Death Penalty Essay: Example and Tips

Death penalty is one of the most commonly used topics used as a task for essay writing. In this article, you can find example of introduction and conclusion of the death penalty essay and a number or choices for main body of the essay. You can choose the one, which is closer to your thoughts and viewpoint as an inspiration for your composition.

Example of the introduction to the death penalty essay

There are not so many controversial topics, which are so difficult for writing essays as death penalty. In order to write this essay, we need to solve this dilemma for ourselves. Death penalty, are you for or against? This question is very controversial for every person. Even the kindest person has such feelings as insult and vindictiveness, and even the cruelest one has compassion.

Fifty-eight countries in the world apply death penalty, including countries such as the USA, China, India, Saudi Arabia and Japan. I assume that both these countries, and those who have abolished the death penalty, have logical arguments and justifications for their foundations. In terms of executions, the US is in the fifth place. Of the top-5, the USA is the only liberal democracy.

Currently in our country, death penalty as a form of punishment is provided by federal law and laws of 36 states. Unlike most countries, American legislation allows the death penalty for minors to be executed. For example, in the state of Mississippi – persons from 13 years old can be executed, in Missouri and Utah – from 14, Arkansas – from 15 years old. In 13 states, there is no age at all in the law, i.e. the question is resolved by the court. Inside the US, most of the executions come within the southern states.

When thinking about death penalty in theory, we can come to one conclusion. But when this question concerns us directly, will the answer be the same? In this death penalty essay, I will try to answer this question for myself.

Body of death penalty essay example. Theoretical sight on the death penalty

Death penalty is the topic of many works, both student and scientific, both in defense of the use of the death penalty and proving the arguments for necessity of its abolition. From the point of view of theory, it is worth considering the most significant sign of the death penalty. First of all, it is a punishment. This means that it has the features that characterize this measure of state coercion.

The essence of any punishment lies in punishing, in the deprivation of the offender’s rights or interests, the reduction of their volume or the introduction of a special procedure for their implementation. The death penalty manifests this to the maximum extent. The convict loses his life. Accordingly, along with this, he is deprived of all other rights and interests.

The death penalty as a criminal punishment acts as a legal restriction, a legal remedy that deterred the perpetrators, which stems from its nature, and is an objective property, in spite of any subjective assessments and public opinion. In other words, one can argue about whether the death penalty is effective or ineffective, whether society needs it or not at certain stage of social development, abort it or not, but that the death penalty is a deterrent, its legal restriction is undoubtedly. Actually, that’s why it serves as a means of protecting society from serious crimes. According to some scholars, the punishment has only one purpose – the prevention of crimes, which is possible in the form of physical retention (for criminals) or in the form of psychological opposition to a crime (for other members of society). Of course, the deterrent role of the death penalty as a legal constraint should not be overestimated. After all, in many cases it is not effective. There are people for whom there are no social barriers at all. If a person wants to kill, no law or fear of punishment will stop him.

Body of death penalty essay example. Characteristic features of death penalty

If we analyze the signs of the death penalty, we can distinguish the following:

