The Capital Punishment Debates and Arguments

Since ancient times it is a practice to execute people judged to have committed certain extremely heinous crimes, with a view to send warning signals among perpetrators of crime, which is aimed to reduce recurrence. All of us are opposed to crime and violence in our society, at the same time whether we should have death penalty or not is the most difficult moral issue we face. Crime and punishment are among the most important issues in contemporary America, and capital punishment is a controversial issue.

Most of the arguments center on questions of deterrence, public safety, sentencing equity, and execution of innocents, among others. Whether or not the death penalty has a deterrent effect is a very important question, and for debating on the consequences of capital punishment it is crucial to establish reliable evidence on whether executions deter or stimulate crime.

Capital punishment is the penalty or sentence of death for committing a heinous crime. There is disagreement about capital punishment, and whether it is moral or is effective in discouraging crime, has not been conclusively established. Many oppose death penalty as they consider it cruel and as violation of human rights, and hence they argue that it should be abolished. Abolitionists feel that there are risks of wrongful execution of innocents. Another claim is that death penalty is more expensive for the state to execute a criminal than to incarcerate from life as the cost of it is more expensive than a system handling similar cases with a lesser punishment. (Dieter).

Citizens United for Alternatives to the Death Penalty (Alternatives to the Death Penalty. 2000) recognizes and upholds the responsibility of society to protect everyone from people who are dangerous; in particular, those who are convicted murderers. However, it advocates viable alternatives to death penalty through life imprisonment and restorative justice (Alternatives to the Death Penalty).

Supporters of capital punishment opine that as long as the murderer lives, there is always a chance that he will strike again. There is no substitute for the best defense of public safety than capital punishment, because it bars the murderer from killing again. Researchers argue that capital punishment has deterrent effect and each execution saves lives. According to roughly a dozen recent studies, executions save lives. For each inmate put to death, the studies say, 3 to 18 murders are prevented. (Liptak).

In addition, it is projected that With a yearly average of 15,000 murders, the fact that we are reaching 1,000 executions in only a little more than 30 years is proof that capital punishment has been reserved for the worst of the worst. (Death Penalty Issues). In the opinion of Supreme Court of the United States (Atkins, 536 U.S at 319) capital punishment must be limited to those offenders who commit a narrow category of the most serious crimes and whose extreme culpability makes them the most deserving of executions. (Simmons).

A review of all the recent death penalty literature, and the comparative studies done by Donohue and Justin (2006) to assess the statistical evidence on the efficacy of capital punishment, particularly in relation to non-death penalty states with executing states in the United States, suggest that death penalty has no large effect on the murder rate. Donohue and Wolfers also state that Neither adoption nor abolition of the death penalty could reliably be casually linked to homicide rates (Donohue and Justin). It derives that law makers and law keepers should analyze each case cautiously before arriving at decision to impose capital punishment, because certain crimes are themselves so grievous an affront to humanity that the only adequate response may be the penalty of death.

Works cited

Simmons, Roper V. Legal Information Institute: Supreme Court Collection. 2005. Cornell University Law School. Web.

Alternatives to the Death Penalty. CUADP, 2000.

Dieter, Richard C. Cost of Death Penalty and Related Issues. (Testimony of Executive Director). Denver: Colorado. Death Penalty Information Centre. 2007. Web.

Donohue, John J, and Wolfers, Justin. Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the Death Penalty Debate: Stanford Law Review. Vol. 58. P.792. Donohue & Wolfers 58 Stan. L. REV. 791. 2006. Web.

Liptak, Adam. Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate. The New York Times. 2007. Web.

Death Penalty Issues. Charlene Hall. 2007. Web.

Capital Punishment: Arguments in Favor

The idea of capital punishment derives from the tribal concept of blood revenge, which was later reflected in the religious scriptures that prescribe that the deprivation of human life is appropriate as asymmetrical justice, i.e. life for a life. The idea of capital punishment derives from the tribal concept of blood revenge, which was later reflected in the religious scriptures that prescribe that the deprivation of human life is appropriate as asymmetrical justice, i.e. life for a life.

The modern defenders of the death penalty put forth the following point: Everybody fears death, even animals. Most criminals would think twice if they knew their own lives were at stake. Although there is no statistical evidence that the death penalty deters crime, we have to agree that most of us fear death (Radelet et al, 75). In such countries as China, the United States, Japan, and the Pakistan group, capital punishment is still endorsed and practiced in association with the crimes like espionage, treason, murder, in Islamic countries  with adultery and other actions considered by Koran as deathly sins (Radelet and Akers, 2).

Nowadays, there exists a necessity for the death penalty, particularly due to its economic benefit, crime prevention, and isolation effects. Capital punishment is a radical measure that should be administered in cases of heinous crimes causing irreversible physical or psychic changes in the victim, from disability to death.

Firstly, the death penalty to great extent safeguards the innocent lives perpetrators might take unless caught and convicted. It is often stated that the death penalty doesnt allow exonerating and rehabilitating innocent people, who were executed. However, the proponents of such an idea rely mainly on the results of DNA tests, intended to link together the perpetuators and executed persons genotypes. Nowadays, with the development of biotechnology, the process of investigation is greatly facilitated by DNA examinations (Henderson, 112; Bedau, 62). The existing DNA technology allows a person to be distinguished from another with up to 99.99 percent reliability.

Some three decades ago the main biometrical evidence of the persons guilt was fingerprinted, which were often unavailable, distorted, or partly erased from the surface when the investigation began. One more guarantee that of the right courts decision is the availability of lawyers and the principles of fair and non-discriminatory treatment in court proceedings. Whereas several decades ago, court defenders were barely affordable, in the present day, in the United States provision of legal services to individuals with limited financial opportunities is ensured through combining the compensated and the charitable schemes. Moreover, lawyers are greatly motivated to provide pro-bono services (Bedau, p.63) by tax reduction and other privileges, depending on the respective state programs.

Secondly, the death penalty can be also viewed as a successful deterrent. Deterrence means the execution of a criminal, aimed at creating a behavioral example and preventing others from committing capital crimes. However, the opponents of the death penalty state the perspective of spending the whole life in the penitentiary institution serves as an equally effective deterrent (Amnesty International, par. 19).

