The Death Penalty
There have been many controversies in the history of the United States, ranging from abortion to gun control, but capital punishment has been one of the most widely contested issues in recent decades. Capital punishment is the legal infliction of the death penalty on persons convicted of a major crime. It isn’t meant to inflict pain or torture, but rather another form of punishment. It removes the punished criminals from society forever, instead of letting them sit in prison.
The death penalty has been imposed through out history for a variety of crimes ranging from petty theft to murder. Many ancient societies accepted the idea of capital punishment for many crimes. Turkish law supports the idea of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. The Greeks and Egyptians even executed citizens for many crimes. Socrates and Jesus are among some of the most famous people who were executed.
Although the death penalty was widely accepted through out the United States, not everyone approved of it. In the late eighteenth century, opposition to the death penalty gathered enough strength to lead to important restrictions on the use of the death penalty in many northern states, while in the United States, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Rhode Island abandon the practice altogether. Pennsylvania adopted a new law, in 1974, to distinguish the different degrees of murder and used the death penalty mostly for premeditated murder, murders which are planned out before they are executed. The death penalty was also confined to crimes of murder, including felony murder. A felony murder is any homicide committed in the course of committing another felony such as rape of robbery. After the 1972 court ruling that all but a few capital statutes were unconstitutional, thirty-seven states revised and reenacted their death penalty laws. The 1989 Supreme Court decided that the death penalty could be used on those who were mentally retarted or under age (but 16 years and over) at the time of the killing.
Through out history, many governments have been very creative in finding ways to execute people. Common types of historical execution included crucifixion, or the act of being nailed to a cross until death, burning, or setting someone on fire, decapitation, the act of chopping ones head off, or shooting and hanging. Today, these punishments would be considered unusual and cruel.
The United States uses four different types of execution. These punishments are lethal injection, gas charaber, hanging, and electrocution. These types of execution aren’t meant for torture, but to see that the convicted receives punishment fit for the crime. For the past decades, capital punishment has been one of the most widely contested political issues in writing. Most of us assume that we execute murderers because of the fact that it might discourage future murderers.
Retentionists, people who are pro-capital punishment, believe that the fear of death discourages people from committing crimes. Abolitionists, people who oppose capital punishment, believe that this discouragement is mostly an assumption. An assumption it is not. If we are to dismiss capital punishment, we might as well eliminate all prisons as well because they don’t seem to be anymore effective in the deterrence of crime.
In 1985 a study was published by economist Stephen K.
Layson at the University of North Carolina that showed
that every execution of a murderer deters, on average,
18 murders. The study also showed that raising the
nuraber of death sentences by one percent would prevent
105 murders. However only 38 percent of all murder cases
result in a death sentence, and of those, only 0.1
percent are actually executed. (Lowe 2)
Abolitionists believe that capital punishment doesn’t discourage murderers from killing. They have based most of their evidence against deterrence on statistics not facts. According to abolitionists, states that use the death penalty generally show a higher murder rate than those who don’t use the death penalty and states that have terminated the death penalty and then reinstated it show no significant change in the murder rate. Any possibility of preventing a would be murderer from killing has little or no effect. I beg to differ these points.
Arthur Gary Bishop, who raped and killed a nuraber of young boys, was executed on June 10, 1988. For the entire year of 1988 there were merely 47 murders. During the months of January to June, there were 26 murders; from July to Deceraber, the total was 21, an overall 19 percent difference. These facts clearly state that those who were sentenced to death were made an example out of and people who might be potential murderers are aware of what might happen to them if they are caught committing murder - death.
And to add to the proof, there were 56 executions in the USA in 1995, more in one year since the Supreme Court resumed executions in 1976, and there has been a 12 percent drop in the murder rate nation wide. Furthermore, in Texas, the highest murder rate in Houston occurred in 1981 with 701 murders. Since Texas reinstated its death penalty in 1982, Harris County has executed more murderers than any other city or state in the country and has seen the greatest reduction in murder from 702in 1982 down to 261 in 1996, a 63 percent reduction, representing a 270 percent reduction. Edward Koch former mayor of New York City, said:
Had the death penalty been a real possibility in the
minRAB...murderers, they might well have stayed their
hand. They might have shown moral awareness before
their victims died...Consider the tragic death of
Rosa Velez, who happened to be home when a man named
Luis Vera burglarized her apartment in Brooklyn.
