Why The Death Penalty Is Ineffective

Submitted By smcdougall
Words: 1576
Pages: 7

Ms. Laseter
English 101
12 November 2013
Why The Death Penalty Is Ineffective The death penalty has been the highest form of criminal punishment in the American judicial system since the thirteen colonies. It has taken the form of hanging, stoning, drowning, burning, beheading, gassing, electrocution, and injection. The taking of a person’s life as a criminal punishment is not only wrong, but also ineffective. It does not teach anything, it is hypocritical, it does not deter crime, and it is costly. The government should abolish the death penalty because it is ineffective and costly. The death penalty does not teach a lesson. Every one is raised to know right from wrong, not matter if you grew up in poverty or wealth. There are laws that we all have to obey and breaking one makes you a criminal. When you were a child and were in trouble, your mother either punished you with a whooping or she took something from you to make you think about what you did and suffer the consequences. Once you realized what you did that was wrong, you learned not to do it again because it could result in consequences you would not want to take. As for a criminal, we can sentence them jail time and take away their privileges of sleeping in a comfortable bed, having privacy, and eating the meals that they want. Prison is a much more severe consequence. This does not mean prisoners are treated poorly. They will still have a roof over their head, a place to rest, and meals to eat. If we use to death penalty on a criminal, it takes away the learning process. They seem to care less about being punished because they know they will be killed and will not have to serve life in prison without parole. The death penalty is also hypocritical. The eighth amendment to the U.S. constitution, which was ratified in 1792, has three provisions. The cruel and unusual punishments clause restricts how severe the state and federal governments can impose on a criminal’s punishment. The eighth amendment marks the progress of a maturing society. The U.S. Supreme Court has also ruled that criminal sentences that are inhuman, outrageous, or shocking to the social conscience are cruel and unusual. Although the Court has never provided meaningful definitions for these characteristics, the pertinent cases speak for themselves. For example, the Georgia Supreme Court explained that the Eighth Amendment was intended to prohibit barbarous punishments such as castration, burning at the stake, and quartering. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Court wrote that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause prohibits crucifixion, breaking on the wheel, and other punishments that involve a lingering death. The death penalty is also hypocritical if you look at it as trying to retaliate. When a person steals you do not take something that is theirs to get revenge or punishment. When a person assaults someone you do not put them in a room and make someone assault them. Therefore, when someone murders another person, why should their life be taken as punishment? Everyone lives to die. Someone should not be murdered as a punishment but instead, live with knowing what they did was wrong and that they could have a normal life had they not committed a crime.
It seems that we spend a great deal of time protecting the lives of individuals through various political and non-political measures. Pro-life, right-to-life, save the planet, non smoking bans, are all put in place to protect the lives of people who may or may not have the ability or capacity to choose life instead of death. We have many biblical references to the preservation of life with the pinnacle being the often quotes “Though Shall Not Kill.” Then, we turn a blind eye when the government starts taking the lives of others through the death penalty. If we stand in favor of preserving life, then we are better than man who come and ruled before us. If we favor the preservation of humanity then we should end the self-inflicted