reduce these crimes. Bryan Stevenson,
    Hennelly 3

    JD, who is a Professor at New York University School of Law, explains that no one, especially

    the government has the right to take someones life (ProCon). I believe that for both groups to

    understand each other, they need to fix the root of this issue: the crime itself.

    I hope to find some common ground between supporters and opponents of the death

    penalty. Collectively, the groups could solve the problem of growing crime rates. Instead of

    arguing about who is right when it comes to capital punishment, each group could use their

    strengths to combat capital crime. I understand, that unfortunately murders will never stop, so

    the issue of the death penalty will always be present, but a decline of heinous crimes will help

    our nation. Fighting the original problem will be helpful to both sides as they support or oppose

    the death penalty.

    The death penalty is a way for criminals to escape their punishments, as well as being

    costly, immoral, and not affecting crime rates at all, this method is not an unacceptable way to

    deal with punishing criminals. In no way am I trying to get a lighter sentence for these criminals.

    The people put on death row are the ones that have committed the most heinous crimes. I would

    rather have them sit in prison for the rest of their lives, instead of ending it altogether. Since, no

    one knows where they go when they die, they could be taking the easy way out for the crime

    they have committed. The opponents of capital punishment should consider the fact that justice

    is not served by killing criminals, and it is giving the government too much power to have the

    ability to end a life. By supporters accepting the opposing position, they will hopefully realize

    that ending the death penalty will allow us to create a more acceptable system for punishing

    criminals, while still serving justice to those who are affected.


    Hennelly 4

    Works Cited

    Blocher, Joseph. The Death Penalty and The Fifth Amendment. Northwestern University Law

    Review Online, vol. 111, no. 1, 15 July 2016, pp. 275-293. Academic Search Complete,

    web.a.ebscohost.com.eztcc.vccs.edu:2048/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=8d907cc0-7a6c-

    46b79df0a395a7219efc%40sessionmgr4010&hid=4204&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3Qtb

    Gl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=120553778&db=a9h. Accessed 24 March 2017.

    ProCon. "Death Penalty ProCon.org." Should the Death Penalty Be Allowed? ProCon.org, 2017.

    Web. 24 March 2017.

    You might also like