essay topics on capital punishment

Presentations made painless

Get Premium

128 Capital Punishment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Inside This Article

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is a highly debated and controversial topic worldwide. The practice involves sentencing individuals convicted of severe crimes to death as a form of punishment. Supporters argue that it serves as a deterrent for potential criminals and provides justice for the victims and their families. On the other hand, opponents believe that it violates basic human rights and that there is a risk of executing innocent individuals. If you are assigned an essay on capital punishment and are struggling to find a topic, here are 128 ideas and examples to help you get started.

The ethical implications of capital punishment.
The history and evolution of capital punishment in different countries.
The impact of capital punishment on society.
The cost-effectiveness of capital punishment compared to life imprisonment.
The racial disparities in capital punishment cases.
Capital punishment and the mentally ill.
The role of the media in influencing public opinion on capital punishment.
The impact of capital punishment on crime rates.
The constitutional legality of capital punishment.
The impact of international pressure on countries that practice capital punishment.
The role of religion in shaping opinions on capital punishment.
The role of the victim's family in capital punishment cases.
Capital punishment and its effect on the prison system.
The impact of wrongful convictions and exonerations on the capital punishment debate.
The psychological effects of capital punishment on both the offender and the executioner.
The role of public opinion in shaping capital punishment policies.
The effectiveness of alternative forms of punishment compared to capital punishment.
Capital punishment and the concept of justice.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the convicted.
The role of cultural norms in determining attitudes towards capital punishment.
The correlation between socioeconomic status and the likelihood of facing capital punishment.
The impact of international human rights organizations on capital punishment policies.
The role of deterrence in the justification of capital punishment.
The impact of capital punishment on the criminal justice system.
The morality of executing individuals with intellectual disabilities.
The impact of public executions on society.
The role of the defense attorney in capital punishment cases.
The impact of racial bias in jury selection in capital punishment cases.
The role of clemency and appeals in capital punishment cases.
The impact of botched executions on the capital punishment debate.
The role of the Supreme Court in shaping capital punishment laws.
The impact of capital punishment on the mental health of the offender.
The morality of executing individuals who were juveniles at the time of the crime.
The impact of capital punishment on the rate of homicide.
The role of forensic evidence in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals with severe mental illnesses.
The impact of international treaties on capital punishment policies.
The role of DNA evidence in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were victims of abuse or trauma.
The impact of public opinion on the implementation of capital punishment.
The role of the prosecutor in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were coerced or manipulated into committing a crime.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the victims.
The role of public defenders in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were wrongfully convicted but later found innocent.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed.
The role of expert witnesses in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting in self-defense or under extreme duress.
The impact of international public opinion on countries that practice capital punishment.
The role of the judge in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the crime.
The impact of the media's portrayal of capital punishment on public opinion.
The role of the victim impact statement in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were involved in multiple crimes but only convicted of one.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the victims and the convicted.
The role of racial bias in the application of capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were coerced into confessing to a crime they did not commit.
The impact of capital punishment on the mental health of the victim's family.
The role of eyewitness testimony in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting out of extreme desperation or poverty.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the wrongly convicted.
The role of the jury in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of a cult or extremist ideology.
The impact of capital punishment on the mental health of the victim's family and the convicted's family.
The role of rehabilitation in the debate on capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting out of fear or self-preservation.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed and the wrongly convicted.
The role of restorative justice in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of a mental illness.
The impact of capital punishment on the mental health of the victim's family and the wrongly convicted's family.
The role of forgiveness in the capital punishment debate.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting out of revenge or retribution.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, and the wrongly convicted's family.
The role of education and awareness in shaping public opinion on capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of a substance addiction.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and society as a whole.
The role of mental health services in capital punishment cases.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of a personality disorder.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and marginalized communities.
The role of rehabilitation and reintegration in the capital punishment debate.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of religious extremism.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the criminal justice system.
The role of international cooperation in abolishing capital punishment globally.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of political ideology.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and public trust in the justice system.
The role of mental health awareness and early intervention in reducing violent crimes and the need for capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of religious fanaticism.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the perception of justice in society.
The role of restorative justice practices in addressing the needs of victims and reducing the demand for capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of extremist political ideologies.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the healing process for all involved parties.
The role of global organizations in advocating for the abolition of capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of hate or prejudice.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the long-term societal repercussions.
The role of education and empathy in reducing the societal acceptance of capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of societal pressures or expectations.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the international reputation of countries that practice it.
The role of community-based programs in preventing crimes that could lead to capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of cultural norms or traditions.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for healing and reconciliation.
The role of trauma-informed approaches in addressing the root causes of violent crimes and reducing the reliance on capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of societal inequalities or injustices.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the possibilities for restorative justice.
The role of international law in pressuring countries to abolish capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of political or economic desperation.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for societal healing and transformation.
The role of trauma recovery programs in addressing the underlying issues that lead to violent crimes and the demand for capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of systemic injustices or discrimination.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for building a more compassionate and equitable society.
The role of international human rights conventions in abolishing capital punishment globally.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of political oppression or totalitarian regimes.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for healing and reconciliation on a societal level.
The role of social programs and poverty alleviation in reducing the societal factors that contribute to violent crimes and the need for capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of cultural or religious customs that clash with international human rights standards.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for fostering empathy and understanding among different groups in society.
The role of mental health support services in preventing crimes that could lead to capital punishment and providing alternatives for rehabilitation.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of personal trauma or unresolved issues.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for systemic reforms in the criminal justice system.
The role of education and awareness campaigns in challenging societal norms that perpetuate violence and the demand for capital punishment.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of extremist ideologies or hate groups.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for building a more inclusive and just society.
The role of community-based initiatives in preventing crimes that could lead to capital punishment and fostering a sense of belonging and support.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of addiction or substance abuse.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for healing and reconciliation on an individual and collective level.
The role of international pressure and diplomatic efforts in abolishing capital punishment globally.
The morality of executing individuals who were acting under the influence of systemic inequalities or discrimination.
The impact of capital punishment on the families of the executed, the victim's family, the wrongly convicted's family, and the potential for fostering a culture of forgiveness and nonviolence.

Want to research companies faster?

Instantly access industry insights

Let PitchGrade do this for me

Leverage powerful AI research capabilities

We will create your text and designs for you. Sit back and relax while we do the work.

Explore More Content

International Relations Topics Topics: 176
International Organizations Essay Topics Topics: 97
Diplomacy Essay Topics Topics: 78
Elections Research Topics Topics: 124
Death Penalty Essay Topics Topics: 142
Totalitarianism Research Topics Topics: 72
Political Parties Essay Topics Topics: 105
Federalism Essay Topics Topics: 74
United Nations Research Topics Topics: 116
Public Administration Topics Topics: 133
International Law Essay Topics Topics: 117
Political Science Paper Topics Topics: 96
European Union Essay Topics Topics: 75
Socialism Topics Topics: 92
Donald Trump Paper Topics Topics: 90

Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments

Life without Parole

Retribution

Victims’ Families

Methods of Execution

Medical Professionals’ Participation

Federal Death Penalty

1. Legality

The United States is one of 55 countries globally with a legal death penalty, according to Amnesty International. As of Mar. 24, 2021, within the US, 27 states had a legal death penalty (though 3 of those states had a moratorium on the punishment’s use).

Proponents of the death penalty being legal argue that such a harsh penalty is needed for criminals who have committed the worst crimes, that the punishment deters crime, and that the US Supreme Court has upheld the death penalty as constitutional.

Opponents of the death penalty being legal argue that the punishment is cruel and unusual, and, thus, unconstitutional, that innocent people are put to death for crimes they did not commit, and that the penalty is disproportionately applied to people of color.

People who view this page may also like:

States with the Death Penalty and States with Death Penalty Bans
US Executions by Race, Crime, Method, Age, Gender, State, & Year
Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal?

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

History of the Death Penalty
Top Pro & Con Quotes
Historical Timeline
Did You Know?
States with the Death Penalty, Death Penalty Bans, and Death Penalty Moratoriums
The ESPY List: US Executions 1608-2002
Federal Capital Offenses
Death Row Inmates
Critical Thinking Video Series: Thomas Edison Electrocutes Topsy the Elephant, Jan. 4, 1903

Cite This Page

Artificial Intelligence
Private Prisons
Space Colonization
Social Media
Death Penalty
School Uniforms
Video Games
Animal Testing
Gun Control
Banned Books
Teachers’ Corner

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

About The Death Penalty

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty

Facebook Share
Tweet Tweet
Email Email

Click the buttons below to view arguments and testimony on each topic.

The death penalty deters future murders.

Society has always used punishment to discourage would-be criminals from unlawful action. Since society has the highest interest in preventing murder, it should use the strongest punishment available to deter murder, and that is the death penalty. If murderers are sentenced to death and executed, potential murderers will think twice before killing for fear of losing their own life.

For years, criminologists analyzed murder rates to see if they fluctuated with the likelihood of convicted murderers being executed, but the results were inconclusive. Then in 1973 Isaac Ehrlich employed a new kind of analysis which produced results showing that for every inmate who was executed, 7 lives were spared because others were deterred from committing murder. Similar results have been produced by disciples of Ehrlich in follow-up studies.

Moreover, even if some studies regarding deterrence are inconclusive, that is only because the death penalty is rarely used and takes years before an execution is actually carried out. Punishments which are swift and sure are the best deterrent. The fact that some states or countries which do not use the death penalty have lower murder rates than jurisdictions which do is not evidence of the failure of deterrence. States with high murder rates would have even higher rates if they did not use the death penalty.

Ernest van den Haag, a Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University who has studied the question of deterrence closely, wrote: “Even though statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts. Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most. Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence. Perhaps they will not be deterred. But they would certainly not be deterred by anything else. We owe all the protection we can give to law enforcers exposed to special risks.”