• All the scientists who studied the punishment agree that it causes suffering. This is one of indications of any punishment. For sure sentences to the death penalty feels suffering when he is sentenced and in the waiting period. Most convicts combine this with the fear of death, often with the awareness of the hopelessness of their position, sometimes with awareness of guilty, etc. However, when they are executed, they stop suffering, thus the punishment is finished. The suffering of a criminal is no longer necessary for society, since it is not a matter of the death penalty to correct this person, to persuade, to prove something to him. The society strikes him out of its members. This raises one important issue related to the purpose of punishment: does society want to deprive a person of life, to protect itself and its citizens from new crimes? Or does it want to revenge for the evil caused, to cause additional suffering? The history of criminal law knows a lot of answers to this question. In many countries, there are/were such ways of enforcing the death penalty, which cause the convict additional very tangible physical suffering. At the same time, the general preventive aim is to humiliate the human dignity of the convicted person. On the other hand, civilized countries are trying to find ways to enforce the death penalty, which is associated with minimal suffering for the convicted person: execution on electric chair, gas, lethal injection.
• Death penalty is the most severe punishment. This, in the first place, is predetermined by the fact that the convicted person loses the most valuable good of a person – life. In addition, it is clear that most convicted persons are precisely this that causes maximum emotions, mainly because of the primitive and natural fear of man before death and the uncertainty associated with it.
• Like any punishment, the death penalty is a coercion. It is applied independently and, as a rule, contrary to the wishes of the convict. If the perpetrator, repenting himself, decides to quit and realizes this decision – it is suicide, not punishment.
• The death penalty is applied on behalf of the state. This means that the state authorizes its authority to execute a verdict pronounced on its behalf by an authorized court. Legitimacy, reasonableness, and fairness of the verdict are also verified by the proper authorities of the state.
• Death penalty is applicable only by court order. Otherwise, this is a murder.
• Death penalty may only be imposed on a person who has been found guilty of a crime. This attribute is characteristic of any punishment, but with respect to the death penalty, it also has its own peculiarities. The death penalty can only be imposed on the perpetrators of a willful crime.
• Death penalty is an exceptional punishment. The exclusivity of the death penalty is determined by the fact that it is assigned to a very narrow circle of the most serious intentional crimes.

Body of death penalty essay example. Moral dilemma

At present, there are three theoretical positions with respect to the problem of such a type of punishment as the death penalty.

1. The first group of scientists opposes entirely the use of the death penalty and insists on its immediate abolition, explaining this by the immorality and inexpediency of such punishment.
2. The second group supports the use of the death penalty, considering it not only as a legal restriction, but also as a physical destruction of the perpetrator, which guarantees complete security from such a deed of this person to society in the future.
3. The third group generally supporting this measure, is in favor of reducing the use and gradual abolition of the death penalty.

All these opinions are reasonably justified, and the choice of the most correct approach to the problem of the death penalty is difficult. Supporters of the death penalty argue that it is a just retribution for committing special crimes. According to this statement, some people deserve to be deprived of their lives for the evil they inflict; sometimes crimes are so terrible that depriving criminals of life is the only fair answer to them. The argument in favor of the idea of ​​retribution is often nothing more than a desire for revenge, masked by the principle of justice.

The most common argument in favor of the death penalty is the assertion that it restrains crime: it is necessary to kill the offender in order to keep him and others from committing such an act. Thanks to this, it serves as a means of protecting society from that type of crime. But there is another opinion. According to some famous scientists, the death penalty does not stop and does not reduce crime, and even contributes to its growth. In reality, both severe punishments, and the enormous scale of their application, and the high level of criminality are caused by certain social causes: traditions, customs, the level of public morals and legal culture, and the entire structure of social life.

Justifying the death penalty, it is often said that it is necessary, since only it can satisfy one of the specific needs of society. And, whatever this need is, it is so great that it justifies the cruel punishment of death. Specific needs vary at different times and in different societies. In some countries, the death penalty is regarded as a legal means of preventing or punishing a crime such as murder. In other countries, the death penalty is considered a measure, without which it is impossible to stop the spread of drugs, eliminate political terrorism, economic corruption, etc. This statement is based on the notion of a “rational” criminal who weighs his actions and their consequences. However, this argument is not supported either by statistical studies or by long-term criminological observations, according to which persons committing severe crimes either do not even think about the consequences, or count on the fact that they will not be detained and convicted. Only 5-10% of murders are premeditated. But even those who commit them, rely, first of all, on impunity.

Socrates said that the death penalty, never, anywhere frighten anyone. This is primarily due to the fact that severe penalties most often threaten those criminals who, for various reasons, are not afraid of them or ignore them: fanatical terrorists, pathologically aggressive individuals, primarily sexual (or other motivated) maniacs, situational mercenary aggressive criminals acting under the influence of a provocative moment, alcohol, drugs (usually in one combination or another), professional, especially organized criminals, for whom the prison and death penalty are a normal risk which they take.

