Over the past year, the death penalty has become vastly unpopular both in application and public support.
As of May, there are now 21 states that have disbanded the death penalty. Many of these states are concentrated
in the Mid Atlantic and New England regions. Less people are being sentenced to death as well, with only
33 this year marking a 47 year low. There are also less people being executed, with only 25 executions
actually being carried out. This is partly due to a temporary moratorium imposed by California, which holds
a quarter of all death row inmates. This moratorium marks a turning point, as California has historically been
a proponent of the death penalty.
As of May, there are now 21 states that have disbanded the death penalty. Many of these states are concentrated
in the Mid Atlantic and New England regions. Less people are being sentenced to death as well, with only
33 this year marking a 47 year low. There are also less people being executed, with only 25 executions
actually being carried out. This is partly due to a temporary moratorium imposed by California, which holds
a quarter of all death row inmates. This moratorium marks a turning point, as California has historically been
a proponent of the death penalty.
There has also been a decline in public support for the death penalty. A record high 60% of people
support life without parole over the death penalty. This is in part due to some high profile exonerations.
One of these was in the case of Curtis Flowers, who was an African American man accused of a
quadruple murder. The supreme court found that the prosecution had worked to keep African Americans
off the jury. In another case, Rodney Reed, who was accused of rape and murder, was given a last
minute stay of execution as there was a call for more DNA evidence. This attracted the attention of
some high profile figures and celebrities, which helped inform the public about it. This can be compared
to the SCOTUS cases of both both Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia, which stopped and than
restarted the death penalty. People also believe that it is more expensive to execute someone than hold
them for life, and they don’t see why we should spend the extra money.
support life without parole over the death penalty. This is in part due to some high profile exonerations.
One of these was in the case of Curtis Flowers, who was an African American man accused of a
quadruple murder. The supreme court found that the prosecution had worked to keep African Americans
off the jury. In another case, Rodney Reed, who was accused of rape and murder, was given a last
minute stay of execution as there was a call for more DNA evidence. This attracted the attention of
some high profile figures and celebrities, which helped inform the public about it. This can be compared
to the SCOTUS cases of both both Furman v. Georgia and Gregg v. Georgia, which stopped and than
restarted the death penalty. People also believe that it is more expensive to execute someone than hold
them for life, and they don’t see why we should spend the extra money.
Although Trump vowed to bring back the death penalty, it has steadily declined in both application and
popularity.
popularity.
Questions:
1. Should the death penalty be applied today?
2. How much influence does the media have on the popularity of controversial issues?
3. Would the current supreme court rule against the death penalty?
I think that the death penalty should not be applied. I think when it comes to dealing with criminals the best course of action is reform instead of killing. I know that there are fringe cases where it feels just that a mass murderer should be killed, but I think it sets a bad standard for what our criminal justice system should be, and how it should work.
ReplyDelete1. I am conflicted on whether to support the death penalty today. I believe that if you commit brutal crimes such as murder, society has failed you and you have lost your right to life. However, I do concede that there has been no evidence that the death penalty discourages crime or prevents crime. For that reason I would advocate for other startegies than the death penalty that still serve as a harsh punishment for commiting the most brutal of crimes. I believe we should still have the death penalty but in less cases that have absolute, unequivocal evidence that such a brutal crime was committed. We need to stop killing innocent men and women, it is unamerican.
ReplyDeleteShould the death penalty be applied today?
ReplyDeleteSome may define the death penalty as a cruel and unusual punishment as supported by the eight amendment. In the 1972 court case, Furman v. Georgia, the court ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional and as a result the states stopped using the death penalty and changed their capital punishment. However, this ruling was overturned in 1976 in Gregg v. Georgia and it allowed states to use the death penalty under certain circumstances. Personally, I think intentionally taking the life of someone else is always wrong, but if the criminal murdered someone, death may be a necessary consequence for their unlawful action. The idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty should be considered closely when deciding if the death penalty is applicable to someone because it would be beyond unjust if we were to put someone to death who did not do anything wrong.
I believe they are many crimes that are so cruel that there is no other option besides the death penalty that would be fair. While, I do not believe it should be used often how could family members of victims get closure if the killer still gets to live.
ReplyDeleteAlthough many may argue that the death penalty constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the 8th Amendment, I believe that in certain cases the death penalty should be applicable. I believe that it should only be applicable to very extreme crimes and that there should be stricter guidelines for when the death penalty is applicable. Also, I believe that the death penalty should only be applied when there is absolute evidence that a crime has been committed. This is in order to prevent an accidental act of injustice by the criminal justice system.
ReplyDeleteI believe the death penalty should be revoked from our justice system. The death penalty shows an inhumane way to kill criminals and by doing so, crime rates are not decreasing therefore showing the ineffectiveness of the death penalty. Death penalty also sparks moral issues with the public which is unnecessary for our politics. Overall, I believe life parole should be the replacement for the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteLike the general public which has denounced the application of the dealthy penalty, I do not think it should be applied to today. While there are some instances where people have committed serious crimes such as in the example above of quadruple murder, there may be some cases where the person charged of the crime is actually innocent. And once we kill someone, we cannot undo this action. Moreover, it is very expensive to perform the dealth penalthy and we could be using this money instead to refine our justice system.
ReplyDelete1. I don't believe that the death penalty should be applied today. Morally, there is a chance that the person you are executing isn't actually guilty. There have been cases where an executed person was exonerated after the fact, and I think the cost of executing a potentially innocent person is not a cost we should accept. There is little to no evidence that the death penalty deters crime, which makes sense to me. After all, people will commit crimes if they believe they'll get away with it; they aren't necessarily looking at the consequences. Furthermore, putting someone on death row is expensive, and life-in-prision is a lot cheaper (and doesn't kill potential innocents). I also believe that if someone is 100% guilty, dying is the easy way out.
ReplyDelete1. I do not think the death penalty should be applied today for several reasons. Firstly, I believe that with the amount of times that our justice system makes mistakes, it is simply impossible to be absolutely 100% certain of somebody’s wrongdoing. Since this is the case I don’t think that we can ethically sentence somebody to death. Secondly, even if we could determine 100% that somebody was guilty, I don’t think that killing them would contribute to society more than the possibility of them redeeming themselves in a meaningful way would
ReplyDelete