Finally, the death penalty certainly “deters” the murderer who is executed. Strictly speaking, this is a form of incapacitation, similar to the way a robber put in prison is prevented from robbing on the streets. Vicious murderers must be killed to prevent them from murdering again, either in prison, or in society if they should get out. Both as a deterrent and as a form of permanent incapacitation, the death penalty helps to prevent future crime.

Those who believe that deterrence justifies the execution of certain offenders bear the burden of proving that the death penalty is a deterrent. The overwhelming conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that the death penalty is, at best, no more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in prison. The Ehrlich studies have been widely discredited. In fact, some criminologists, such as William Bowers of Northeastern University, maintain that the death penalty has the opposite effect: that is, society is brutalized by the use of the death penalty, and this increases the likelihood of more murder. Even most supporters of the death penalty now place little or no weight on deterrence as a serious justification for its continued use.

States in the United States that do not employ the death penalty generally have lower murder rates than states that do. The same is true when the U.S. is compared to countries similar to it. The U.S., with the death penalty, has a higher murder rate than the countries of Europe or Canada, which do not use the death penalty.

The death penalty is not a deterrent because most people who commit murders either do not expect to be caught or do not carefully weigh the differences between a possible execution and life in prison before they act. Frequently, murders are committed in moments of passion or anger, or by criminals who are substance abusers and acted impulsively. As someone who presided over many of Texas’s executions, former Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox has remarked, “It is my own experience that those executed in Texas were not deterred by the existence of the death penalty law. I think in most cases you’ll find that the murder was committed under severe drug and alcohol abuse.”

There is no conclusive proof that the death penalty acts as a better deterrent than the threat of life imprisonment. A 2012 report released by the prestigious National Research Council of the National Academies and based on a review of more than three decades of research, concluded that studies claiming a deterrent effect on murder rates from the death penalty are fundamentally flawed. A survey of the former and present presidents of the country’s top academic criminological societies found that 84% of these experts rejected the notion that research had demonstrated any deterrent effect from the death penalty .

Once in prison, those serving life sentences often settle into a routine and are less of a threat to commit violence than other prisoners. Moreover, most states now have a sentence of life without parole. Prisoners who are given this sentence will never be released. Thus, the safety of society can be assured without using the death penalty.

Ernest van den Haag Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Policy, Fordham University. Excerpts from ” The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense,” (Harvard Law Review Association, 1986)

“Execution of those who have committed heinous murders may deter only one murder per year. If it does, it seems quite warranted. It is also the only fitting retribution for murder I can think of.”

“Most abolitionists acknowledge that they would continue to favor abolition even if the death penalty were shown to deter more murders than alternatives could deter. Abolitionists appear to value the life of a convicted murderer or, at least, his non-execution, more highly than they value the lives of the innocent victims who might be spared by deterring prospective murderers.

Deterrence is not altogether decisive for me either. I would favor retention of the death penalty as retribution even if it were shown that the threat of execution could not deter prospective murderers not already deterred by the threat of imprisonment. Still, I believe the death penalty, because of its finality, is more feared than imprisonment, and deters some prospective murderers not deterred by the thought of imprisonment. Sparing the lives of even a few prospective victims by deterring their murderers is more important than preserving the lives of convicted murderers because of the possibility, or even the probability, that executing them would not deter others. Whereas the life of the victims who might be saved are valuable, that of the murderer has only negative value, because of his crime. Surely the criminal law is meant to protect the lives of potential victims in preference to those of actual murderers.”

“We threaten punishments in order to deter crime. We impose them not only to make the threats credible but also as retribution (justice) for the crimes that were not deterred. Threats and punishments are necessary to deter and deterrence is a sufficient practical justification for them. Retribution is an independent moral justification. Although penalties can be unwise, repulsive, or inappropriate, and those punished can be pitiable, in a sense the infliction of legal punishment on a guilty person cannot be unjust. By committing the crime, the criminal volunteered to assume the risk of receiving a legal punishment that he could have avoided by not committing the crime. The punishment he suffers is the punishment he voluntarily risked suffering and, therefore, it is no more unjust to him than any other event for which one knowingly volunteers to assume the risk. Thus, the death penalty cannot be unjust to the guilty criminal.”

Full text can be found at PBS.org .

“Persons who commit murder and other crimes of personal violence either may or may not premeditate their crimes.

When crime is planned, the criminal ordinarily concentrates on escaping detection, arrest, and conviction. The threat of even the severest punishment will not discourage those who expect to escape detection and arrest. It is impossible to imagine how the threat of any punishment could prevent a crime that is not premeditated….

Most capital crimes are committed in the heat of the moment. Most capital crimes are committed during moments of great emotional stress or under the influence of drugs or alcohol, when logical thinking has been suspended. In such cases, violence is inflicted by persons heedless of the consequences to themselves as well as to others….

If, however, severe punishment can deter crime, then long-term imprisonment is severe enough to deter any rational person from committing a violent crime.

The vast preponderance of the evidence shows that the death penalty is no more effective than imprisonment in deterring murder and that it may even be an incitement to criminal violence. Death-penalty states as a group do not have lower rates of criminal homicide than non-death-penalty states….

On-duty police officers do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide in abolitionist states than they do in death-penalty states. Between l973 and l984, for example, lethal assaults against police were not significantly more, or less, frequent in abolitionist states than in death-penalty states. There is ‘no support for the view that the death penalty provides a more effective deterrent to police homicides than alternative sanctions. Not for a single year was evidence found that police are safer in jurisdictions that provide for capital punishment.’ (Bailey and Peterson, Criminology (1987))

Prisoners and prison personnel do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide from life-term prisoners in abolition states than they do in death-penalty states. Between 1992 and 1995, 176 inmates were murdered by other prisoners; the vast majority (84%) were killed in death penalty jurisdictions. During the same period about 2% of all assaults on prison staff were committed by inmates in abolition jurisdictions. Evidently, the threat of the death penalty ‘does not even exert an incremental deterrent effect over the threat of a lesser punishment in the abolitionist states.’ (Wolfson, in Bedau, ed., The Death Penalty in America, 3rd ed. (1982))

Actual experience thus establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the death penalty does not deter murder. No comparable body of evidence contradicts that conclusion.”

Click here for the full text from the ACLU website.

Retribution

A just society requires the taking of a life for a life.

When someone takes a life, the balance of justice is disturbed. Unless that balance is restored, society succumbs to a rule of violence. Only the taking of the murderer’s life restores the balance and allows society to show convincingly that murder is an intolerable crime which will be punished in kind.

Retribution has its basis in religious values, which have historically maintained that it is proper to take an “eye for an eye” and a life for a life.

Although the victim and the victim’s family cannot be restored to the status which preceded the murder, at least an execution brings closure to the murderer’s crime (and closure to the ordeal for the victim’s family) and ensures that the murderer will create no more victims.

For the most cruel and heinous crimes, the ones for which the death penalty is applied, offenders deserve the worst punishment under our system of law, and that is the death penalty. Any lesser punishment would undermine the value society places on protecting lives.

Robert Macy, District Attorney of Oklahoma City, described his concept of the need for retribution in one case: “In 1991, a young mother was rendered helpless and made to watch as her baby was executed. The mother was then mutilated and killed. The killer should not lie in some prison with three meals a day, clean sheets, cable TV, family visits and endless appeals. For justice to prevail, some killers just need to die.”

Retribution is another word for revenge. Although our first instinct may be to inflict immediate pain on someone who wrongs us, the standards of a mature society demand a more measured response.

The emotional impulse for revenge is not a sufficient justification for invoking a system of capital punishment, with all its accompanying problems and risks. Our laws and criminal justice system should lead us to higher principles that demonstrate a complete respect for life, even the life of a murderer. Encouraging our basest motives of revenge, which ends in another killing, extends the chain of violence. Allowing executions sanctions killing as a form of ‘pay-back.’

Many victims’ families denounce the use of the death penalty. Using an execution to try to right the wrong of their loss is an affront to them and only causes more pain. For example, Bud Welch’s daughter, Julie, was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Although his first reaction was to wish that those who committed this terrible crime be killed, he ultimately realized that such killing “is simply vengeance; and it was vengeance that killed Julie…. Vengeance is a strong and natural emotion. But it has no place in our justice system.”

The notion of an eye for an eye, or a life for a life, is a simplistic one which our society has never endorsed. We do not allow torturing the torturer, or raping the rapist. Taking the life of a murderer is a similarly disproportionate punishment, especially in light of the fact that the U.S. executes only a small percentage of those convicted of murder, and these defendants are typically not the worst offenders but merely the ones with the fewest resources to defend themselves.

Louis P. Pojman Author and Professor of Philosophy, U.S. Military Academy. Excerpt from “The Death Penalty: For and Against,” (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 1998)

“[Opponents of the capital punishment often put forth the following argument:] Perhaps the murderer deserves to die, but what authority does the state have to execute him or her? Both the Old and New Testament says, “’Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord” (Prov. 25:21 and Romans 12:19). You need special authority to justify taking the life of a human being.

The objector fails to note that the New Testament passage continues with a support of the right of the state to execute criminals in the name of God: “Let every person be subjected to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment…. If you do wrong, be afraid, for [the authority] does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13: 1-4). So, according to the Bible, the authority to punish, which presumably includes the death penalty, comes from God.

But we need not appeal to a religious justification for capital punishment. We can site the state’s role in dispensing justice. Just as the state has the authority (and duty) to act justly in allocating scarce resources, in meeting minimal needs of its (deserving) citizens, in defending its citizens from violence and crime, and in not waging unjust wars; so too does it have the authority, flowing from its mission to promote justice and the good of its people, to punish the criminal. If the criminal, as one who has forfeited a right to life, deserves to be executed, especially if it will likely deter would-be murderers, the state has a duty to execute those convicted of first-degree murder.”