As you know, judicial errors are inevitable, they always existed, exist and, unfortunately, will be committed. As a result, a person’s life can be cut off due to an unfavorable confluence of circumstances, an accidental, but irreparable human error. One of the most common arguments in favor of abolishing the death penalty is the reference to judicial errors. The key component of the system of basic human rights is their inalienability. They can not be taken away, even if the individual has committed the gravest crime.

It should be noted that in some countries, when the level of crime increases, more severe types of punishment are introduced, while in others, punishment for certain types of crimes is mitigated. All this is due to quite certain factors: the standard of living of people, the peculiarity of economic and political processes, traditions, customs, the level of public morality and legal culture – the entire way of life of society.

There is also a more pragmatic approach. Prisoners who committed particularly serious crimes for which life imprisonment is imposed are cheaper to kill than to keep in prison. Supporters of this point of view are motivated by the fact that the money of taxpayers is being spent on the maintenance of such prisoners, who can no longer benefit society.

Body of death penalty essay example. Arguments against the death penalty

Consider the ethical arguments against the death penalty.

1. The death penalty has a moral-corrupting effect on human society.

It exerts a negative influence directly through the people who are involved in it, and indirectly – by the fact that the very fact of the death penalty itself affirms the idea that murder, even in some particular cases, can be just, useful for society, a good thing. It happens only as something inhuman, as a shameful thing: the executioners often hide their profession. Such methods of the death penalty are applied, so that it is even impossible to even know who is acting as the executioner.

2. The death penalty is an anti-legal act.

The basic principle of law is the balance of personal freedom and the common good. The death penalty, which destroys the individual, eliminates the very legal attitude. In the case of the death penalty, the relatives of the criminal are also practically punished, since it can exert such a strong influence on them that it can lead to suicide or insanity, not to mention their heavy moral suffering. According to the law, the principle of restorability of punishment operates, it makes it possible to some extent to make reversible cases when a judicial error is made. With regard to the death penalty, this principle is violated, since the one who was killed can not now be brought back to life, nor can he be compensated for by a legal error. It should be noted that such errors are not so rare.

3. The possibility of a judicial error.

No matter how professional the investigators dealing with the case are, no matter how convincing the evidence of the convict’s guilt are, and no matter how fair the court is, – in the judicial system of any country on our planet can make an error (and does it from time to time). While the verdict is not put into effect, the convict still has hope and an opportunity to gather the necessary evidence of his innocence and convince the investigation and the court. After the execution of the sentence, neither evidence nor rehabilitation will be able to return the executed person to life.

4. The death penalty is not a deterrent.

According to the researchers of the question, first, a person committing a crime, expects to avoid punishment, whatever it may be, so there is no difference in whether he will be condemned to life imprisonment or to death. In addition, criminals who know that the death penalty will be applied for them, often commit new crimes, because they know that there will be no more terrible punishment – there is nothing to lose. So, for example, the death penalty does not matter for a terrorist, since he is constantly risking his own life.

5. Execution gives rise to cruelty in society

Long ago crowds of people gathered in the squares to look at how they hang, burn or decapitate criminals. However, in more ancient times, the executions were even more cruel and sophisticated. Nevertheless, the methods did not deter spectators, on the contrary – the people wanted more and more bloody spectacles. In an atmosphere of cruelty and dispassion, new crimes were committed with enviable regularity. But that was then, and one could say that society has changed and ennobled. In fact, no: the 2006 UN report showed that in countries where the death penalty is allowed, crimes that are “worthy” of this punishment happen more often.

6. The presence of the “institute of executioners.”

The existence of an institution of the death penalty dehumanizes society. In countries where the death penalty is permitted, there are butchers, in fact, legal killers. The difference between them and those they execute is only that the former act for the benefit of their state, whose constitution, in turn, stipulates that the murder of a person is punishable. It turns out that in this way the state justifies murder in the public consciousness and undermines the fundamental principle of public morality, as the complete inviolability of human life. One contradicts the other and a vicious circle turns out.