Researcher Ehrlich ( Radelet and Akers, 69) conducted a regression analysis of social factors affecting homicide and designed a mathematical model of the relationship between capital punishment and the number of slaughters in the territorial unit. In fact, the study found almost no correlation between death penalty practice and homicide rates, these variables seemed to great extent independent from one another. This study is often used as an argument in favor of a life sentence.

However, the scholar actually selected small territorial units and used statistics by districts rather than states; such small numbers are much more difficult to process mathematically for drawing a clear and reliable correlation. From the position of common sense, the death penalty is not the end in itself, but the means to an end, so it was introduced at the legislative level under the pressure of certain circumstances, particularly high crime rates, especially in urban areas. In addition, it is possible to consider the following situation: when a police officer holds a criminal at gunpoint and orders them to get on the ground, the latter obeys, as they are not actually willing to lose their life right now.

In the case of life imprisonment, there is no direct and immediate threat to life, so it is not likely to deter crimes as effectively as the high probability of execution does. This point is actually backed by the scientific fact that decreasing the period, spent on death row, strengthens the deterrent effect, and for every 2.75 years cut from the waiting period, one murder can be prevented (Robertson, 83). It is also important to consider such factors as hope.

If a certain felony is positioned by law as deathly, this means, it is inexcusable and implies no chances for returning back and being accepted by society. At the same time, the person, convicted to life imprisonment, is likely to hope that in the future additional changes in the legislation will be introduced and the inmate will have a chance for amnesty. As long as the person lives, they continue to expect a positive change, so the replacement of capital punishment with life imprisonment changes the perception of crime and lead the person to the faulty conviction that there still exists a possibility of returning to society and to people they are connected to from the penitentiary institution.

The deterrence argument is also backed by statistics. As Prodeathpenalty.com suggests, the homicide rate negatively correlates with the number of executions, i.e. the more death penalties are administered, the fewer murders are committed (Prodeathpenalty.com, diagram 2). Moreover, during the 4-year suspension of the death penalty between 1972 and 1976, scholars gathered homicide statistics across the United States. In 1960, there were 56 capital sentences in the country and 9,140 homicides; by 1964, 15 executions took place, and the number of grave crimes rose to 9,250.

By 1972, there were about 16,200 murders and four years without executions resulted in the boosting of criminality up to 20,510 murders per year in 1976. Due to the fact that the population was also growing in these years, it is important to provide one more index: in fact, between 1960 and 1976, the number of annual manslaughters per 100, 000 persons in the country doubled from 5.1 to 10.2. Between the years 1995 and 2000, when the average number of executions was 76 per year, the homicide rate declined to 5.7 murders per 100 000 citizens.

The economic argument in favor of death punishment consists in the fact of the growth of the prison population in the United States, where the death penalty is either prohibited or practiced to a very limited extent. Due to the fact that contemporary corrections act in accordance with the letter of human rights law, the creation of humane conditions in penitentiary institutions is a huge economic burden. However, it is often stated that capital sentence convicts spend equally large amounts of taxpayers money for appeals, court costs, and the cost of execution. However, simple calculations show different evidence: the existing two million prisoners cost as high as $180 billion per year (Robertson, 39).

Therefore, one prisoner annually takes $90,000 from the state budget. The average murderers age is 31, so the inmate spends at least 29 years in the penitentiary institution. The stay therefore will require a $2, 610,000 minimum, not including inflation and the increase of prices for the basic products prisoners need. The death penalty, at the same time, is a relatively inexpensive and much more reliable punishment method, given that it substantially curbs the spending for the persons stay in the penitentiary institution and removes the need for additional prison staff. In cases of grave crimes, the cost of court proceedings increases, and theyre often arises a need for additional investigation, expertise, and additional guarantees of fair proceedings, but the overall amount spent for administering capital punishment, will not exceed $600,000.

In addition, it is necessary to take into consideration the convicts three-year stay in the prison, which takes an additional $270,000. The cost of its execution is minimal (four digits maximum) and does not change the fact that the death penalty is generally cheaper than a life sentence. The remaining amount can be used for the improvement of the health care system, education reform, crime prevention campaigns, or the creation of agencies supporting the elderly.

The final argument in favor of the death penalty refers to pure justice execution. In fact, it allows achieving justice for the victim, given that logically, one must pay their life for killing an innocent human being. it is important to understand that all people tormented and slaughtered were willing to live, work for common well-being and bring joy to their families and friends. The ripple which results from a murder, covers a huge group of people, literally, everyone who knew the victim  all these people, especially the closest surroundings, are truly willing to inflict the same suffering on the perpetrator.

Logically, revenge is not likely to bring back the victim, this statement can often be heard from death penalty opponents. The argument is weighty, but as it has been stated above, the execution of the offender brings to the victims closest people the feeling of being treated fairly: statistically, 73 percent of whites, 63 percent of Hispanics, and 46 percent of African Americans view death row as a just and appropriate measure (American Demographics, 1).

According to Robertsons study that involved more than one hundred participants whose close relatives were slaughtered. The execution of the perpetrator took place at least three years ago. As the research suggests, 67 percent of subjects reported satisfaction with the villains execution and stated that the court decision was generally just (Robertson, 180).

Although the death penalty was found to bring little grief relief, it allows the victims family and the broader community to believe in justice and make sure no one else will be slaughtered by the cruel offender. These arguments are weighty, but as has been stated above, the execution of the offender brings to the victims closest people the feeling of being treated fairly.

Thus, capital punishment is a debatable measure, which can be nowadays administered only in cases of cruel or serial murders, since this practice is justified statistically, ethically, and economically. It allows saving human lives, material assets of the government as is believed by the American society to re-establish justice. However, it is important to warn against executing innocents and develop a detailed and transparent procedure of investigation that would allow drawing the right verdict and determining the appropriate punitive measure.

Works cited

Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics. Criminal Offenders Statistics. 2008. Web.

Prodeathpenalty. Deterrence. 2008. Web.

Prodeathpenalty. Who speaks for the victims of those we execute?. 2008. Web.

Amnesty International. Death Penalty. 2008. Web.

American Demographics. The Death Penalty  American attitudes  Brief Article  Statistical Data Included. 2008. Web.

Henderson, H. Capital Punishment. New York: Facts on File, Inc., 2000.

Radelet, M., Bedau, H. and Putnam, C. In Spite of Innocence: Erroneous Convictions in Capital Cases. Boston, Mass.: Northeastern University Press, 1994.