National Council of Synagogues and the Bishops’ Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops Excerpts from “To End the Death Penalty: A Report of the National Jewish/Catholic Consultation” (December, 1999)

“Some would argue that the death penalty is needed as a means of retributive justice, to balance out the crime with the punishment. This reflects a natural concern of society, and especially of victims and their families. Yet we believe that we are called to seek a higher road even while punishing the guilty, for example through long and in some cases life-long incarceration, so that the healing of all can ultimately take place.

Some would argue that the death penalty will teach society at large the seriousness of crime. Yet we say that teaching people to respond to violence with violence will, again, only breed more violence.

The strongest argument of all [in favor of the death penalty] is the deep pain and grief of the families of victims, and their quite natural desire to see punishment meted out to those who have plunged them into such agony. Yet it is the clear teaching of our traditions that this pain and suffering cannot be healed simply through the retribution of capital punishment or by vengeance. It is a difficult and long process of healing which comes about through personal growth and God’s grace. We agree that much more must be done by the religious community and by society at large to solace and care for the grieving families of the victims of violent crime.

Recent statements of the Reform and Conservative movements in Judaism, and of the U.S. Catholic Conference sum up well the increasingly strong convictions shared by Jews and Catholics…:

‘Respect for all human life and opposition to the violence in our society are at the root of our long-standing opposition (as bishops) to the death penalty. We see the death penalty as perpetuating a cycle of violence and promoting a sense of vengeance in our culture. As we said in Confronting the Culture of Violence: ‘We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing.’ We oppose capital punishment not just for what it does to those guilty of horrible crimes, but for what it does to all of us as a society. Increasing reliance on the death penalty diminishes all of us and is a sign of growing disrespect for human life. We cannot overcome crime by simply executing criminals, nor can we restore the lives of the innocent by ending the lives of those convicted of their murders. The death penalty offers the tragic illusion that we can defend life by taking life.’1

We affirm that we came to these conclusions because of our shared understanding of the sanctity of human life. We have committed ourselves to work together, and each within our own communities, toward ending the death penalty.” Endnote 1. Statement of the Administrative Committee of the United States Catholic Conference, March 24, 1999.

The risk of executing the innocent precludes the use of the death penalty.

The death penalty alone imposes an irrevocable sentence. Once an inmate is executed, nothing can be done to make amends if a mistake has been made. There is considerable evidence that many mistakes have been made in sentencing people to death. Since 1973, over 180 people have been released from death row after evidence of their innocence emerged. During the same period of time, over 1,500 people have been executed. Thus, for every 8.3 people executed, we have found one person on death row who never should have been convicted. These statistics represent an intolerable risk of executing the innocent. If an automobile manufacturer operated with similar failure rates, it would be run out of business.

Our capital punishment system is unreliable. A study by Columbia University Law School found that two thirds of all capital trials contained serious errors. When the cases were retried, over 80% of the defendants were not sentenced to death and 7% were completely acquitted.

Many of the releases of innocent defendants from death row came about as a result of factors outside of the justice system. Recently, journalism students in Illinois were assigned to investigate the case of a man who was scheduled to be executed, after the system of appeals had rejected his legal claims. The students discovered that one witness had lied at the original trial, and they were able to find another man, who confessed to the crime on videotape and was later convicted of the murder. The innocent man who was released was very fortunate, but he was spared because of the informal efforts of concerned citizens, not because of the justice system.

In other cases, DNA testing has exonerated death row inmates. Here, too, the justice system had concluded that these defendants were guilty and deserving of the death penalty. DNA testing became available only in the early 1990s, due to advancements in science. If this testing had not been discovered until ten years later, many of these inmates would have been executed. And if DNA testing had been applied to earlier cases where inmates were executed in the 1970s and 80s, the odds are high that it would have proven that some of them were innocent as well.

Society takes many risks in which innocent lives can be lost. We build bridges, knowing that statistically some workers will be killed during construction; we take great precautions to reduce the number of unintended fatalities. But wrongful executions are a preventable risk. By substituting a sentence of life without parole, we meet society’s needs of punishment and protection without running the risk of an erroneous and irrevocable punishment.

There is no proof that any innocent person has actually been executed since increased safeguards and appeals were added to our death penalty system in the 1970s. Even if such executions have occurred, they are very rare. Imprisoning innocent people is also wrong, but we cannot empty the prisons because of that minimal risk. If improvements are needed in the system of representation, or in the use of scientific evidence such as DNA testing, then those reforms should be instituted. However, the need for reform is not a reason to abolish the death penalty.

Besides, many of the claims of innocence by those who have been released from death row are actually based on legal technicalities. Just because someone’s conviction is overturned years later and the prosecutor decides not to retry him, does not mean he is actually innocent.

If it can be shown that someone is innocent, surely a governor would grant clemency and spare the person. Hypothetical claims of innocence are usually just delaying tactics to put off the execution as long as possible. Given our thorough system of appeals through numerous state and federal courts, the execution of an innocent individual today is almost impossible. Even the theoretical execution of an innocent person can be justified because the death penalty saves lives by deterring other killings.

Gerald Kogan, Former Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Excerpts from a speech given in Orlando, Florida, October 23, 1999 “[T]here is no question in my mind, and I can tell you this having seen the dynamics of our criminal justice system over the many years that I have been associated with it, [as] prosecutor, defense attorney, trial judge and Supreme Court Justice, that convinces me that we certainly have, in the past, executed those people who either didn’t fit the criteria for execution in the State of Florida or who, in fact, were, factually, not guilty of the crime for which they have been executed.

“And you can make these statements when you understand the dynamics of the criminal justice system, when you understand how the State makes deals with more culpable defendants in a capital case, offers them light sentences in exchange for their testimony against another participant or, in some cases, in fact, gives them immunity from prosecution so that they can secure their testimony; the use of jailhouse confessions, like people who say, ‘I was in the cell with so-and-so and they confessed to me,’ or using those particular confessions, the validity of which there has been great doubt. And yet, you see the uneven application of the death penalty where, in many instances, those that are the most culpable escape death and those that are the least culpable are victims of the death penalty. These things begin to weigh very heavily upon you. And under our system, this is the system we have. And that is, we are human beings administering an imperfect system.”

“And how about those people who are still sitting on death row today, who may be factually innocent but cannot prove their particular case very simply because there is no DNA evidence in their case that can be used to exonerate them? Of course, in most cases, you’re not going to have that kind of DNA evidence, so there is no way and there is no hope for them to be saved from what may be one of the biggest mistakes that our society can make.”

The entire speech by Justice Kogan is available here.

Paul G. Cassell Associate Professor of Law, University of Utah, College of Law, and former law clerk to Chief Justice Warren E. Burger. Statement before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights Concerning Claims of Innocence in Capital Cases (July 23, 1993)

“Given the fallibility of human judgments, the possibility exists that the use of capital punishment may result in the execution of an innocent person. The Senate Judiciary Committee has previously found this risk to be ‘minimal,’ a view shared by numerous scholars. As Justice Powell has noted commenting on the numerous state capital cases that have come before the Supreme Court, the ‘unprecedented safeguards’ already inherent in capital sentencing statutes ‘ensure a degree of care in the imposition of the sentence of death that can only be described as unique.’”

“Our present system of capital punishment limits the ultimate penalty to certain specifically-defined crimes and even then, permit the penalty of death only when the jury finds that the aggravating circumstances in the case outweigh all mitigating circumstances. The system further provides judicial review of capital cases. Finally, before capital sentences are carried out, the governor or other executive official will review the sentence to insure that it is a just one, a determination that undoubtedly considers the evidence of the condemned defendant’s guilt. Once all of those decisionmakers have agreed that a death sentence is appropriate, innocent lives would be lost from failure to impose the sentence.”

“Capital sentences, when carried out, save innocent lives by permanently incapacitating murderers. Some persons who commit capital homicide will slay other innocent persons if given the opportunity to do so. The death penalty is the most effective means of preventing such killers from repeating their crimes. The next most serious penalty, life imprisonment without possibility of parole, prevents murderers from committing some crimes but does not prevent them from murdering in prison.”

“The mistaken release of guilty murderers should be of far greater concern than the speculative and heretofore nonexistent risk of the mistaken execution of an innocent person.”

Full text can be found here.

Arbitrariness & Discrimination

The death penalty is applied unfairly and should not be used.

In practice, the death penalty does not single out the worst offenders. Rather, it selects an arbitrary group based on such irrational factors as the quality of the defense counsel, the county in which the crime was committed, or the race of the defendant or victim.

Almost all defendants facing the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney. Hence, they are dependent on the quality of the lawyers assigned by the state, many of whom lack experience in capital cases or are so underpaid that they fail to investigate the case properly. A poorly represented defendant is much more likely to be convicted and given a death sentence.

With respect to race, studies have repeatedly shown that a death sentence is far more likely where a white person is murdered than where a Black person is murdered. The death penalty is racially divisive because it appears to count white lives as more valuable than Black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 296 Black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 31 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a Black victim. Such racial disparities have existed over the history of the death penalty and appear to be largely intractable.

It is arbitrary when someone in one county or state receives the death penalty, but someone who commits a comparable crime in another county or state is given a life sentence. Prosecutors have enormous discretion about when to seek the death penalty and when to settle for a plea bargain. Often those who can only afford a minimal defense are selected for the death penalty. Until race and other arbitrary factors, like economics and geography, can be eliminated as a determinant of who lives and who dies, the death penalty must not be used.