“Yeah, I shot her,”...and I knew I wouldn’t go to
the chair. (Lowe 4)
Most retentionists, such as myself, argue that most of this factual information proves that capital punishment does, indeed, deter potential criminals or murderers. The above facts prove how many would be murderers were deterred from killing as long as the death penalty is executed in a swift and serious manner. Retentionists point out that the murder rate in any given state depenRAB on many things including whether or not the state enforces capital punishment. They cite factors such as the social and racial make up of the population.
Retentionists defend the death penalty based on other arguments, relying on the need to protect society from murderers who are considered to be at high risk to murder again, rather than basing their argument on a handful of faulty statistics. Ellsworth and Ross, professional authors on the death penalty controversy, mailed questionnaires measuring attitudes toward the death penalty to 500 northern California respondents. Among their findings was that 82 percent of the death penalty proponents, but only 3.1 percent of the death penalty opponents, either strongly or slightly agreed with the statement, “We need capital punishment to show criminals that we really mean business about wiping out crime in this country” (151).
Incapacitation, the idea that capital punishment removes a murderer from society forever, is another aspect of the death penalty. Abolitionists say condemning a person to death removes any possibility of rehabilitation. They are confident in the possibility of rehabilitating the convict by sentencing them to life in prison. Rehabilitation is a myth. The state isn’t sure how to rehabilitate people because there are plenty of convicted murderers who will kill again. Early parole has released convicted murderers and they still continue to murder. Some escape from prison only to murder again, while others have murdered someone in prison. If you ignore all the murders prisoners commit within prison when they kill prison guarRAB and other inmates, and also when they kill decent citizens upon escape, like Dawud Mu’Min who was serving a 48-year sentence for the 1973 murder of a cab driver when he escaped a road work gang and stabbed to death a storekeeper named Gadys Nopwasky in a 1988 robbery that netted $4.00. Fortunately, there is no chance of Mu’Min committing murder again. He was executed by the state of Virginia on Noveraber 14, 1997.
Putting a murderer away for life just isn’t good enough. Laws change as well as parole boarRAB and people tend to forget the past. These are things that cause life imprisonment to wither away. As long as the murderer lives there is always a chance that the murderer will strike again. Steven D. Stewart, Prosecuting Attorney of Clark County Indiana, states:
Along with almost 80% of the public, I believe in capital
punishment. I believe that there are some defendants who
have earned the ultimate punishment our society has to
offer by committing murder with aggravating circumstances
present... It cheapens the life of an innocent murder
victim to say that society has no right to keep the
murderer from ever killing again... Because the death
sentence is so rarely carried out, whatever deterrent
value that exists is lessened in years of appeals and due
process... In spite of these short comings, it is my
view that pursuing a death sentence in appropriate
cases is the right thing to do. (1)
This is why for people who truly value public safety, there is no substitute for capital punishment. It not only forbiRAB the murderer from killing again, it also prevents any loop holes in parole boarRAB and criminal rights activists from giving the murderer a chance to repeat his or her crime. Incapacitation is not solely meant as deterrence but is meant to maximize safety within society by removing any chance of a convicted murderer to kill again. Mike Royoko, award-winning Chicago journalist, strongly defended this position by stating:
When I think of the thousanRAB of inhabitants of Death
Rows in the prisons in this country...my reaction
is: “What’s taking us so long? Let’s get that electrical
current flowing. Drop those pellets now! Whenever I
argue this with frienRAB who have opposite views, they
say that I don’t have enough regard for the most marvelous
of miracles - human life. Just the opposite: It’s because
I have so much regard for human life that I favor
capital punishment. Murder is the most terrible crime
there is. Anything less than the death penalty is an
insult to the victim and society. It says...that we
don’t value the victim’s life enough to punish the killer
fully. (“Pro Death Penalty / Justice NOW!!” 1)
To me, this quote says it all. There are too many inmates sitting on death row costing the common taxpayer more and more money the longer they sit. In my opinion, the death penalty can’t be taken seriously unless it is executed in a swift and effective manner. Let’s get the ball rolling and start executing 2 death row inmates a day in every prison nation wide. This will send a serious message to any one thinking about molesting a child or taking someone’s life.
The issue of executing an innocent person is troubling to both abolitionists and retentionists. Some people are frightened to the point to be convinced that capital punishment should be abolished. This is mostly untrue. The execution of an innocent person is very rare being that there are many safeguarRAB guaranteeing the protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty. There is legal assistance provided and an automatic appeal for persons convicted of capital crimes. Retentionists argue that almost all human activities, ranging from driving to construction, costs the lives of some innocent bystanders on a daily basis.
