Is death the solution?
Should the Death Penalty be Allowed?
The reason why people believe this penalty should stay
1.No system of justice can produce results which are 100% certain all the time. Mistakes will be made in any system which relies upon human testimony for proof. We should be vigilant to uncover and avoid such mistakes. Our system of justice rightfully demands a higher standard for death penalty cases. However, the risk of making a mistake with the extraordinary due process applied in death penalty cases is very small, and there is no credible evidence to show that any innocent persons have been executed at least since the death penalty was reactivated in 1976... The inevitability of a mistake should not serve as grounds to eliminate the death penalty any more than the risk of having a fatal wreck should make automobiles illegal.
2.Accepting capital punishment in principle means accepting it in practice, whether by the hand of a physician or anyone else... If one finds the practice too brutal, one must either reject it in principle or seek to mitigate its brutality. If one chooses the latter option, then the participation of physicians seems more humane than delegating the deed to prison wardens, for by condoning the participation of untrained people who could inflict needless suffering that we physicians might have prevented, we are just as responsible as if we had inflicted the suffering ourselves. The AMA [American Medical Association] position should be changed either to permit physician participation or to advocate the abolition of capital punishment. The hypocritical attitude of 'My hands are clean — let the spectacle proceed' only leads to needless human suffering.
3.Common sense, lately bolstered by statistics, tells us that the death penalty will deter murder... People fear nothing more than death. Therefore, nothing will deter a criminal more than the fear of death... life in prison is less feared. Murderers clearly prefer it to execution -- otherwise, they would not try to be sentenced to life in prison instead of death... Therefore, a life sentence must be less deterrent than a death sentence. And we must execute murderers as long as it is merely possible that their execution protects citizens from future murder.
1.The process of a death penalty would cost almost twice as much opposed to living life in prison. An example would be you would have to have twice as much cases, one for guilt and the other for punishment.
2.Poverty plays a big role in whether you die or not. For example the more money you have the better defense you get. If you are a poor person you will not be able to pay for good defense(s). Think about it you will never see a multi-millionare really suffer the consequence of death up against a poor person. In the end the main factor is really depending on your income.
3.Attorney quality could very well cost you youre life if you do not have a good attorney with experience. It is proven that two out of evey three cases were overturned by police and officials because of the cause of unexperienced or poor quality attorneys. So then again this links with the money issue. When a life hangs in the balance it just doesnt turn out right due to the attorney. More and more people are now saying that they see the flaws in the death penalty, some even said that this death penalty system is broken.
So while taking this project into consideration, I would have to say that I think the death penalty should be allowed. For example if a terrorist gets caught, people will not want the person to still live. They will want to get rid of him/her as soon as possible because they do not want to risk letting the terrorist do more bad things. So I do not think that the death penalty should be abolished.
This issue is in Amenment 6, Section 11 and 15.
It states all accused shall be held to a public trial. They shall be conronted for waht they have done. All eyewitnesses will be present to speak. They shall have assitance by their side. Opposing conflicts will confront the culprit as well.