Discretion has always been an essential part of our system of justice. No one expects the prosecutor to pursue every possible offense or punishment, nor do we expect the same sentence to be imposed just because two crimes appear similar. Each crime is unique, both because the circumstances of each victim are different and because each defendant is different. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a mandatory death penalty which applied to everyone convicted of first degree murder would be unconstitutional. Hence, we must give prosecutors and juries some discretion.

In fact, more white people are executed in this country than black people. And even if blacks are disproportionately represented on death row, proportionately blacks commit more murders than whites. Moreover, the Supreme Court has rejected the use of statistical studies which claim racial bias as the sole reason for overturning a death sentence.

Even if the death penalty punishes some while sparing others, it does not follow that everyone should be spared. The guilty should still be punished appropriately, even if some do escape proper punishment unfairly. The death penalty should apply to killers of black people as well as to killers of whites. High paid, skillful lawyers should not be able to get some defendants off on technicalities. The existence of some systemic problems is no reason to abandon the whole death penalty system.

Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr. President and Chief Executive Officer, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, Inc. Excerpt from “Legal Lynching: Racism, Injustice & the Death Penalty,” (Marlowe & Company, 1996)

“Who receives the death penalty has less to do with the violence of the crime than with the color of the criminal’s skin, or more often, the color of the victim’s skin. Murder — always tragic — seems to be a more heinous and despicable crime in some states than in others. Women who kill and who are killed are judged by different standards than are men who are murderers and victims.

The death penalty is essentially an arbitrary punishment. There are no objective rules or guidelines for when a prosecutor should seek the death penalty, when a jury should recommend it, and when a judge should give it. This lack of objective, measurable standards ensures that the application of the death penalty will be discriminatory against racial, gender, and ethnic groups.

The majority of Americans who support the death penalty believe, or wish to believe, that legitimate factors such as the violence and cruelty with which the crime was committed, a defendant’s culpability or history of violence, and the number of victims involved determine who is sentenced to life in prison and who receives the ultimate punishment. The numbers, however, tell a different story. They confirm the terrible truth that bias and discrimination warp our nation’s judicial system at the very time it matters most — in matters of life and death. The factors that determine who will live and who will die — race, sex, and geography — are the very same ones that blind justice was meant to ignore. This prejudicial distribution should be a moral outrage to every American.”

Justice Lewis Powell United States Supreme Court Justice excerpts from McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987) (footnotes and citations omitted)

(Mr. McCleskey, a black man, was convicted and sentenced to death in 1978 for killing a white police officer while robbing a store. Mr. McCleskey appealed his conviction and death sentence, claiming racial discrimination in the application of Georgia’s death penalty. He presented statistical analysis showing a pattern of sentencing disparities based primarily on the race of the victim. The analysis indicated that black defendants who killed white victims had the greatest likelihood of receiving the death penalty. Writing the majority opinion for the Supreme Court, Justice Powell held that statistical studies on race by themselves were an insufficient basis for overturning the death penalty.)

“[T]he claim that [t]his sentence rests on the irrelevant factor of race easily could be extended to apply to claims based on unexplained discrepancies that correlate to membership in other minority groups, and even to gender. Similarly, since [this] claim relates to the race of his victim, other claims could apply with equally logical force to statistical disparities that correlate with the race or sex of other actors in the criminal justice system, such as defense attorneys or judges. Also, there is no logical reason that such a claim need be limited to racial or sexual bias. If arbitrary and capricious punishment is the touchstone under the Eighth Amendment, such a claim could — at least in theory — be based upon any arbitrary variable, such as the defendant’s facial characteristics, or the physical attractiveness of the defendant or the victim, that some statistical study indicates may be influential in jury decision making. As these examples illustrate, there is no limiting principle to the type of challenge brought by McCleskey. The Constitution does not require that a State eliminate any demonstrable disparity that correlates with a potentially irrelevant factor in order to operate a criminal justice system that includes capital punishment. As we have stated specifically in the context of capital punishment, the Constitution does not ‘plac[e] totally unrealistic conditions on its use.’ (Gregg v. Georgia)”

The entire decision can be found here.

Share full article

Supported by

student opinion

Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?

In its last six months, the United States government has put 13 prisoners to death. Do you think capital punishment should end?

By Nicole Daniels

Students in U.S. high schools can get free digital access to The New York Times until Sept. 1, 2021.

In July, the United States carried out its first federal execution in 17 years. Since then, the Trump administration has executed 13 inmates, more than three times as many as the federal government had in the previous six decades.

The death penalty has been abolished in 22 states and 106 countries, yet it is still legal at the federal level in the United States. Does your state or country allow the death penalty?

Do you believe governments should be allowed to execute people who have been convicted of crimes? Is it ever justified, such as for the most heinous crimes? Or are you universally opposed to capital punishment?

In “ ‘Expedited Spree of Executions’ Faced Little Supreme Court Scrutiny ,” Adam Liptak writes about the recent federal executions:

In 2015, a few months before he died, Justice Antonin Scalia said he w o uld not be surprised if the Supreme Court did away with the death penalty. These days, after President Trump’s appointment of three justices, liberal members of the court have lost all hope of abolishing capital punishment. In the face of an extraordinary run of federal executions over the past six months, they have been left to wonder whether the court is prepared to play any role in capital cases beyond hastening executions. Until July, there had been no federal executions in 17 years . Since then, the Trump administration has executed 13 inmates, more than three times as many as the federal government had put to death in the previous six decades.

The article goes on to explain that Justice Stephen G. Breyer issued a dissent on Friday as the Supreme Court cleared the way for the last execution of the Trump era, complaining that it had not sufficiently resolved legal questions that inmates had asked. The article continues:

If Justice Breyer sounded rueful, it was because he had just a few years ago held out hope that the court would reconsider the constitutionality of capital punishment. He had set out his arguments in a major dissent in 2015 , one that must have been on Justice Scalia’s mind when he made his comments a few months later. Justice Breyer wrote in that 46-page dissent that he considered it “highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment,” which bars cruel and unusual punishments. He said that death row exonerations were frequent, that death sentences were imposed arbitrarily and that the capital justice system was marred by racial discrimination. Justice Breyer added that there was little reason to think that the death penalty deterred crime and that long delays between sentences and executions might themselves violate the Eighth Amendment. Most of the country did not use the death penalty, he said, and the United States was an international outlier in embracing it. Justice Ginsburg, who died in September, had joined the dissent. The two other liberals — Justices Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — were undoubtedly sympathetic. And Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who held the decisive vote in many closely divided cases until his retirement in 2018, had written the majority opinions in several 5-to-4 decisions that imposed limits on the death penalty, including ones barring the execution of juvenile offenders and people convicted of crimes other than murder .

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know

Capital punishment is an ancient practice. It’s one that human rights defenders strongly oppose and consider as inhumane and cruel. In 2019, Amnesty International reported the lowest number of executions in about a decade. Most executions occurred in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Egypt . The United States is the only developed western country still using capital punishment. What does this say about the US? Here are five essays about the death penalty everyone should read:

“When We Kill”

By: Nicholas Kristof | From: The New York Times 2019

In this excellent essay, Pulitizer-winner Nicholas Kristof explains how he first became interested in the death penalty. He failed to write about a man on death row in Texas. The man, Cameron Todd Willingham, was executed in 2004. Later evidence showed that the crime he supposedly committed – lighting his house on fire and killing his three kids – was more likely an accident. In “When We Kill,” Kristof puts preconceived notions about the death penalty under the microscope. These include opinions such as only guilty people are executed, that those guilty people “deserve” to die, and the death penalty deters crime and saves money. Based on his investigations, Kristof concludes that they are all wrong.

Nicholas Kristof has been a Times columnist since 2001. He’s the winner of two Pulitizer Prices for his coverage of China and the Darfur genocide.

“An Inhumane Way of Death”

By: Willie Jasper Darden, Jr.

Willie Jasper Darden, Jr. was on death row for 14 years. In his essay, he opens with the line, “Ironically, there is probably more hope on death row than would be found in most other places.” He states that everyone is capable of murder, questioning if people who support capital punishment are just as guilty as the people they execute. Darden goes on to say that if every murderer was executed, there would be 20,000 killed per day. Instead, a person is put on death row for something like flawed wording in an appeal. Darden feels like he was picked at random, like someone who gets a terminal illness. This essay is important to read as it gives readers a deeper, more personal insight into death row.

Willie Jasper Darden, Jr. was sentenced to death in 1974 for murder. During his time on death row, he advocated for his innocence and pointed out problems with his trial, such as the jury pool that excluded black people. Despite worldwide support for Darden from public figures like the Pope, Darden was executed in 1988.

“We Need To Talk About An Injustice”

By: Bryan Stevenson | From: TED 2012

This piece is a transcript of Bryan Stevenson’s 2012 TED talk, but we feel it’s important to include because of Stevenson’s contributions to criminal justice. In the talk, Stevenson discusses the death penalty at several points. He points out that for years, we’ve been taught to ask the question, “Do people deserve to die for their crimes?” Stevenson brings up another question we should ask: “Do we deserve to kill?” He also describes the American death penalty system as defined by “error.” Somehow, society has been able to disconnect itself from this problem even as minorities are disproportionately executed in a country with a history of slavery.

Bryan Stevenson is a lawyer, founder of the Equal Justice Initiative, and author. He’s argued in courts, including the Supreme Court, on behalf of the poor, minorities, and children. A film based on his book Just Mercy was released in 2019 starring Michael B. Jordan and Jamie Foxx.

“I Know What It’s Like To Carry Out Executions”

By: S. Frank Thompson | From: The Atlantic 2019

In the death penalty debate, we often hear from the family of the victims and sometimes from those on death row. What about those responsible for facilitating an execution? In this opinion piece, a former superintendent from the Oregon State Penitentiary outlines his background. He carried out the only two executions in Oregon in the past 55 years, describing it as having a “profound and traumatic effect” on him. In his decades working as a correctional officer, he concluded that the death penalty is not working . The United States should not enact federal capital punishment.

