Death Penalty

Death Penalty

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to enlighten and explore the concept of the death penalty. This is an argumentative paper that will provide the authentic evidences to support the arguments that favor the death penalty and the ones who refute it. This paper will propose and enlighten diverse scenarios from the history and present time in order to analyze the fact that whether the death penalty is fair or it is just the sentence violating the human rights. The death sentences have been utilized throughout history (Cottrol, 2004, pp. 55-62). At common law, death was imposed for all convicted murderers. Recognizing that the culpability of convicted murderers varied, in 1794, Pennsylvania became the first state to abolish capital punishment for most murders. The state mandated death for only those killings that were "willful, deliberate and premeditated (Hood, 1996, pp. 104-110)." Every other state followed Pennsylvania's lead. Jurors balked, however, at being forced to impose the death in cases that were inappropriate for capital punishment (Bedau, Cassell, 2004, pp. 301-107). As a result, they engaged in jury nullification by simply refusing to convict the defendant (Bienen, 1999, pp. 44-49).

Discussion

The death penalty sentences are often opposed by different human rights perspectives. There are a lot of people who believe that the death penalty is fair and just; however, other believe that the death penalty violates the human rights (Cottrol, 2004, pp. 55-62). According to different studies, the culprits should be given a chance to improve themselves rather than sentencing them for the death (Hood, 1996, pp. 104-110).

Moral Issue: Death Penalty

Death penalty is one of the most hotly debated punishments across the country over the last few decades. The imposition of death penalty has been challenged by many, firstly on the basis that it violated the Constitutional prohibition against unjust and ...