Rich People On Death Row example essay topic

The text below contains a number of arguments against capital punishment (the death penalty). Argument 1: One of the aims of punishment is deterrence. This means that, if you punish one person for committing a crime, other people will be put off committing that crime, because they fear the punishment. The figures below demonstrate that abolishing the death penalty does not lead to an increase in murder, therefore the death penalty cannot have a deterrent effect.

Country: Canada (the death penalty was abolished in 1976) Homicide (murder) rate per 100,000 people: 1975 - 3.091980 - 2.412001 - 1.78 Two other aims of punishment cannot be achieved if we have the death penalty (we need examples here). (Argument 2 and Argument 3). Protection - Putting people into prison keeps them away from the opportunity of crime and so protects society. Retribution - If you do something wrong you deserve to be punished in a way that is fitting for the crime you " ve committed. Vindication - People must be punished so that the laws will be respected. Reform - People who commit crimes need help.

Linked to the punishment will be help that will stop them from offending again. (Argument 4) Some people argue that it costs less to have the death penalty than to keep someone in prison for life. However, it costs lb 61.58 a day to keep someone on death row in the USA, which is more than the cost of keeping a regular prisoner, so this argument does not work. (Argument 5) Other people argue that many people who were executed in the past have been proved to have been innocent.

The death penalty is immoral, because it leads to innocent people being killed. Other people argue that the existence of the death penalty might mean that more people who are guilty are set free. This is because, if juries think that someone will be executed if they are found guilty of a crime, they might be unwilling to convict that person. (Argument 7) Some people argue that the death penalty goes against the right to life.

Every person has the right to life. A murderer has taken away someone's right to life, but that does not mean that society has the right to take away the murderer's life. Two wrongs do not make a right. (Argument 8) Other people argue that execution is a cruel and degrading punishment. They argue that, to hang someone or electrocute them is little more than torturing someone to death and this is as bad as the original murder.

In some cases, it is worse, because the original murder might have been done on the spur of the moment, whereas an execution is a premeditated killing. (Argument 9) Some families of murdered people argue that it is only fair for the murderer to be killed. They argue that it helps them to move on, if they know that the murderer has been killed. Some family members choose to be present at the execution and say that it helps them to move on. On the other hand, some families have argued that the desire for revenge is destructive and even bloodthirsty. (Argument 10) Amnesty International, which campaigns for the worldwide abolition of the death penalty, argues that there are proportionately more poor people than rich people on death row and proportionately more black people and white people.

Helen Pre jean, who visits prisoners on death row and was the inspiration for the film "Dead Men Walking", argues that the American justice system is racially biased. She also argues that poor people cannot afford good lawyers, so are not well defended in court. This means that they are more often found guilty than rich people and so are more likely to be executed. This is plainly unfair..