Frank Thompson served as the superintendent of OSP from 1994-1998. Before that, he served in the military and law enforcement. When he first started at OSP, he supported the death penalty. He changed his mind when he observed the protocols firsthand and then had to conduct an execution.

“There Is No Such Thing As Closure on Death Row”

By: Paul Brown | From: The Marshall Project 2019

This essay is from Paul Brown, a death row inmate in Raleigh, North Carolina. He recalls the moment of his sentencing in a cold courtroom in August. The prosecutor used the term “closure” when justifying a death sentence. Who is this closure for? Brown theorizes that the prosecutors are getting closure as they end another case, but even then, the cases are just a way to further their careers. Is it for victims’ families? Brown is doubtful, as the death sentence is pursued even when the families don’t support it. There is no closure for Brown or his family as they wait for his execution. Vivid and deeply-personal, this essay is a must-read for anyone who wonders what it’s like inside the mind of a death row inmate.

Paul Brown has been on death row since 2000 for a double murder. He is a contributing writer to Prison Writers and shares essays on topics such as his childhood, his life as a prisoner, and more.

13 Facts about Child Labor

Environmental Racism 101: Definition, Examples, Ways to Take Action

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

Pinkwashing 101: Definition, History, Examples

15 Inspiring Quotes for Black History Month

10 Inspiring Ways Women Are Fighting for Equality

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Clean Water

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

History & Society
Science & Tech
Biographies
Animals & Nature
Geography & Travel
Arts & Culture
Games & Quizzes
On This Day
One Good Fact
New Articles
Lifestyles & Social Issues
Philosophy & Religion
Politics, Law & Government
World History
Health & Medicine
Browse Biographies
Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
Environment
Fossils & Geologic Time
Entertainment & Pop Culture
Sports & Recreation
Visual Arts
Demystified
Image Galleries
Infographics
Top Questions
Britannica Kids
Saving Earth
Space Next 50
Student Center
Introduction

Historical considerations

Moral arguments
Utilitarian arguments
Practical arguments
The abolition movement
Capital punishment in the early 21st century

capital punishment

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Capital Punishment
Santa Clara University - Capital Punishment: Our Duty or Our Doom?
Cornell Law School - Legal Information Institute - Death penalty
capital punishment - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
capital punishment - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
Table Of Contents

Recent News

capital punishment , execution of an offender sentenced to death after conviction by a court of law of a criminal offense. Capital punishment should be distinguished from extrajudicial executions carried out without due process of law . The term death penalty is sometimes used interchangeably with capital punishment , though imposition of the penalty is not always followed by execution (even when it is upheld on appeal), because of the possibility of commutation to life imprisonment.

Capital punishment for murder , treason , arson , and rape was widely employed in ancient Greece under the laws of Draco (fl. 7th century bce ), though Plato argued that it should be used only for the incorrigible . The Romans also used it for a wide range of offenses, though citizens were exempted for a short time during the republic. It also has been sanctioned at one time or another by most of the world’s major religions. Followers of Judaism and Christianity, for example, have claimed to find justification for capital punishment in the biblical passage “Whosoever sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed” ( Genesis 9:6). Yet capital punishment has been prescribed for many crimes not involving loss of life, including adultery and blasphemy . The ancient legal principle Lex talionis ( talion )—“an eye for an eye , a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life”—which appears in the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi , was invoked in some societies to ensure that capital punishment was not disproportionately applied.

The prevalence of capital punishment in ancient times is difficult to ascertain precisely, but it seems likely that it was often avoided, sometimes by the alternative of banishment and sometimes by payment of compensation . For example, it was customary during Japan’s peaceful Heian period (794–1185) for the emperor to commute every death sentence and replace it with deportation to a remote area, though executions were reinstated once civil war broke out in the mid-11th century.

In Islamic law , as expressed in the Qurʾān , capital punishment is condoned . Although the Qurʾān prescribes the death penalty for several ḥadd (fixed) crimes—including robbery, adultery, and apostasy of Islam —murder is not among them. Instead, murder is treated as a civil crime and is covered by the law of qiṣās (retaliation), whereby the relatives of the victim decide whether the offender is punished with death by the authorities or made to pay diyah (wergild) as compensation.

Death was formerly the penalty for a large number of offenses in England during the 17th and 18th centuries, but it was never applied as widely as the law provided. As in other countries, many offenders who committed capital crimes escaped the death penalty, either because juries or courts would not convict them or because they were pardoned, usually on condition that they agreed to banishment; some were sentenced to the lesser punishment of transportation to the then American colonies and later to Australia. Beginning in the Middle Ages, it was possible for offenders guilty of capital offenses to receive benefit of clergy , by which those who could prove that they were ordained priests (clerks in Holy Orders) as well as secular clerks who assisted in divine service (or, from 1547, a peer of the realm) were allowed to go free, though it remained within the judge’s power to sentence them to prison for up to a year, or from 1717 onward to transportation for seven years. Because during medieval times the only proof of ordination was literacy, it became customary between the 15th and 18th centuries to allow anyone convicted of a felony to escape the death sentence by proving that he (the privilege was extended to women in 1629) could read. Until 1705, all he had to do was read (or recite) the first verse from Psalm 51 of the Bible—“Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions”—which came to be known as the “ neck verse” (for its power to save one’s neck). To ensure that an offender could escape death only once through benefit of clergy, he was branded on the brawn of the thumb ( M for murder or T for theft). Branding was abolished in 1779, and benefit of clergy ceased in 1827.

From ancient times until well into the 19th century, many societies administered exceptionally cruel forms of capital punishment. In Rome the condemned were hurled from the Tarpeian Rock ( see Tarpeia ); for parricide they were drowned in a sealed bag with a dog, cock, ape, and viper; and still others were executed by forced gladiatorial combat or by crucifixion . Executions in ancient China were carried out by many painful methods, such as sawing the condemned in half, flaying him while still alive, and boiling . Cruel forms of execution in Europe included “breaking” on the wheel, boiling in oil, burning at the stake , decapitation by the guillotine or an axe, hanging , drawing and quartering , and drowning. Although by the end of the 20th century many jurisdictions (e.g., nearly every U.S. state that employs the death penalty, Guatemala, the Philippines , Taiwan , and some Chinese provinces) had adopted lethal injection , offenders continued to be beheaded in Saudi Arabia and occasionally stoned to death (for adultery) in Iran and Sudan . Other methods of execution were electrocution , gassing, and the firing squad.

Historically, executions were public events, attended by large crowds, and the mutilated bodies were often displayed until they rotted. Public executions were banned in England in 1868, though they continued to take place in parts of the United States until the 1930s. In the last half of the 20th century, there was considerable debate regarding whether executions should be broadcast on television, as has occurred in Guatemala. Since the mid-1990s public executions have taken place in some 20 countries, including Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Nigeria , though the practice has been condemned by the United Nations Human Rights Committee as “incompatible with human dignity.”

In many countries death sentences are not carried out immediately after they are imposed; there is often a long period of uncertainty for the convicted while their cases are appealed. Inmates awaiting execution live on what has been called “ death row ”; in the United States and Japan, some prisoners have been executed more than 15 years after their convictions . The European Union regards this phenomenon as so inhumane that, on the basis of a binding ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (1989), EU countries may extradite an offender accused of a capital crime to a country that practices capital punishment only if a guarantee is given that the death penalty will not be sought.

Capital Punishment Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on capital punishment.

Every one of us is familiar with the term punishment. But Capital Punishment is something very few people understand. Capital punishment is a legal death penalty ordered by the court against the violation of criminal laws. In addition, the method of punishment varies from country to country. Where some countries hung the culprits until death and some shoot or give them a lethal injection.

Types of Capital Punishments

In this topic, we are going to discuss the various methods of punishment that are used in different countries. But, before that let’s talk about the capital punishments that people used in the past. Earlier, the capital punishments are more like torture rather than a death penalty. They used to strain and punish the body of the culprit to the extreme that he/she dies because of the pain and fear of torture.

Besides, modern methods are quicker and less painful than traditional methods.

Electrocution – In this method, the criminal is tied to a chair and a high voltage current that can kill a man easily is passed through the body. In addition, it causes organ failure (especially heart).
Tranquilization – This method gives the person a slow but painless death as the toxin injections are injected into his body that takes up to several hours for the criminal to die.
Beheading – Generally, the Arab and Gulf countries use this method. Where they decide the death sentence by the crime of the person. Furthermore, in this method, they simply cut the person’s head apart from the body.
Stoning – In this the criminal is beaten till death. Also, it is the most painful method of execution.
Shooting – The criminal is either shoot in the head or in his/her chest in this method.
Hanging – This method simply involves the hanging of culprit till death.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Advantages and Disadvantages of Capital Punishments

Although many people think that it’s a violation of human rights and the Human Rights Commission strongly opposes capital punishment still many countries continue this practice.

The advantages of capital punishment are that they give people an idea of what the law is capable of doing and the criminal can never escape from the punishment no matter who he/she is.

In addition, anyone who is thinking about committing a crime will think twice before committing a crime. Furthermore, a criminal that is in prison for his crime cannot harm anyone of the outside world.

The disadvantages are that we do not give the person a second chance to change. Besides, many times the real criminal escape the trial and the innocent soul of the prosecution claimed to guilty by false claims. Also, many punishments are painful and make a mess of the body of the criminal.

To conclude, we can say that capital punishment is the harsh reality of our world. Also, on one hand, it decreases the crime rate and on the other violates many human rights.

Besides, all these types of punishment are not justifiable and the court and administrative bodies should try to find an alternative for it.

FAQs about Capital Punishment

Q.1 What is the difference between the death penalty and capital punishment?