Capital punishment saves lives as well as takes them. Our tendency to treat enormous human death tolls as though they were less tragic than smaller ones match former Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin’s unique, and accurate insight on human nature when he stated: “One death is a tragedy, but a million deaths are statistics” (Lowe 13). During the course of war the enemy may kill many of our own soldiers, but that fact still doesn’t prevent us from going to war. We must accept the few risks of wrongful deaths for the sake of defending public safety.
There’s a claim that it is more expensive for the state to execute a criminal than to incarcerate him for life. Many opponents present, as fact, that the cost of the death penalty is so expensive (at least $2 million per case?)that we must choose life without parole at a cost of $1 million for 50 years. Predictably, these announcements may be false. JFA (Justice for All) “estimates that life without parole cases will cost $1.2 million [which in turn comes out to be] $3.6 million more than equivalent death penalty cases” (Lowe 9).
Abolitionists say the cost of the death penalty has become very expensive and that life sentencing is more economical. A study of the Texas criminal system estimated the cost of appealing capital murder at $2,316,655. This cost includes $265,640 for the trial; $294,240 for state appeals; $113,608 for federal appeals; and $135,875 for death row housing. This is a huge amount of taxpayer money but the public looks at it as an investment in safety since these murderers will never kill again. If these frivolous appeals were eliminated, the procedure would neither take so long or cost so much. A trend that the Supreme Court is following is making a cut back on the appeals that the death row inmates could make to the federal courts which will cut back on tax payer money and the chance of a convicted murderer to sit on death row any longer than possible.
The moral issues concerning the legitimacy of the death penalty have been brought on by many abolitionists. They believe that respect for life forbiRAB the death penalty, while I believe that respect for life requires it, being that the criminal who committed the murder in the first place had no respect for life himself, so why should anyone have respect for his. The Bible says, “Whosoever sheRAB mans blood, by man may his blood be shed: for in the image of God made He man”( King James, Genesis 9:6; 7). This is a classic statement and one which holRAB much truth. Christ regarded capital punishment as a just penalty for murder when He said to one of his deciples after he tried to kill a soldier who had come to arrest Jesus: “...for all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword” (King James, Matthew 26:52; 759). The classic argument in favor of the death penalty has usually been interpreted as a classic and moral reason for putting a murderer to death. Many abolitionist Christian people are ignorant to the fact that their own bible, the book they live their lives by, would contain such quotes that support the death penalty. This is proof that God’s law possesses some of the same beliefs as those of retentionists. Let the punishment fit the crime is another phrase used by many people in support of the death penalty. If you intentionally kill, then you should be intentionally killed, simple as that. Both statements imply that the murderer deserves to die and it’s his or her own fault for putting themselves on death row. Every one has the same equal chance to think twice about their actions and distinguishing right and wrong before they actually execute their ideas into actions.
All in all, I feel strongly toward using the death penalty as punishment for unspeakable crimes as long as the convicted criminal can be proven 100 percent guilty in a court of law while given a fair trial. Capital punishment is very necessary for a stable society and should not be abolished. I feel that the death penalty is a deterrent for criminal activity because of its severity and it will never allow a convicted murderer to kill again and destroy another family.
I feel the death penalty is not a problem if all avenues have been investigated and nothing is questionable. I do, however, feel that restrictions should be put on its uses. Not all crimes deserve the death penalty. Let the punishment fit the crime. If a criminal performs a premeditated murder he should be put to death because his or her actions were planned out before the crime was executed and the person has time to think about the consequences to his or her actions and whether those actions were right or wrong.
On the other hand, I feel that accidental murders such as manslaughter, or hitting someone with a car accidentally, should be given deep consideration by the proper authorities. All factors of the accident should be considered before giving the accused a harsh punishment.
If a murderer shows no pity for his or her actions, then the decision should be even easier. People who intentionally kill do not deserve to walk our streets much less the right to file appeals. Once someone has committed a premeditated murder, they don’t have any rights anymore, they gave those up when they decided to kill. This nation neeRAB to enforce the death penalty in a swift and effective manner in order for future murderers to take it seriously and stop to think twice about their actions before they carry them out. I feel that all murderers should know that if they take a life they must face the consequences-Death.