7. Execution does not eliminate the reason for the commission of a crime

The main factors provoking criminality are poverty, lack of education, inequality, mental deviations of a specific criminal. The death penalty can not in any way influence these reasons.

8. Execution does not allow correction.

A serial killer, who is particularly cruel in his crimes, may not deserve to be justified in the eyes of the people and relatives of his victims, but absolutely has no chance to think about his behavior and bring society good – he has no time for it. Moreover, the expectation of death often does not motivate, but demotivates the condemned to reflections: it still does not change anything. The same UN report states that life imprisonment and isolation from society scares criminals much more than the death penalty.

9. Execution does not punish.

One of the most conclusive arguments in support of the ban on the death penalty. Punishment is a measure of state coercion applied against a person convicted of a crime and consisting in a certain narrowing of his legal status, giving him special rights and duties. Execution involves depriving the convict of the right to life.

Body of death penalty essay example. Arguments for death penalty

There is a number of arguments, which justify the use of death penalty.

1. Fair punishment.

The modern death penalty is a kind of blood revenge on the principle of “an eye for an eye”. In addition, the rule that the punishment should be proportionate to the crime still has not been canceled. Naturally, even killing can be different: it is exceeding the limits of necessary self-defense, and murder by negligence or in a state of affect. Such murderers are not sentenced to death and executed. Death penalty is used in exceptional cases. The murderers, who consciously committed their crimes, should be punished with all the severity of the law.

2. Deterrence factor.

The irrevocability of punishment in the form of the death penalty can be a good deterrent for many types of crimes. Take for example China, which today can execute not only for brutal murders, but also for bribes or for drug trafficking. That is why there is an extremely low percentage of such crimes. No one wants to lose their lives just for the sake of earning an extra several hundred thousand dollars.

3. Protecting society from dangerous elements.

The death penalty is an ideal method of protecting society from dangerous social elements. Even with life imprisonment, a criminal can simply escape from prison, or continue to kill behind bars. The death penalty once and for all relieves society of these people.

4. Economic injustice of life imprisonment.

In the debate over the imposition of the death penalty in certain countries, this argument is often one of the main. Indeed, when being sentenced to life imprisonment, the offender becomes a state dependent, who will be kept until the end of his days at the expense of taxpayers, among whom may be relatives of his victims, for example.

5. Death penalty is more humane than life imprisonment.

In fact, life imprisonment without the right to amnesty is also a “death sentence”, but only prolonged in time. The most dangerous criminals or those for whom there is a threat to their life in prison, for example rapists and pedophiles, are kept in solitary confinement cells. All their lives they will spend in a concrete cage. Of all the activities, they are only allowed to write and read. In this case, rapid death is a more humane punishment.

Example of conclusion to the death penalty essay

The death penalty is one of the oldest kinds of punishment known to criminal law. It has existed for many centuries. During this time, the attitude to this punishment changed many times: it was applied very widely, it was not used at all. The goals of the death penalty left an imprint on the entire legal regulation of this punishment, the frequency of its application, the list of crimes that could have resulted in the death penalty. This affected the way it was used.

In the criminal law aspect, justice as an ethical category is viewed mainly as a harmonious correlation of crime and punishment. It is a just punishment that the victims, their relatives and friends, all those who are involved in the grief of others are waiting for from the court. Moreover, the criminal law itself, the main purpose of the punishment, proclaims the restoration of social justice. The moral basis of the judiciary is the independence of judges, their submission to the law alone, the ability to make decisions only on the basis of conscience and inner conviction. You can say: the judge is responsible for the proper execution of the punishment. In this regard, the uncertainty about the preservation of the death penalty as a form of criminal punishment has a negative impact on the judges in the sentencing.

Even now, after reading so much evidence, arguments for and against death penalty, I can’t say that I’m 100% sure about my own position. I appeared to be weaker than I thought I am. I thing I can say for sure: I would never want to be the one who sentences and even worse the one who executes.

Death Penalty Research Paper Topics