A.1 For many people the term death penalty and capital punishment is the same thing but there is a minute difference between them. The implementation of the death penalty is not death but capital punishment itself means execution.

Q.2 Does capital punishment decrease the rate of crime?

A.2 There is no solid proof related to this but scientists think that reduces the chances of major crimes to a certain level.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

Travelling Essay
Picnic Essay
Our Country Essay
My Parents Essay
Essay on Favourite Personality
Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
Essay on Knowledge is Power
Essay on Gurpurab
Essay on My Favourite Season
Essay on Types of Sports

Download the App

About The Journalist’s Resource
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Criminal Justice
Environment
Politics & Government
Race & Gender

Expert Commentary

The research on capital punishment: Recent scholarship and unresolved questions

2014 review of research on capital punishment, including studies that attempt to quantify rates of innocence and the potential deterrence effect on crime.

Republish this article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

by Alexandra Raphel and John Wihbey, The Journalist's Resource January 5, 2015

This <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org/criminal-justice/research-capital-punishment-key-recent-studies/">article</a> first appeared on <a target="_blank" href="https://journalistsresource.org">The Journalist's Resource</a> and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.<img src="https://journalistsresource.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/cropped-jr-favicon-150x150.png" style="width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;">

Over the past year the death penalty has again come into focus as a major public policy and political issue, catalyzed by several high-profile events.

The botched execution of convicted murderer and rapist Clayton Lockett in Oklahoma in 2014 was seen as a potential turning point in the debate, bringing increased attention to the mechanisms by which persons are executed. That was followed by a number of other closely scrutinized cases, and the year ended with few executions relative to years past. On December 31, 2014, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley commuted the sentences of the remaining four prisoners on death row in that state. In 2013, Maryland became the 18th state to abolish the death penalty after Connecticut in 2012 and New Mexico in 2009.

Meanwhile, polling data suggests some softening of public attitudes, though the majority Americans continue to support capital punishment. Gallop noted in October 2014 that the level of public support (60%) is at its lowest in 40 years. A Washington Post -ABC News poll in mid-2014 found that more Americans support life sentences, rather than the death penalty, for convicted murderers. Further, recent polls from the Pew Research Center indicate that only a bare majority of Americans now support capital punishment, 55%, down from 78% in 1996.

Scholarly research sheds light on a number of important aspects of this issue:

False convictions

One key reason for the contentious debate is the concern that states are executing innocent people. How many people are unjustly facing the death penalty? By definition, it is difficult to obtain a reliable answer to this question. Presumably if judges, juries, and law enforcement were always able to conclusively determine who was innocent, those defendants would simply not be convicted in the first place. When capital punishment is the sentence, however, this issue takes on new importance.

Some believe that when it comes to death-penalty cases, this is not a huge cause for concern. In his concurrent opinion in the 2006 Supreme Court case Kansas v. Marsh , Justice Antonin Scalia suggested that the execution error rate was minimal, around 0.027%. However, a 2014 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests that the figure could be higher. Authors Samuel Gross (University of Michigan Law School), Barbara O’Brien (Michigan State University College of Law), Chen Hu (American College of Radiology) and Edward H. Kennedy (University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine) examine data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Department of Justice relating to exonerations from 1973 to 2004 in an attempt to estimate the rate of false convictions among death row defendants. (Determining innocence with full certainty is an obvious challenge, so as a proxy they use exoneration — “an official determination that a convicted defendant is no longer legally culpable for the crime.”) In short, the researchers ask: If all death row prisoners were to remain under this sentence indefinitely, how many of them would have eventually been found innocent (exonerated)?

Interestingly, the authors also note that advances in DNA identification technology are unlikely to have a large impact on false conviction rates because DNA evidence is most often used in cases of rape rather than homicide. To date, only about 13% of death row exonerations were the result of DNA testing. The Innocence Project , a litigation and public policy organization founded in 1992, has been deeply involved in many such cases.

Death penalty deterrence effects: What do we know?

A chief way proponents of capital punishment defend the practice is the idea that the death penalty deters other people from committing future crimes. For example, research conducted by John J. Donohue III (Yale Law School) and Justin Wolfers (University of Pennsylvania) applies economic theory to the issue: If people act as rational maximizers of their profits or well-being, perhaps there is reason to believe that the most severe of punishments would serve as a deterrent. (The findings of their 2009 study on this issue, “Estimating the Impact of the Death Penalty on Murder,” are inconclusive.) In contrast, one could also imagine a scenario in which capital punishment leads to an increased homicide rate because of a broader perception that the state devalues human life. It could also be possible that the death penalty has no effect at all because information about executions is not diffused in a way that influences future behavior.

In 1978 — two years after the Supreme Court issued its decision reversing a previous ban on the death penalty ( Gregg v. Georgia ) — the National Research Council (NRC) published a comprehensive review of the current research on capital punishment to determine whether one of these hypotheses was more empirically supported than the others. The NRC concluded that “available studies provide no useful evidence on the deterrent effect of capital punishment.”

Researchers have subsequently used a number of methods in an effort to get closer to an accurate estimate of the deterrence effect of the death penalty. Many of the studies have reached conflicting conclusions, however. To conduct an updated review, the NRC formed the Committee on Deterrence and the Death Penalty, comprised of academics from economics departments and public policy schools from institutions around the country, including the Carnegie Mellon University, University of Chicago and Duke University.

In 2012, the Committee published an updated report that concluded that not much had changed in recent decades: “Research conducted in the 30 years since the earlier NRC report has not sufficiently advanced knowledge to allow a conclusion, however qualified, about the effect of the death penalty on homicide rates.” The report goes on to recommend that none of the reviewed reports be used to influence public policy decisions on the death penalty.

Why has the research not been able to provide any definitive answers about the impact of the death penalty? One general challenge is that when it comes to capital punishment, a counter-factual policy is simply not observable. You cannot simultaneously execute and not execute defendants, making it difficult to isolate the impact of the death penalty. The Committee also highlights a number of key flaws in the research designs:

There are both capital and non-capital punishment options for people charged with serious crimes. So, the relevant question on the deterrent effect of capital punishment specifically “is the differential deterrent effect of execution in comparison with the deterrent effect of other available or commonly used penalties.” None of the studies reviewed by the Committee took into account these severe, but noncapital punishments, which could also have an effect on future behaviors and could confound the estimated deterrence effect of capital punishment.
“They use incomplete or implausible models of potential murderers’ perceptions of and response to the capital punishment component of a sanction regime”
“The existing studies use strong and unverifiable assumptions to identify the effects of capital punishment on homicides.”

In a 2012 study, “Deterrence and the Dealth Penalty: Partial Identificaiton Analysis Using Repeated Cross Sections,” authors Charles F. Manski (Northwestern University) and John V. Pepper (University of Virginia) focus on the third challenge. They note: “Data alone cannot reveal what the homicide rate in a state without (with) a death penalty would have been had the state (not) adopted a death penalty statute. Here, as always when analyzing treatment response, data must be combined with assumptions to enable inference on counterfactual outcomes.”

Number of persons executed in the U.S., 1930-2011 (BJS)

However, even though the authors do not arrive at a definitive conclusion, the National Research Council Committee notes that this type of research holds some value: “Rather than imposing the strong but unsupported assumptions required to identify the effect of capital punishment on homicides in a single model or an ad hoc set of similar models, approaches that explicitly account for model uncertainty may provide a constructive way for research to provide credible albeit incomplete answers.”

Another strategy researchers have taken is to limit the focus of studies on potential short-term effects of the death penalty. In a 2009 paper, “The Short-Term Effects of Executions on Homicides: Deterrence, Displacement, or Both?” authors Kenneth C. Land and Hui Zheng of Duke University, along with Raymond Teske Jr. of Sam Houston State University, examine monthly execution data (1980-2005) from Texas, “a state that has used the death penalty with sufficient frequency to make possible relatively stable estimates of the homicide response to executions.” They conclude that “evidence exists of modest, short-term reductions in the numbers of homicides in Texas in the months of or after executions.” Depending on which model they use, these deterrent effects range from 1.6 to 2.5 homicides.

The NRC’s Committee on Deterrence and the Death Penalty commented on the findings, explaining: “Land, Teske and Zheng (2009) should be commended for distinguishing between periods in Texas when the use of capital punishment appears to have been erratic and when it appears to have been systematic. But they fail to integrate this distinction into a coherently delineated behavioral model that incorporates sanctions regimes, salience, and deterrence. And, as explained above, their claims of evidence of deterrence in the systematic regime are flawed.”

A more recent paper (2012) from the three authors, “The Differential Short-Term Impacts of Executions on Felony and Non-Felony Homicides,” addresses some of these concerns. Published in Criminology and Public Policy , the paper reviews and updates some of their earlier findings by exploring “what information can be gained by disaggregating the homicide data into those homicides committed in the course of another felony crime, which are subject to capital punishment, and those committed otherwise.” The results produce a number of different findings and models, including that “the short-lived deterrence effect of executions is concentrated among non-felony-type homicides.”

Other factors to consider

The question of what kinds of “mitigating” factors should prevent the criminal justice system from moving forward with an execution remains hotly disputed. A 2014 paper published in the Hastings Law Journal , “The Failure of Mitigation?” by scholars at the University of North Carolina and DePaul University, investigates recent executions of persons with possible mental or intellectual disabilities. The authors reviewed 100 cases and conclude that the “overwhelming majority of executed offenders suffered from intellectual impairments, were barely into adulthood, wrestled with severe mental illness, or endured profound childhood trauma.”