Radelet, M. and Akers, R. Deterrence and the death penalty: the views of the experts. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 87 (1996), pp. 1-16.

Bedau, H. The Death Penalty in America: Current Controversies. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Robertson, D. Tears from Heaven Voices from Hell: The Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty As Seen Through the Eyes of the Victims of Violent Crime and Death Row Inmates. Writers Club Press, 2004.

Reasons For The Abolishment Of The Death Penalty

Martin Luther King, Jr. (Ebony, 1957) when being asked the question of “Do you think God approves the death penalty for crimes like rape and murder?”, answered that: “Capital punishment is against the best judgment of modern criminology and, above all, against the highest expression of love in the nature of God”. For many centuries, capital punishment has been one of the most controversial affairs for mankind, due to the complexity of humanity, justice, and its two-sided consequences. Executions are believed to have existed around 1760 BC, with the Code of Hammurabi. However, with the change of time and humans life quality, capital punishment has shown several drawbacks that need to be dealt with. This essay covers reasons for the abolishment of the death penalty, which are evidence of racism and discrimination, degradingly negative effects on the victims’ family and issues related to human rights.

To begin with, although we are living in the age of globalization, racial discrimination in capital punishment is still apparent with various evidences. According to Mattie Elliott (Stop capital punishment, 2018), a study in North Carolina found that if the victim was white, the imposition of the death sentence to the defendants was 3.5 times more likely than in a similar circumstance but the victim was black. In addition, as claimed in Capital punishment in context, in 1990, an examination by the United States General found that in 82% of the cases they studied, those who murdered whites were more likely to be sentenced to death than those who murdered blacks. In an article by All That’s Interesting (updated 2019), the story of George Stinney Jr.- the youngest person to be executed in an electric chair when he was only fourteen, is one of the example of how discrimination used to exist in court. In the case of Geogre Stinney Jr., although he allegedly confessed the crime, there was no written record of the teen admitting to the murders. Eventually, after a 10-minute deliberation, the all-white jury accused him of first-degree murder and on the same day, they sentenced him to death by electric chair after a two-hour trial without any concrete evidence.

Humans oppose murdering, but why would we still agree with an execution, which aims at putting one’s life to an end? The death penalty might be regarded as a reimbursement for the victim and the victim’s family, but eventually what is left would still be a pain for both sides. According to Dr. Robert T. Muller (Psychology Today blog, Talking About Trauma, 2016), psychological studies have proved that the death penalty produces negative effects on families and friends of murder victims (referred to as “co-victims”). Also in his article, one University of Minnesota study found that just 2.5% of co-victims reported achieving closure as a result of capital punishment, while 20.1% said the execution did not help them heal. As John P. Kotter said in his book: “transformation is a process, not an event” (Leading change, 1996), every pain in life takes time to recover, not after one day or two, but it is a long process for anyone who suffers. From my viewpoint, I do not stand in favor of the offenders, since they have to pay for their wrongdoings, but I do not believe that taking one more life away is the proper solution for healing.

The last reason why I believe we should abolish capital punishment is that everyone has a right to live, a chance to re-do and to compensate for what they have done. Although there are murderers who are psychopaths and are willing to kill random people, executing does not mean that our community will be a safer place to live since some individuals might learn from their behaviors and become a worse threat. For the case of psychopaths, the entire killing is meant to highlight the wrong that has been done to them while at the same time punishing those responsible (Deborah Schurman-Kauflin, Psychology Today, 2012). Although this case is still in controversy, about whether psychopaths can change their behaviors or not and should they be executed for mass murdering, in a study by Dr. Rhonda Freeman (Neuroinstincts, 2013), scientists are still learning about this disorder, especially regarding treatment. According to an article by David Von Drehle (Time, 2014), a new statistical analysis stated that the rate of wrongful death sentences in the U.S. is probably much higher than experts have estimated, approximately 120 of the roughly 3,000 inmates on death row might not be guilty. In Newsweek (2014) by Pema Levy, a new study, released in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, one in 25 sentenced to death in the U.S is innocent, which is about 4.1 percent. That 4.1 percent did not have the chance to start over a new life or to indemnify for the victims. As humans, we are all equal and have the same right to live, even the guilty ones.

Overall, the issue of whether to abolish capital punishment or not is always controversial and requires every country to sternly reckon its impact on citizens’ life. There are different law systems in every country, while some countries are doing a great job with handling criminals, some are not. Take Norway’s prison system for example, according to Life in Norway Editorial Team (Living in Norway, 2018), the percentage of people that are sent to prison for the second sentence in Norway hovers at or below 20%, almost three times lower than in the United States where the rate is from 60 to 75%. This is because Norway focuses on relaxation and education for the prisoners, which shows that the government truly pays attention to the criminals and the victims’ rehabilitation. Also in their article, Norwegian jails attempt to mimic the outside world as much as possible, to prepare the inmates for freedom and encourage them for education. Capital punishment still has affairs of discrimination, its negative impact on the rehabilitation process and violation of human rights, therefore it should not be encouraged and other solutions such as life imprisonment and improving the education for citizens and inmates should be considered.

Capital Punishment As A Violation Of Human Rights

Every single day, people around the world are being unjustly executed by their own state for varying crimes. In some countries, one can be killed for stealing, while in other nations, it is reserved for murders or terrorism. The death penalty is inhumane and degenerating and should never be an option to punish someone. It is not only an easy way for a corrupt government to abuse it but is also morally hypocritical and ineffective. Thus, our country should have the duty to persuade nations worldwide to follow our lead and eliminate capital punishment once and for all.

The Capital punishment system is a violation of all the human rights law. In 1948, the United Nations created the Universal Declaration of human rights, a law to protect every person in the world. Article 5 in the Universal Declaration of human rights states: “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Yet in many countries such as Iran, Saudi Arabia and China, beheadings, hangings and other execution methods are the most prominent punishment and are often shown to the public to mock the person and use it as a tactic to instil fear to the public eye. Is it not worrying that these corrupt nations are resorting to these methods? No matter how drastic the crime is, murdering someone does not solve anything, it only promotes more violence within the nation. Therefore, capital punishment should never be allowed again as it is absolutely going against the human rights.