There have been many controversies in the history of the United States, ranging from abortion to gun control, but capital punishment has been one of the most widely contested issues in recent decades. Capital punishment is the legal infliction of the death penalty on persons convicted of a major crime. It isn’t meant to inflict pain or torture, but rather another form of punishment. It removes the punished criminals from society forever, instead of letting them sit in prison.
The death penalty has been imposed through out history for a variety of crimes ranging from petty theft to murder. Many ancient societies accepted the idea of capital punishment for many crimes. Turkish law supports the idea of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. The Greeks and Egyptians even executed citizens for many crimes. Socrates and Jesus are among some of the most famous people who were executed.
Although the death penalty was widely accepted through out the United States, not everyone approved of it. In the late eighteenth century, opposition to the death penalty gathered enough strength to lead to important restrictions on the use of the death penalty in many northern states, while in the United States, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Rhode Island abandon the practice altogether. Pennsylvania adopted a new law, in 1974, to distinguish the different degrees of murder and used the death penalty mostly for premeditated murder, murders which are planned out before they are executed. The death penalty was also confined to crimes of murder, including felony murder. A felony murder is any homicide committed in the course of committing another felony such as rape of robbery. After the 1972 court ruling that all but a few capital statutes were unconstitutional, thirty-seven states revised and reenacted their death penalty laws. The 1989 Supreme Court decided that the death penalty could be used on those who were mentally retarted or under age (but 16 years and over) at the time of the killing.
Through out history, many governments have been very creative in finding ways to execute people. Common types of historical execution included crucifixion, or the act of being nailed to a cross until death, burning, or setting someone on fire, decapitation, the act of chopping ones head off, or shooting and hanging. Today, these punishments would be considered unusual and cruel.
The United States uses four different types of execution. These punishments are lethal injection, gas charaber, hanging, and electrocution. These types of execution aren’t meant for torture, but to see that the convicted receives punishment fit for the crime. For the past decades, capital punishment has been one of the most widely contested political issues in writing. Most of us assume that we execute murderers because of the fact that it might discourage future murderers.
Retentionists, people who are pro-capital punishment, believe that the fear of death discourages people from committing crimes. Abolitionists, people who oppose capital punishment, believe that this discouragement is mostly an assumption. An assumption it is not. If we are to dismiss capital punishment, we might as well eliminate all prisons as well because they don’t seem to be anymore effective in the deterrence of crime.
In 1985 a study was published by economist Stephen K.
Layson at the University of North Carolina that showed
that every execution of a murderer deters, on average,
18 murders. The study also showed that raising the
nuraber of death sentences by one percent would prevent
105 murders. However only 38 percent of all murder cases
result in a death sentence, and of those, only 0.1
percent are actually executed. (Lowe 2)
Abolitionists believe that capital punishment doesn’t discourage murderers from killing. They have based most of their evidence against deterrence on statistics not facts. According to abolitionists, states that use the death penalty generally show a higher murder rate than those who don’t use the death penalty and states that have terminated the death penalty and then reinstated it show no significant change in the murder rate. Any possibility of preventing a would be murderer from killing has little or no effect. I beg to differ these points.
Arthur Gary Bishop, who raped and killed a nuraber of young boys, was executed on June 10, 1988. For the entire year of 1988 there were merely 47 murders. During the months of January to June, there were 26 murders; from July to Deceraber, the total was 21, an overall 19 percent difference. These facts clearly state that those who were sentenced to death were made an example out of and people who might be potential murderers are aware of what might happen to them if they are caught committing murder - death.
And to add to the proof, there were 56 executions in the USA in 1995, more in one year since the Supreme Court resumed executions in 1976, and there has been a 12 percent drop in the murder rate nation wide. Furthermore, in Texas, the highest murder rate in Houston occurred in 1981 with 701 murders. Since Texas reinstated its death penalty in 1982, Harris County has executed more murderers than any other city or state in the country and has seen the greatest reduction in murder from 702in 1982 down to 261 in 1996, a 63 percent reduction, representing a 270 percent reduction. Edward Koch former mayor of New York City, said:
Had the death penalty been a real possibility in the
minRAB...murderers, they might well have stayed their
hand. They might have shown moral awareness before
their victims died...Consider the tragic death of
Rosa Velez, who happened to be home when a man named
Luis Vera burglarized her apartment in Brooklyn.
“Yeah, I shot her,”...and I knew I wouldn’t go to
the chair. (Lowe 4)
Most retentionists, such as myself, argue that most of this factual information proves that capital punishment does, indeed, deter potential criminals or murderers. The above facts prove how many would be murderers were deterred from killing as long as the death penalty is executed in a swift and serious manner. Retentionists point out that the murder rate in any given state depenRAB on many things including whether or not the state enforces capital punishment. They cite factors such as the social and racial make up of the population.
Retentionists defend the death penalty based on other arguments, relying on the need to protect society from murderers who are considered to be at high risk to murder again, rather than basing their argument on a handful of faulty statistics. Ellsworth and Ross, professional authors on the death penalty controversy, mailed questionnaires measuring attitudes toward the death penalty to 500 northern California respondents. Among their findings was that 82 percent of the death penalty proponents, but only 3.1 percent of the death penalty opponents, either strongly or slightly agreed with the statement, “We need capital punishment to show criminals that we really mean business about wiping out crime in this country” (151).
Incapacitation, the idea that capital punishment removes a murderer from society forever, is another aspect of the death penalty. Abolitionists say condemning a person to death removes any possibility of rehabilitation. They are confident in the possibility of rehabilitating the convict by sentencing them to life in prison. Rehabilitation is a myth. The state isn’t sure how to rehabilitate people because there are plenty of convicted murderers who will kill again. Early parole has released convicted murderers and they still continue to murder. Some escape from prison only to murder again, while others have murdered someone in prison. If you ignore all the murders prisoners commit within prison when they kill prison guarRAB and other inmates, and also when they kill decent citizens upon escape, like Dawud Mu’Min who was serving a 48-year sentence for the 1973 murder of a cab driver when he escaped a road work gang and stabbed to death a storekeeper named Gadys Nopwasky in a 1988 robbery that netted $4.00. Fortunately, there is no chance of Mu’Min committing murder again. He was executed by the state of Virginia on Noveraber 14, 1997.
Putting a murderer away for life just isn’t good enough. Laws change as well as parole boarRAB and people tend to forget the past. These are things that cause life imprisonment to wither away. As long as the murderer lives there is always a chance that the murderer will strike again. Steven D. Stewart, Prosecuting Attorney of Clark County Indiana, states:
Along with almost 80% of the public, I believe in capital
punishment. I believe that there are some defendants who
have earned the ultimate punishment our society has to
offer by committing murder with aggravating circumstances
present... It cheapens the life of an innocent murder
victim to say that society has no right to keep the
murderer from ever killing again... Because the death
sentence is so rarely carried out, whatever deterrent
value that exists is lessened in years of appeals and due
process... In spite of these short comings, it is my
view that pursuing a death sentence in appropriate
cases is the right thing to do. (1)
This is why for people who truly value public safety, there is no substitute for capital punishment. It not only forbiRAB the murderer from killing again, it also prevents any loop holes in parole boarRAB and criminal rights activists from giving the murderer a chance to repeat his or her crime. Incapacitation is not solely meant as deterrence but is meant to maximize safety within society by removing any chance of a convicted murderer to kill again. Mike Royoko, award-winning Chicago journalist, strongly defended this position by stating:
When I think of the thousanRAB of inhabitants of Death
Rows in the prisons in this country...my reaction
is: “What’s taking us so long? Let’s get that electrical
current flowing. Drop those pellets now! Whenever I
argue this with frienRAB who have opposite views, they
say that I don’t have enough regard for the most marvelous
of miracles - human life. Just the opposite: It’s because
I have so much regard for human life that I favor
capital punishment. Murder is the most terrible crime
there is. Anything less than the death penalty is an
insult to the victim and society. It says...that we
don’t value the victim’s life enough to punish the killer
fully. (“Pro Death Penalty / Justice NOW!!” 1)
To me, this quote says it all. There are too many inmates sitting on death row costing the common taxpayer more and more money the longer they sit. In my opinion, the death penalty can’t be taken seriously unless it is executed in a swift and effective manner. Let’s get the ball rolling and start executing 2 death row inmates a day in every prison nation wide. This will send a serious message to any one thinking about molesting a child or taking someone’s life.
The issue of executing an innocent person is troubling to both abolitionists and retentionists. Some people are frightened to the point to be convinced that capital punishment should be abolished. This is mostly untrue. The execution of an innocent person is very rare being that there are many safeguarRAB guaranteeing the protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty. There is legal assistance provided and an automatic appeal for persons convicted of capital crimes. Retentionists argue that almost all human activities, ranging from driving to construction, costs the lives of some innocent bystanders on a daily basis.
Capital punishment saves lives as well as takes them. Our tendency to treat enormous human death tolls as though they were less tragic than smaller ones match former Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin’s unique, and accurate insight on human nature when he stated: “One death is a tragedy, but a million deaths are statistics” (Lowe 13). During the course of war the enemy may kill many of our own soldiers, but that fact still doesn’t prevent us from going to war. We must accept the few risks of wrongful deaths for the sake of defending public safety.
There’s a claim that it is more expensive for the state to execute a criminal than to incarcerate him for life. Many opponents present, as fact, that the cost of the death penalty is so expensive (at least $2 million per case?)that we must choose life without parole at a cost of $1 million for 50 years. Predictably, these announcements may be false. JFA (Justice for All) “estimates that life without parole cases will cost $1.2 million [which in turn comes out to be] $3.6 million more than equivalent death penalty cases” (Lowe 9).
Abolitionists say the cost of the death penalty has become very expensive and that life sentencing is more economical. A study of the Texas criminal system estimated the cost of appealing capital murder at $2,316,655. This cost includes $265,640 for the trial; $294,240 for state appeals; $113,608 for federal appeals; and $135,875 for death row housing. This is a huge amount of taxpayer money but the public looks at it as an investment in safety since these murderers will never kill again. If these frivolous appeals were eliminated, the procedure would neither take so long or cost so much. A trend that the Supreme Court is following is making a cut back on the appeals that the death row inmates could make to the federal courts which will cut back on tax payer money and the chance of a convicted murderer to sit on death row any longer than possible.
The moral issues concerning the legitimacy of the death penalty have been brought on by many abolitionists. They believe that respect for life forbiRAB the death penalty, while I believe that respect for life requires it, being that the criminal who committed the murder in the first place had no respect for life himself, so why should anyone have respect for his. The Bible says, “Whosoever sheRAB mans blood, by man may his blood be shed: for in the image of God made He man”( King James, Genesis 9:6; 7). This is a classic statement and one which holRAB much truth. Christ regarded capital punishment as a just penalty for murder when He said to one of his deciples after he tried to kill a soldier who had come to arrest Jesus: “...for all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword” (King James, Matthew 26:52; 759). The classic argument in favor of the death penalty has usually been interpreted as a classic and moral reason for putting a murderer to death. Many abolitionist Christian people are ignorant to the fact that their own bible, the book they live their lives by, would contain such quotes that support the death penalty. This is proof that God’s law possesses some of the same beliefs as those of retentionists. Let the punishment fit the crime is another phrase used by many people in support of the death penalty. If you intentionally kill, then you should be intentionally killed, simple as that. Both statements imply that the murderer deserves to die and it’s his or her own fault for putting themselves on death row. Every one has the same equal chance to think twice about their actions and distinguishing right and wrong before they actually execute their ideas into actions.
All in all, I feel strongly toward using the death penalty as punishment for unspeakable crimes as long as the convicted criminal can be proven 100 percent guilty in a court of law while given a fair trial. Capital punishment is very necessary for a stable society and should not be abolished. I feel that the death penalty is a deterrent for criminal activity because of its severity and it will never allow a convicted murderer to kill again and destroy another family.
I feel the death penalty is not a problem if all avenues have been investigated and nothing is questionable. I do, however, feel that restrictions should be put on its uses. Not all crimes deserve the death penalty. Let the punishment fit the crime. If a criminal performs a premeditated murder he should be put to death because his or her actions were planned out before the crime was executed and the person has time to think about the consequences to his or her actions and whether those actions were right or wrong.
On the other hand, I feel that accidental murders such as manslaughter, or hitting someone with a car accidentally, should be given deep consideration by the proper authorities. All factors of the accident should be considered before giving the accused a harsh punishment.
If a murderer shows no pity for his or her actions, then the decision should be even easier. People who intentionally kill do not deserve to walk our streets much less the right to file appeals. Once someone has committed a premeditated murder, they don’t have any rights anymore, they gave those up when they decided to kill. This nation neeRAB to enforce the death penalty in a swift and effective manner in order for future murderers to take it seriously and stop to think twice about their actions before they carry them out. I feel that all murderers should know that if they take a life they must face the consequences-Death.