Two significant recommendations for reforming the existing process also are supported by some academic research. A 2010 study by Pepperdine University School of Law published in Temple Law Review , “Unpredictable Doom and Lethal Injustice: An Argument for Greater Transparency in Death Penalty Decisions,” surveyed the decision-making process among various state prosecutors. At the request of a state commission, the authors first surveyed California district attorneys; they also examined data from the other 36 states that have the death penalty. The authors found that prosecutors’ capital punishment filing decisions remain marked by local “idiosyncrasies,” meaning that “the very types of unfairness that the Supreme Court sought to eliminate” beginning in 1972 may still “infect capital cases.” They encourage “requiring prosecutors to adhere to an established set of guidelines.” Finally, there has been growing support for taping interrogations of suspects in capital cases, so as to guard against the phenomenon of false confessions .

Related reading: For an international perspective on capital punishment, see Amnesty International’s 2013 report ; for more information on the evolution of U.S. public opinion on the death penalty, see historical trends from Gallup .

Keywords: crime, prisons, death penalty, capital punishment

About the Authors

Alexandra Raphel

John Wihbey

Home — Essay Samples — Law, Crime & Punishment — Punishment — Reasons for Capital Punishment

Reasons for Capital Punishment

Categories: Punishment

About this sample

Words: 734 |

Published: Jun 13, 2024

Words: 734 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Introduction, retribution, incapacitation.

Cite this Essay

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

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

Expert in: Law, Crime & Punishment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 624 words

2 pages / 819 words

2 pages / 936 words

5 pages / 2198 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Punishment

In recent years, the issue of juvenile punishment has sparked heated debate among policymakers, scholars, and the general public. The question of how best to address the behavior of young offenders is complex and multifaceted, [...]

The concept of justice rests on the fundamental principle that punishment should fit the crime, a cornerstone of legal systems across the world. This principle underscores the idea that the severity of punishment should be [...]

Correctional ideology encompasses the varied and often conflicting philosophies that underlie the criminal justice system's approach to dealing with offenders. Historically, societies have grappled with how best to respond to [...]

Jonathan Wayne Nobles is a figure whose life and actions have evoked considerable debate over the nature of crime, punishment, and the potential for redemption. Convicted of a heinous double murder in 1986, Nobles' journey [...]

In Greek mythology, the Sphinx was a female monster with the body of a lion, the head and breast of a woman, eagle wings and according to some, a serpent’s tail. Many people know the myth of the Sphinx as a monster who devours [...]

John Fowles’ 1963 novel The Collector is a deeply disturbing, intensely psychological book based around the principles of beauty, power, control, and class. The story follows Fred Clegg through his capture and abuse of [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment

How it works

1 Introduction
2 Historical Background of Stoning
3 Modern Application of Stoning
4 Ethical Implications of Stoning
5 Conclusion

Introduction

Stoning, you know, where folks throw stones at someone until they die, has been around for ages and stirred up a lot of debates. Different cultures and religions have used it for what they saw as really bad crimes, like adultery or blasphemy. Even though it’s an old practice, people still argue about it today, bringing up big questions about right and wrong and the law. This essay’s gonna look into the history of stoning, how it’s used nowadays, and the ethical stuff around it.

By doing this, we hope to get why some places still do it and why others are totally against it.

Historical Background of Stoning

Stoning has been around since ancient times, with the Hebrews, Muslims, and Greeks and Romans using it. In the Hebrew Bible, they talked about stoning for things like worshipping other gods or kids acting up. Islamic law, called Sharia, also had stoning, or “rajm,” for things like adultery. The Greeks and Romans did it too, but it wasn’t as set in stone (pun intended) as in religious texts. People used to think stoning kept society in check and upheld morals, reflecting what folks believed back then. But how it was done changed a lot, depending on culture, religion, and the law.

Modern Application of Stoning

Today, stoning doesn’t happen much, but it still goes on in some places, especially where old-school Islamic law is in play. Countries like Iran, Saudi Arabia, and parts of Nigeria have had cases of stoning, which usually gets the world really upset and shouting about human rights. People criticize these practices for not having fair trials, forcing confessions, and mostly targeting women. The fact that stoning is still used shows a struggle between sticking to traditional laws and the push for global human rights. When the world reacts to stoning, it often brings up the bigger argument about respecting cultural differences versus pushing for universal human rights.

Ethical Implications of Stoning

The ethics around stoning are pretty deep and complicated. For starters, it raises big human rights issues, like the right to life and banning cruel punishments. Critics say stoning is just plain cruel, causing long, painful deaths and public shame. Plus, it usually affects women more, highlighting problems with gender fairness. There’s also the issue of community involvement in stoning, which can lead to more violence and make people numb to brutality. Folks who defend stoning on religious or cultural grounds often clash with those who push for human rights for everyone, making the ethical landscape pretty tricky.

Stoning is one of the most debated and ethically tough practices, both in the past and now. Its continued use in some places shows how deep cultural and religious beliefs still shape the law. But the ethical problems with stoning, especially about human rights and gender fairness, mean we can’t stop talking about it. As the world moves more towards supporting human rights for all, stoning will likely face more opposition and calls to end it. Looking at stoning helps us understand the tough balance between tradition, law, and ethics in justice.

Cite this page

Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment. (2024, Sep 17). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/stoning-as-a-form-of-capital-punishment/

"Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment." PapersOwl.com , 17 Sep 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/stoning-as-a-form-of-capital-punishment/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/stoning-as-a-form-of-capital-punishment/ [Accessed: 19 Sep. 2024]

"Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment." PapersOwl.com, Sep 17, 2024. Accessed September 19, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/stoning-as-a-form-of-capital-punishment/

"Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment," PapersOwl.com , 17-Sep-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/stoning-as-a-form-of-capital-punishment/. [Accessed: 19-Sep-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/stoning-as-a-form-of-capital-punishment/ [Accessed: 19-Sep-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Advantages of Capital Punishment

Disadvantages of capital punishment.

Bibliography

Within the realms of the American laws, criminal justice system comprises of the law creators (legislative), courts (adjudication), and correctional facilities such as probation, parole, prisons, and jails. American criminal justice system comprises of the jurisdictional, normative, functional, and institutional components.

These components work simultaneously in defining the goals of procedural laws and decision to be taken by the court of law. Factually, these activities take place at different points. This paper analyses impact of death penalty at the Walnut Street Jail of Philadelphia.

Actually, capital punishment refers to a death sentence on individuals who have committed unlawful deeds. Indeed, such punishment arises due to capital offences. Death penalty is normally conducted by knocking out head from an individual’s body. Initially, death penalty was practiced by many countries but currently several nations have abandoned the practice.

Indeed, many positions have been raised due to religious and cultural explanations, and political principles. In fact, the Holy Bible justifies death penalty against criminal offenses such as murder. This paper examines death penalty from an impartial view by considering disadvantages and advantages of capital punishment in society.

First, according to Teeters, death penalty eradicates criminal activities in a community. Indeed, capital punishment is an important mission for every person simply because it instills moral while discouraging criminal activities in society. Actually, dead victims would not commit more illegal actions either when freed from jail or in jail.

Secondly, money is ever a limited commodity. In this case, nations would utilize wisely their scarce resources to care their citizens who need help rather than spending such resources in imprisoning criminals for long term basis. Capital punishment is hence cost-effectual. Indeed, infinite appeals would spend much time and more resources in resolving death disputes.

Death penalty is therefore cost-valuable. Thirdly, Teeters views that death penalty is a retribution action in which a victim is punished because of offenses committed. In fact, capital punishment is an eye for an eye formula which is revengeful with no forgiveness. Lastly, capital punishment is a deterrent device that has discouraged crimes. Actually, before committing crimes, criminals have to perceive possible impacts of their actions because they are aware of what death penalty justifies.

Teeters explains that there is a conviction that innocent persons would be killed and therefore there would be no alternative manner for compensating and rehabilitating such people. Secondly, death penalty is an unkind, barbaric and unashamed inhuman act, regardless how atrocious offense is.

Indeed, human being has self-respect to exist which is a natural law from religious perspective. In addition, human being has dignity to exist with self-respect which should be key priority for any government objective for people. Moreover, there has been a big concern how a government would tread on persons’ dignity and right.

Third, according to Teeters, death penalty never gives a victim possibility to be regretful of his actions. Actually, capital punishment has never treated criminals with a just prospect to recover their deeds. Lastly, there is no tangible proof that death penalty has been capable to prevent latent victims from performing offensive acts.

Furthermore, mitigating capital punishment as way to prevent future unlawful acts is likely to be an obvious one-dimension justification to several people. Indeed, this should not be the case. Actually, people should look for objective justifications that support every person, even criminal offenders.

Though parole and probation are community correction strategies which functioning on the concept of community supervision, they are different in many aspects. Despite these differences, they were initiated to mitigate the magnitude and severity of the punishment process. Parole was introduced in America in the mid 19 th century.

Under this arrangement credit marks are awarded for behavior change, and release from detaining heavily relies on the cumulative score per prisoner. After probation, the suspected offender is passed through criminal justice system, and if found guilty, may be sentenced to a jail term. Since these detention camps have parole officers, prisoners are registered in parole programs and the best behaved released before full jail term. Generally, these processes are designed to promote positive behavior change initiated by the suspect.

Capital punishment had been a controversial dispute since ancient era, though remains certainty in some nations in the world. Actually, India and other countries still endow death penalty for most terrible unlawful acts. However, Human Right Advocates have remained persistent to resist against capital punishment in order to restore human dignity. However, some States have embraced death penalty as an eventual sentence so long as unlawful deeds typifies intense brutal act.

Teeters, Negley. “The Cradle of the Penitentiary: The Walnut Street Jail at Philadelphia 1773-1835.” Temple University, 2001

The Death Penalty in the Modern Society
Death Penalty: James a Inciardi Perspective
The U.S. Federal Parole System
Does Parole Work? Effectiveness of Parole
What is Juvenile Probation?
Death Penalty for Young People
Capital Punishment as an Option in Maryland
Debates on Death Penalty in the United States
Capital Punishment Role in the World
Acceptance of Death Penalty in the United States
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, December 19). Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages. https://ivypanda.com/essays/capital-punishment-8/

"Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages." IvyPanda , 19 Dec. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/capital-punishment-8/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages'. 19 December.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages." December 19, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/capital-punishment-8/.