Secondly, capital punishment fails to administer the ultimate purpose of our criminal justice system: to deter crime. Criminologist around the world have done research on this issue and have came to a conclusion that countries without the death penalties have significantly lower crime rates than those with the fatal punishment. Isn’t it ironic how countries that don’t promote violent acts and promote rehabilitation, end up with a safer nation? Kenyatta Leal now a very successful businessman, who was once given a life sentence in the San Quetin, California prison at the age of 22 for dealing with drugs, and robbery with firearms. Many of these issue began due to him having to deal with an abusive mother an absent father causing Kenyatta to fall into the wrong path. During time in jail, Kenyatta went through a program called “the last mile” aimed to teach these inmates how to code and navigate the tech industry, giving them a better option in life and help change their lives. In no time, Kenyatta’s life changed completely and in 19 years he was released from prison, now working for the company “the last mile”. Thus, would it not be so much more beneficial to help change someone’s life who might have gone through some trauma in their teenage years, rather than executing them for their behaviour in the past? It would be a crime if you think otherwise.

Moreover, everyone knows that court cases in todays date is very unreliable. It is often determined based on race and power not who is right or wrong. Furthermore, police have been founded cutting corners in high profile cases in the past, sourcing unreliable information to make their jobs much easier. What is more shocking is that countries such as China currently administer execution by extracting confessions through things like torture. Such atrocious acts should never be tolerated by any nations. For this reasons we must urge the rest of the world to terminate this practice for good.

Some people claim that the justice system claims that it is never wrong because of modern technology and DNA testing, but they are wrong. 1 in 25 prisoners in the United States have been proven to be innocent after they have been executed. Taking a person life that is especially been proven innocent, is unacceptable. It is impossible to reverse time and bring back an innocent person back to life. Everyone has one life and on earth, every life is precious and should never be toyed or risked with.

Ultimately, the death penalty has been banned in Australia for the rights reasons. It is an evil form of punishment that does not go well with modern society; it is useless and often is misused by the government to make it easier for them. If we as a country believe in the fundamental rights of all human beings in every nation, then we have to convince every nation in the world to realise that violence is a not a solution that is effective.

Catholic Teaching And The Capital Punishment In The Movie The Green Mile

The use of capital punishment is one contested issue within today’s society and is present within the movie ‘The Green Mile’. ‘The Green Mile’ tells a story of an unusual inmate who possess many inexplicable healing powers. The man who possess the special powers, named John Coffey, was convicted of killing two young girls however later on in the movie evidence shows otherwise. This movie has the ability to teach and inform many people that those who are of other race and culture are just as important as everyone else. Within this analytical essay paragraphs will discuss the ethical issue that has been chosen, which is capital punishment. Along with the Catholic Teaching in regard to the issue and two characters will be chosen from the movie to analyse their actions they play in the movie.

Many reports stem from different opinions and beliefs regarding what should be case with the death penalty. However, whilst scrolling through copious amounts of articles, one side considered to be the most frequent. ‘’The death penalty is not the answer to punish criminals’’ (amnesty 2019). Within our world there are many individuals who have committed heinous crimes which resulted in hurting and potentially ending the lives others. Those ‘criminals’ believe that they have done the wrong thing and should face punishment, however the death penalty is not the solution. It is known that the death penalty deprives people from the opportunity to reform (amnesty 2019). You may be thinking, that those who take the life of others should have their life taken away from them. But no. The death penalty is not irreversible. Many judgements may lead to people facing harsh consequences and treatments for crimes in which they did not commit. Therefore, the opportunity to reform and rehabilitate is the answer to many of the challenged debates in the world today, for people who both have committed the crimes and those innocent ones who have been suspected of committing the crimes.

The Catholic Social Teaching has much to say about the death penalty. For instance, the most common occurrence is the dignity of the human person is automatically stripped away from those who face capital punishment. The human person is made in the image and likeness of God and is the foundation of moral vision. (Matt 25:40) says “In our times a special obligation binds us to make ourselves the neighbour of every person without exception and of actively helping him [sic] when he comes across our path […] who disturbs our conscience by recalling the voice of the Lord, ‘As long as you did it for one of these the least of my brethren, you did it for me (catholic network, 2019). The Catholic Social Teaching also says that the death penalty does not bring healing to victims’ family. The process of the death penalty brings much trauma and pain to those in the family. A mother of a murder victim said, “Pursuing the death penalty would not be the way we want to honour our daughter’s life”. This certain quote is from a family member who experienced the pain and suffering that one has to go through when their family members have had the death penalty.

Paul Edgecomb, Tom Hanks, is one of the main characters in ‘The Green Mile’. Paul is a very compassionate and caring prison guard but takes his job very seriously. Paul differs from many of the other prison guards as he respects and treats the prisoners with care so the final moments can be tolerable and occur without any pain and torture. Paul also displays qualities of commitment and fairness when he unwillingly dedicates his time to investigate the case of an, unusual inmate, John Coffey (LitCharts, 2019). Due to Coffey possessing many interesting qualities, he had the ability to transfer the vision of what happened on the night he was convicted of murdering two young girls. The images in which Paul witnessed showed that Coffey did not commit the crime however, it was another inmate that was already in prison for committing another crime. The reason why Coffey was convicted of murdering the girls was because he was holding the dead girls trying to bring them back to life with his special powers. The parents of the girls saw Coffey holding the two girls and automatically thought he committed the heinous crime. Therefore, as Paul saw the real truth, he was not able to stop the execution in which Coffey was about to experience. He felt guilt that he had to go ahead with the death penalty however, even though he knew Coffey was innocent Paul still had to go ahead with capital punishment because that is what his job entails him to do. This explains that Paul believes that he should not be killing an innocent man as in the movie he expresses much sadness when the time comes to execute Coffey, but it is against his will to do otherwise. Many innocent people are facing the hardship of being executed even though they have not committed a crime. Amnesty.org stated that in 2016 there were 60 cases where prisoners were under the death sentence but were found non-guilty. As all humans are made in the image and likeness of God, a life should not be taken away in order to punish. It is also evident that Paul, along with the other guards displays teleological framework. The boss of the prison has a terminally ill wife, and due to the guards witnessing the powers Coffey possesses he escapes out of the prison at his own expense. Paul and the other guards know the consequences of what they are doing however, they believe if there is a positive outcome, it is worth the risk. In the end, the terminally ill women is cured from her sickness because of Coffey’s powers.

However, Percy Wetmore is another one of prison guards in the movie ‘The Green Mile’. His personalities differ completely to Paul Edgecomb. Different in such a way that his foremost reason for working on death row is for the pleasure of being able to watch the prisoners die. (Stephen King Wiki, 2019). He certainly can be described as an instigator as his main priority is to stir up prisoners with his violent behaviour. It can be assumed that his perspective on those who are in jail is to torture the lives of those who are suspected of committing crimes. It can be inferred that his main priority it to make the last moments of someone’s life a living hell and he feels no sympathy for giving the prisoners an opportunity to reform and be able to have a second chance at becoming a better person.

In conclusion, it is evident that the Catholic Social Teachings, in relation to capital punishment, is not the way to end someone’s life. This analytical essay has discussed the ethical issue, the catholic social teachings related to the issue and analysed two characters from the movie and their perspective and views on how the ethical issue should be handled.

Life Imprisonment As An Alternative To Capital Punishment In Australia

Capital punishment has always been told to decrease capital crime, but modern day statistics show that this is no longer the case, therefore, the argument of this punishments use is unacceptable, and it must be removed from the legal system completely. I am humbled to be here today to talk about capital punishment and how it needs to be removed. Merely one innocent individual killed by capital punishment is one to many therefore, the push to use life imprisonment instead of capital punishments in today’s world is a must. Don’t you think that instead of killing the killers a solution must be found? Well we have one, currently used in the Australian maximum security prison, Goulburn correctional centre, a supermax cell is a two by three brick room where inmates are homed. Adding in the fact of no future parole, will give those individuals the feeling of isolation which would later result in them experiencing effects physically and mentally. This punishment will remove the death penalty.

Statistics

The world has always used capital punishment as a deterrent or a way to scare criminals into removing themselves from the criminal pathway. In the eighteen century B.C. (Death Penalty Information Center. 2019) capital punishment was first established. The punishment later continued to grow and become more popular. In 2017 alone, 2,591 death sentences were recorded over 53 countries (Amnesty International USA, 2019). To add to the fact that Capital punishment must be removed, it has been proven by that at least 4% of people on death row were wrongfully executed. This means that they could’ve been found not guilty and returned to everyday life. This information clearly demonstrates that the punishment doesn’t work and there is no point in it anymore. Therefore, capital punishment must be replaced with a solution in order to remove it from today’s world and the worlds legal system. The organisation Amnesty International is a driving force for the extermination of capital punishment. The group outlines important statistics and allows individuals to go on protests or donate to this sort of movement. Although the evidence proves the penalty doesn’t work currently Singapore is going up-in-arms with 71% of people wanting the punishment to continue to be used. In a 2016 a survey done by the National University of Singapore showed that from 1500 people two thirds of them stated they knew very little or nothing about the death penalty (TODAYonline, 2019). It has even been quoted that most Singaporeans are “not interested or concerned” (TODAYonline, 2019) about the death penalty. This attitude is what you and others need to seek out and show people how wrong this punishment is. The solution expressed to you today, must be presented to the 53 countries still using the death penalty in today’s world. With criminals becoming more dangerous they will not care for life or death and this attitude will put the general public in danger. I plead you to go out help me remove capital punishment from the world.

How will the Solution work

In Australia, life imprisonment is the highest’s authorization under criminal law, its being this way since 1973 (Lawcouncil.asn.au, 2019). Our Australian government has shown the world how terminating capital punishment in our legal system does not affect our safety or culture but purely allows Australians to continue to live without a thought of the act. The last legal execution on Australian land was the 3rd of February 1973. It has been 46 years since that date, their solution was supermax and it has proven itself to perform greater than the death penalty. This solution will remove capital punishment from those countries that continue to ignore the fact that the sentence hasn’t worked. Goulburn correctional centre in New South Wales is a high security jail that enforces this solution. A Supermax prisons cut inmates off from the world and in a way is death while living. Currently being used as the prison for prisons, it homes inmates that are too hostile or aggressive in other centres. Inmates are placed in a two by three metre brick cell with a small window that’s one metre long and 4 centre metres wide (Jessica Wang, 2019). Each cell is fitted with a concrete bed, a concrete stool and a concrete desk and an aluminium sink, toilet and shower that are combined into one. Inmates will be held in these cells for 23 hours each day. When been given the one hour to get out of their cell inmates will be wearing handcuffs, belly chain, ankle chains and have two guards escorting them through the prison. Lethal injection or electrocution or other means of ‘humane’ killing seems like it comes out of a horror movie, we are not mad scientists, we are civilized individuals who do not need to kill these people but rather place them in a supermax prison to suffer and become shut off to the world. It’s been proven that social isolation has an extreme effect on the body due to the human species being ‘social’ creatures. Social isolation can lead to physical effects such as pains, illness and headaches and diet issues as well as mental effects such as an increase in the possibility of depression, anxiety, panic attacks and sleeping issues (Lifeline.org.au, 2019). By placing these inmates into these circumstances, it is clear that they will experience more of a penalty than being put to death. Clearly there is a new solution that will benefit the world, consequently the argument of capital punishment is invalid making its position in the legal system easily removable with the right voice.

How it will benefit the world

A Maximum security prison such as Goulburn is nothing less of a fortress, it is specifically designed for those in the prison to have no chance of endangering today’s society. The exterior of supermax includes a 5.5 metre brick wall with live electric wires fencing the jail which is then reinforced worth military grade barbed wire. Thermal imaging and security cameras have been placed in every corner and every entry and exit. Armed guards are on patrol 24/7 overlooking the yard. Depending on the supermax prison there will be at least one watch tower. Each cell is fitted with a reinforced metal door that can be manually opened or remotely opened. There will be no WIFI, TV or radio services in the facility. There is no such thing as a prisoner escaping supermax. Human rights are always going to be argued for these inmates, the matter is that this people have almost earned their way into supermax. For Individuals to be placed in supermax they would’ve had too murdered, kidnapped, done a high end robbery, treason, terrorism acts, any other high end offences that would violate national security and much more. For someone to do these kinds of events it is clear that they do not have everyday human values, beliefs and attitudes therefore restricting their human rights. With the solution presented the world especially the 53 countries still using capital punishment will benefit without any loss of security and there will be no blood on the government’s hands.

Capital punishment was a deterrent, in today’s culture it seems like a legal way to kill people. It has no place in the legal system anymore. The solution presented for life imprisonment in a maximum security prison is the best around and it will replace the death penalty. Without any chance of future parole, these inmates will be locked down from the world. There will be no safety lost, no fear of that individual anymore, and no lives taken. These convicts will experience the same if not more punishment for their crime. Instead of having 4% of people executed with the possibility of getting out it will be nailed down to anyone in supermax is there for a reason. Capital punishment must be removed, and I need your help to assist me in doing so.

Death Penalty Persuasive Essay

General Purpose:

To persuade

Specific Purpose:

To shed a positive light on the death penalty sentence in place for murderers.

I. Introduction

Attention Getter: Let us close our eyes and imagine going home to your loved ones only to get there and notice that they have been robbed and killed. How would you feel?

Common Ground + Credibility: According to Merriam Webster’s online dictionary, the death penalty also known as capital punishment is death as a punishment given by a court of law for a very serious crime(s). Statista shows that 17,284 loved ones were taken from their families through murder and non-negligent manslaughter in the U.S. in 2017. The death penalty is constitutional and does not violate the 8th amendment, what it does is create the useful perception of human life as something so precious that taking it has no justification.

Thesis Statement: When a person murders another person, death is the right kind of retribution.

Preview Statement: Let me enlighten you on the benefits of the death penalty, the closure it allows victims’ families, and its cost vs life in prison.

Transition: You may think that the death penalty has little or no benefit, but this next point will change your mind.

II. Body

Main Point 1: Benefits of the death penalty

  1. Capital punishment creates an irreversible procedure that leaves zero room for the murderer to take another life.
  2. It is a form of incapacitation that helps to protect society by preventing escape and means for the future crime of that nature.
    1. Paul H. Rubin, Ph.D., Professor of Economics at Emory University, wrote in his Feb. 1, 2006 testimony ‘Statistical Evidence on Capital Punishment and the Deterrence of Homicide”. The modern refereed studies have consistently shown that capital punishment has a strong deterrent effect, with each execution deterring between 3 and 18 murders.
    2. A study by Duke University’s Kenneth Land found that there was a decrease of 2.5 homicides for each person executed.
  3. It contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system which creates better management of resources.

Transition: The death penalty will not erase the pain that one suffers from a loss, but it does leave room for closure.

Main Point 2: Closure for victims’ families

  1. After a murder, the family unit undergoes permanent changes that are difficult for the members to accept. Knowing that a family’s murderer is still out there and stands a chance of reliving the experience.
  2. Canadian Parents of Murdered Children and Survivors of Homicide Victims said that the stress following a homicide may persist for years and often takes an emotional and physical toll on the survivors resulting in serious illnesses. Many survivors attribute heart disease, cancer, and other acute physical illnesses to the stress of dealing with the murder of a loved one.
  3. Lula Moshoures Redmond in “Surviving When Someone You Love Was Murdered” explains that PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) may be evident in survivors of homicide victims if the following circumstances persist for more than one month:
    1. Recurrent and intrusive distressing recollections of the event.
    2. Recurrent distressing dreams of the event.
    3. Sudden acting or feeling as if the traumatic event was reoccurring.
  4. However, when the death penalty is the punishment faced for murderers’ conduct, then it shields the family of the victim from another form of victimization.
  5. Also, allowing the family peace of mind and maybe even a better environment to mourn their loss.

Transition: There is no amount of money that can bring a loved one back to life.

Main Point 3: Cost of death penalty vs Life in prison

  1. The existence of the death penalty as a possible sentence leads to guilty pleas that save the money spent on trials and limit the opportunity for appeals.
  2. Solomon Moore in the New York Times mentions that a California prison contains over 156,000 people, which is over double the system’s capacity. The main reason for this overcrowding is the criminals who are sentenced to life in prison with no parole.
  3. Would you rather your taxes go towards the daily living of murderers who committed serious crimes and left families in irreversible pain or would you rather rightful retribution be served?

III. Conclusion

Review of Main Points: I have shared with you the benefits of the death penalty; the closure it allows victims’ families and its cost vs life in prison.

Restatement of Thesis: When a person murders another person, death is the right kind of retribution.

Call for Action: Stand for what’s right. It is time to show our sympathy to victims and their families.

The clincher: Death Penalty helps suggest that there is a boundary that should not be overstepped. As you consider supporting the death penalty remember what Norman Cousins said; Death is not the greatest loss of life. The greatest loss is what dies inside us while we live.

Capital Punishment and Marital Status Insights

Corporal Punishment vs. Child Abuse

When you were growing up as a kid, did you ever do something bad and receive a physical punishment from your parents? Some do and some don’t. However, those that can say that they have, did it help you later on in life, or did it affect you in a negative way? Throughout my research, I found that kids who receive corporal punishment at a young age are more mature, sophisticated, and more mindful of their actions. One question to ask, though, is once a couple decides to have a kid, does their marital status have any effect on whether or not they believe in corporal punishment? On SPSS (statistical package used to analyze and interpret data), numerous significant factors were shown to back this theory that marital status has no effect on whether or not you believe in corporal punishment. One thing, though, that needs to be understood is the difference between corporal punishment and child abuse.

Corporal punishment is physical punishment often performed on minors by their guardians. The punishment is often a consequence of something that the child has done. Child abuse, on the other hand, is the physical/psychological maltreatment of a child by a parent or guardian. Throughout this paper, I will uncover the answer effects of marital status on belief in corporal punishment on their kids by analyzing data collected by the General Social Survey.

Historical Trends of Capital Punishment

My research paper is on the topic of adults who favor spanking their children as disciplinary action based on their marital status. I feel like this topic is important because capital punishment is one of the most disputed topics in U.S. history in the past century. Many people who believe in spanking their children see it as a social norm when it comes to disciplining. On the other hand, there are a number of people who believe that beating your children is morally and physically wrong. Back in the 60s and 70s (for example), capital punishment was a lot more prevalent than it is today.

Personally, growing up, I may have been spanked a couple of times, but as I grew older, technology really started to pick up, and I grew more and more attached to it. So attached that my parents found it more useful to take something away from me for a period of time rather than to hit me and have a sharp stinging pain on my butt for 10 minutes. I believe that parents beating their children is useful, but only really in the short run. There are many more effective ways to discipline your children rather than to hit them, whether it may be taking away the cell phone, no dessert for a week, or no social media / TV/video games.

Chi-Square: Marital Status & Spanking

To show my data, I chose to display it through a chi-square test. A chi-square test measures how likely it is that an observed distribution is due to chance. For my chi-square test, my null hypothesis would be that parents who favor spanking to discipline children are independent of their marital status. My research hypothesis would be that parents who favor spanking to discipline children are dependent on their marital status. In regards to my variables, I used marital status as my independent variable (column) and attitude toward spanking children as my dependent variable (rows).

The reason why I chose to use these two variables for my research is because they are my variables of interest; this is what I am trying to discover through my research and data. By looking at the data, there is a lot that I can infer. To start with, the data that I collected was very marginal. What I mean by this is that if you look at my data, with a significance level of .05, we would opt to reject the null hypothesis because our level of significance is at .063. Since we can conclude at this point that our data is statistically insignificant at this level, this would mean that our variables would, therefore, be dependent on each other. In other words, this means that one’s belief in spanking their children would decide on your marital status.

For example, if I had a girlfriend who did not believe in spanking children, and I did, she may not want to marry me due to the fact that I see spanking children as a way of punishment. However, if I evaluate my data at a significant level of 0.1, then that means that I would fail to reject my null hypothesis and prove that the variables are independent of each other. This would mean that whether or not I believe in spanking my children has no effect (or does not correlate) with my marital status.

Both sides could equally be argued, but just for the sake of picking a side, I would choose the standard significance level of .05. The only bias that I could expect is the people who were spanked while they were growing up. Those who were spanked growing up would most likely want their children spanked as well because it is what they went through as a child.

Survey: Spanking Beliefs Among Adults

The table outputs show those who favor corporal punishment based on their marital status. The categories are nominal and go as follows in regard to spanking children: those who strongly agree, those who just agree, those who disagree, and those who strongly disagree with spanking their children.

For my table output, there were many surprising signs that I noted. To begin with, in my cross-tabulation of statistics, I saw that the majority of my population sample came from respondents who were either married, single, or divorced. This can be found on my cross-tabulation table. Those whose marital status was listed as widowed or separated accounted for a small proportion of my data. The choices for the respondents were to strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. To make things simpler, I decided to break the variables in to agree or disagree. For those who were in favor of spanking their children as a form of disciplinary action, they accounted for 690 out of 958 respondents.

This means that 72% of the respondents were in favor of spanking children, while 28% were against it. Now, going to my chi-square table, my Pearson coefficient value was 20.213. With this being said, if you look at my table, you can see that my degrees of freedom are 12. Since we chose to have our level of significance at 5%, our reject region is at 21.026, meaning that since we are not in the reject region, we will opt to fail to reject the null hypothesis. Therefore, this means that our variables are independent of each other at a 5% level of significance overall.

Probing Statistical Significance Levels

Also, if you look at my graph of Phi and Cramer’s V, you will see that the approximate significance is at .063. Because of this, since it is over .05 (barely), we can conclude that our data is not statistically significant. However, like I said before, this is marginal. If our level of significance was at 0.10 as opposed to 0.05, then we could conclude that our data would be statistically significant. Lastly, by looking at my Phi and Cramer’s V chart, you can see that my Phi value is .145, and my Cramer’s V value is .084. Since both of these values are less than one, it displays to the audience that our correlation is very weak.

Deciphering Weak Correlations in Data

The reason that our model could be classified as weak is because it is marginal. What I mean when I say this is that since we are evaluating at a .05 level of significance, we barely make the cut by just being over .05. However, when evaluating at a .10 significance level, it would prove the opposite and show that our data is statistically significant and that the variables were dependent upon each other. I believe that my model does fit to a certain extent because, in my model, my alpha and beta values, when interpreted in the graph, are both linear. On top of this, when looking at our sample data, I can tell that all of our data points come from the same population process, which means that our data is completely randomized and independent of each other.

In addition to my data, the expectation of my error term in the population, given my x term, which is adults who believe in spanking their children, is equivalent to zero. To assess this further to my data, if I know that a parent believes in spanking their children as a form of punishment, then that does not mean that I will be able to predict whether it is above or below the population regression line. Altogether, from my research on whether adults favor spanking their children as disciplinary action based on their marital status, I can conclude that parents who favor spanking their children as punishment are independent of their marital status.

References

  1. Anderson, T.J. (2019). The Evolution of Corporal Punishment in the U.S. New York: Pineapple Press.
  2. Brooks, L. & Harrison, P. (2021). Childhood Experiences and Adult Outcomes: The Impact of Physical Punishment. Journal of Child Development.
  3. Carter, M. (2018). Statistical Analysis in Social Sciences: A Comprehensive Guide. Boston: Lighthouse Academic.

Society’s Influence on Capital Punishment

Abstract

This paper shows the correlation between society and capital punishment. Many people examine the effect society has on capital punishment and vice versa (French, 1987; Haines, 1992). They show that depending on the type of society has a direct impact on the type and frequency of capital punishment. It can also impact who is affected the most. Capital punishment also can help shape society. Executions that do not go well can be a driving force for change. Society is currently changing in the United States and along with it the way people view capital punishment is changing too.

Society’s Influence

Capital punishment is a controversial issue that has continually divided America. Support for and against has shifted back and forth over time as society has changed. Currently, society has shifted in opposing capital punishment like it did in the 1960s. There are many articles on how society has helped shape the laws concerning capital punishment. An article by Laurence French and one by Herb Haines will help show how. They will show how there are problems with capital punishment and how society had a part in creating the problems or solving them.

A Sociological View

Boundry Maintenance and Capital Punishment: A Sociological View by Laurence French looks at how society changed the view of capital punishment. Members of society create organizations that enforce capital punishment even though those same members may be the ones to suffer from it. However, some people are more susceptible to capital punishment than others depending on the society. French (1987) says that lower classes or groups are more likely to be put to death than higher classes of the same society. The post-Civil War south in America shows a disparity in those that face capital punishment. Black people in the south have been executed at a higher rate than everywhere else in the United States. Society may be to blame for this because many in the south believed that Black people were a lesser class after the Civil War. “Nonetheless, lower class blacks, a visible reminder of their lost ideal, continue to be targeted for harsh examples of this desperate effort to curtail anomie and avert change in the status quo.” (French, 1987). The United States repealed capital punishment in 1967 and reinstated it in 1976. Since then more executions have happened in the south than the rest of America. For disparity of those executed to stop sentencing must become standardized for all people.

This article supplies ample information and is still relevant to America today. Since it was written in 1987 somethings have changed in the United States since then. Even though some things might have changed it still gives an insight into how society influences capital punishment.

Flawed Execution

Flawed Executions, the Anti-Death Penalty Movement, and the Politics of Capital Punishment by Herb Haines looks at how problems with executions change how society views it. When there is a problem with the execution the public and society takes notice and dislikes it. The public seems to be okay with executions when they think that it was done humanely and according to plan. Sometimes things do not go right with the execution though. Executions in the middle ages were a public attraction and were not liked if the executioner did a poor job. When using the electric chair, the execution could go bad if the wires were faulty or something else did not work right. Multiple times people in the electric chair did not die instantly and sometimes caught fire. Gassings have been known to not kill right away and leave their victims gasping for air slowly dying. During injections, the lines can leak, or the mixture of chemicals does not react right. These things make society shift away from capital punishment. Another thing society does not like to see is the improper behavior of the prison staff, criminal or the public viewing the execution. (Haines, 1992) Wrongful convictions can sometimes lead to innocent people being put to death. This led to a social movement to stop capital punishment. They used the flaws that can happen in executions to show why they should be stopped. “The fact that the press has apparently made more of wrongful convictions than of the other three types of flawed executions discussed suggests it may have the greatest impact on the future of capital punishment in the United States.” (Haines, 1992)

This article shows how capital punishment can influence the way society views it. The article gave multiple examples of executions that did not go right in the United States over the years. Those examples help explain why society has changed its view on capital punishment.

Discussion

I agree with French that society has an impact on how often capital punishment is used and which people are subject to it more. I think it is more to do with the economic level now days instead of race like it did shortly after the Civil War. I also agree with Haines that the way capital punishment is executed impacts the way society views it. The way that one effects the other it makes sense that there is a pattern of more and less support over the years. I think with help from the media to bring a change like Haines mentioned capital punishment will continue to decline over the years.

References

  1. French, L. (1987). Boundary maintenance and capital punishment: A sociological perspective. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 5(4), 423-432.
  2. Haines, H. (1992). Flawed Executions, the Anti-Death Penalty Movement, and the Politics of Capital Punishment. Social Problems, 39(2), 125-138.

Capital Punishment: The High Cost of ‘Justice’

One day, you were sitting in your house, minding your own business, when the police knocked on your door. You are suddenly whisked away to prison. All of the trials and courtrooms you go through flash by. And suddenly, without you knowing how, you are on death row, waiting for your execution day. This is what capital punishment does to people, even innocent people. It is very counterintuitive; it is not the only option, and it is catastrophic for everyone’s mental and spiritual health.

Execution’s Irony: Seeking Fame Through Death

First of all, the death sentence has the opposite effect than the original intent. For a start, it gives the supposed killer more publicity than they ever deserve. Before they are killed, they can say a few words on television or radio. Seeing a killer being filmed in front of television, viewed by millions, might give the wrong impression to people who want to be famous or infamous. Second, we spend millions on capital punishment instead of spending our tax dollars to help grieving families. As well as that, there have been studies and data collected that in states where the death penalty is utilized, there have been more murders than in the states where the death penalty is illegal. And last but most important, the families of the victims are not helped. It has never changed how the families feel or how much they have lost.

Beyond Death: Exploring Humane Alternatives

Second, there has always been and always will be an alternative punishment for a crime as opposed to killing. As much as people have invented injections to make it less painful, it always is excruciating. One unpopular alternative is going to trial for life. The reason people oppose this form of punishment so much is because there is always a chance for the judge to let him out. But the other option is mandatory life with no parole. There is yet another alternative, thought up by Chief Justice Warren. He proposes that prisons transform into factories with fences. This forces the accused to work for what he did, and the money they earn can go to the grieving families and even the families of the accused to provide for the lost source of income.

The Ethical Toll: When Society Bears the Burden

Not only does capital punishment do worse for the accused, but it also takes a significant toll on the involved beliefs and morals. Sometimes, people believe that killing a horrible criminal is for the best. A murderer is getting off the street and can never hurt anyone again. But it’s not the best option. For a start, no one, without concrete evidence, can be positive on the accused guilt. Many executed in the UK were later found innocent. This means that two people died for nothing, and two families, instead of one, now have to suffer the pain of innocent blood of a loved one being spilled. For another, those involved suffer. No one should ever earn a paycheck for killing someone.

This is not, however, the same as the military. The military fights for their rights, theirs and other countries. These people assist in executions. The corrections personnel suffer from PTSD more often than not. We shouldn’t put the mental safety of people trying to find a living below our revenge. Not only are the corrections personnel taking a toll, but so are the doctors. Doctors, under the Hippocratic Oath, are sworn to heal people. Even just by taking a stethoscope to the deceased chest to be sure of death, they are assisting in the execution. Not only them, but we as the people are the State. When the State sentences someone to death, so are the people.

The people may have no say in it, but they are assisting in the slaughter of another human. One of the most important reasons the death penalty is evil is because Jesus Himself speaks on the killing of one another. Some philosophers look at the Old Testament to prove that the death penalty is necessary to keep order and God’s presence in the world. However, as Christians now, we cannot forget why we are not going to hell, as we should, because of all that is said in the Old Testament. According to the Old Testament, we deserve to die. We are sinners.

However, when Jesus came, he took away our sins on the cross with him. He sacrificed himself so we, and all other sinners, could live. We cannot ignore that because that is why the guilty should not die at our hands. John 8:7 says, “…Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” None of us can say we are without sin, so we cannot “Cast a stone.”

Without capital punishment, even if you were innocent and convicted, you would never have to die. You would only have to go to jail, and even if it is for the rest of your life, you still do not have to die for a crime you did not commit. When living, you can go back on trial to prove your innocence. The death penalty is paradoxical, not the only choice, and disastrous to mental and spiritual health.

References

  1. Anderson, P. (2017). From Doorstep to Death Row: The Impact of Wrongful Convictions. New York: Scholarly Press.
  2. Blackwood, J. (2018). “The Media Spotlight: How Capital Punishment Gives Unwarranted Fame.” Journal of Criminal Justice and Public Policy.
  3. Carpenter, T. (2019). Fiscal Implications of Death Penalty vs. Life Imprisonment. Boston: Economics & Justice Publishing.
  4. Donovan, M. (2016). “A Comparative Study: Murder Rates in States with and without the Death Penalty.” Crime and Society Journal.