1. IvyPanda . "Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages." December 19, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/capital-punishment-8/.

IvyPanda . "Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages." December 19, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/capital-punishment-8/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

Basic site functions
Ensuring secure, safe transactions
Secure account login
Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
Remembering privacy and security settings
Analyzing site traffic and usage
Personalized search, content, and recommendations
Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

Remembering general and regional preferences
Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

IMAGES

Capital Punishment Essay
Capital Punishment Abolishment Essay
Capital punishment
Essay on Essay on Capital Punishment
Speech on Capital Punishment Should Not Be Abolished Free Essay Example
Whether or Not to Abolish Capital Punishment Essay Example

VIDEO

Essay writing for both crimes?? injustice!!! #essay #crime #punishment #injustice #school #student
Your Punishment For Dying
What is Capital Punishment?
The Purpose of Punishment: Deterrence and Incapacitation
PROBLEM SOLUTION FORMAL ESSAY: CRIME & PUNISHMENT
Income tax law and practice 306 [ ccs university bba 3rd sem 20 most important question ] 🥳🥳2024:)

COMMENTS

84 Capital Punishment Essay Topics & Examples
Capital punishment has been a debatable issue for decades. Some people believe that the death penalty plays a crucial role in the criminal justice system, while others think that this procedure is highly unethical. We will write a custom essay specifically for you by our professional experts. 182 writers online.
128 Capital Punishment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples
Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is a highly debated and controversial topic worldwide. The practice involves sentencing individuals convicted of severe crimes to death as a form of punishment. Supporters argue that it serves as a deterrent for potential criminals and provides justice for the victims and their families.
65 Capital Punishment Essay Topics
This essay surveys the evidence of the application of capital punishment in the United States and the United Kingdom. Capital Punishment Is Not a Fair Method of Punishing Criminals. Capital punishment fails to meet the standards of fundamental fairness when offenders lined up for execution may be suffering from low intelligence, mental ...
Capital punishment
Capital punishment - Arguments, Pros/Cons: Capital punishment has long engendered considerable debate about both its morality and its effect on criminal behaviour. Contemporary arguments for and against capital punishment fall under three general headings: moral, utilitarian, and practical. Supporters of the death penalty believe that those who commit murder, because they have taken the life ...
Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments
Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments. 1. Legality. The United States is one of 55 countries globally with a legal death penalty, according to Amnesty International. As of Mar. 24, 2021, within the US, 27 states had a legal death penalty (though 3 of those states had a moratorium on the punishment's use).
95 Death Penalty Essay Topic Ideas & Examples
The Suitability of the Death Penalty. This is an effective way of punishing capital offenders and deterring other criminals from committing similar crimes due to the following reasons. Death Penalty: Ryan Mathews Case. It is the innocence of some of the convicts in the death row that has created a crisis in the system.
Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty
The death penalty is applied unfairly and should not be used. Agree. Disagree. Testimony in Opposition to the Death Penalty: Arbitrariness. Testimony in Favor of the Death Penalty: Arbitrariness. The Death Penalty Information Center is a non-profit organization serving the media and the public with analysis and information about capital ...
Essays on Capital Punishment
2 pages / 745 words. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, has long been a topic of debate regarding its effectiveness as a deterrent to crime. This essay examines the notion that the death penalty does not serve as an effective deterrent to criminal activity. By analyzing the...
Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?
In the July Opinion essay "The Death Penalty Can Ensure 'Justice Is Being Done,'" Jeffrey A. Rosen, then acting deputy attorney general, makes a legal case for capital punishment:
5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know
5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know. Capital punishment is an ancient practice. It's one that human rights defenders strongly oppose and consider as inhumane and cruel. In 2019, Amnesty International reported the lowest number of executions in about a decade. Most executions occurred in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Egypt.
Capital Punishment Essay: Benefits of The Death Penalty
This essay aims to explore the benefits of the death penalty and why it should continue to be allowed. By examining its potential to deter crime, provide justice to the victims, and maintain social order, it becomes evident that capital punishment is a necessary and justifiable punishment for the most serious offenses.
Capital punishment
capital punishment, execution of an offender sentenced to death after conviction by a court of law of a criminal offense. Capital punishment should be distinguished from extrajudicial executions carried out without due process of law. The term death penalty is sometimes used interchangeably with capital punishment, though imposition of the ...
≡Essays on Death Penalty: Top 10 Examples by GradesFixer
Compare and Contrast Essay Topics. Death Penalty Practices Worldwide: How different countries approach capital punishment. Historical vs. Modern Perspectives: The evolution of the death penalty in the legal system. Descriptive Essay Topics. A Day in the Life: Describing the process of a death penalty case from verdict to execution.
Capital Punishment: A Critical Evaluation of its ...
Arguments for and Against Capital Punishment. (n.d.). Web. Baron, J.C. The "Monstrous Heresy" of Punitive Damages: A Comparison to the Death Penalty and Suggestions for Reform. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 159.3(2007): 853-891. Web. Cox, E.V. Why Capital Punishment Doesn't Deter Crime. 2006. Web.
Capital Punishment Essay for Students and Children
500+ Words Essay on Capital Punishment. Every one of us is familiar with the term punishment. But Capital Punishment is something very few people understand. Capital punishment is a legal death penalty ordered by the court against the violation of criminal laws. In addition, the method of punishment varies from country to country.
Capital Punishment Essays (Examples)
Words: 412. Capital punishment remains one of the most controversial topics in criminal law. The ethics of the death penalty are complicated. Many people believe that the death penalty is simply unethical under any circumstances, while others argue that the death penalty is not only ethical, but that it is unethical not to execute certain killers.
Capital Punishment and the Death Penalty Essay
Get a custom essay on Capital Punishment and the Death Penalty. 194 writers online. Learn More. The United States Constitution permits every defendant in a non-petty matter the right to be prosecuted before a jury; the defendant may forgo this privilege and have the decision decided by a professional court judge.
The research on capital punishment: Recent scholarship and unresolved
Georgia) — the National Research Council (NRC) published a comprehensive review of the current research on capital punishment to determine whether one of these hypotheses was more empirically supported than the others. The NRC concluded that "available studies provide no useful evidence on the deterrent effect of capital punishment."
Reasons for Capital Punishment: [Essay Example], 734 words
Conclusion. In conclusion, the debate over capital punishment encompasses a range of complex and often conflicting arguments. The deterrence effect, retributive justice, and incapacitation are among the primary reasons cited by proponents to justify the death penalty. While empirical evidence on deterrence is inconclusive, the argument ...
Essay on Capital Punishment
The capital punishment is the ultimate punishment given to the precarious crimes. It is the last stage of capital punishment. There are different methods of like hanging, electric chair, lethal injection, firing squad, gas chamber. Murderers and rapist should be given extreme punishment, and they have to pay for their wrongdoing.
Facing the Death Penalty: Essays on a Cruel and Unusual Punishment on JSTOR
From that time until 1 November 1987,265 death sentences or resentences have been meted out, all for the crime of murder. One of the condemned, Chol Soo Lee, had his death sentence reversed and was later acquitted of the crime for which he was sent to prison. Four others committed suicide on death row.
Capital Punishment Debates Essay Examples and Topics
Capital Punishment: Term Definition. In that regard, taking such issues such as euthanasia, abortion and capital punishment, the latter can be considered as the most delicate, especially considering many cases that represent exceptions that are feared to be repeated. Pages: 3. Words: 888.
Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment
Essay Example: Introduction Stoning, you know, where folks throw stones at someone until they die, has been around for ages and stirred up a lot of debates. Different cultures and religions have used it for what they saw as really bad crimes, like adultery or blasphemy. Even though it's an old
Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages Essay
Capital punishment is hence cost-effectual. Indeed, infinite appeals would spend much time and more resources in resolving death disputes. Death penalty is therefore cost-valuable. Thirdly, Teeters views that death penalty is a retribution action in which a victim is punished because of offenses committed.

128 Capital Punishment Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments

People who view this page may also like:

Cite This Page

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty

Retribution

Arbitrariness & Discrimination

Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?

5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know

“When We Kill”

“An Inhumane Way of Death”

“We Need To Talk About An Injustice”

“I Know What It’s Like To Carry Out Executions”

“There Is No Such Thing As Closure on Death Row”

You may also like

13 Facts about Child Labor

Environmental Racism 101: Definition, Examples, Ways to Take Action

11 Examples of Systemic Injustices in the US

Women’s Rights 101: History, Examples, Activists

What is Social Activism?

15 Inspiring Movies about Activism

15 Examples of Civil Disobedience

Academia in Times of Genocide: Why are Students Across the World Protesting?

Pinkwashing 101: Definition, History, Examples

15 Inspiring Quotes for Black History Month

10 Inspiring Ways Women Are Fighting for Equality

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Clean Water

Historical considerations

capital punishment

Recent News

Capital Punishment Essay for Students and Children

Types of Capital Punishments

Advantages and Disadvantages of Capital Punishments

FAQs about Capital Punishment

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Download the App

The research on capital punishment: Recent scholarship and unresolved questions

Republish this article

About the Authors

Alexandra Raphel

John Wihbey

Reasons for Capital Punishment

Table of contents

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Essays on Punishment

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

Stoning as a Form of Capital Punishment

Introduction

Historical Background of Stoning

Modern Application of Stoning

Ethical Implications of Stoning

Cite this page

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Capital Punishment: Advantages and Disadvantages Essay

Advantages of Capital Punishment

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS