write a thesis statement about death penalty

• AI Content Shield
• AI KW Research
• AI Assistant
• SEO Optimizer
• AI KW Clustering
• Customer reviews
• The NLO Revolution
• Press Center
• Help Center
• Content Resources
• Facebook Group

Death Penalty Essay Introduction — a Quick Guide

Table of Contents

The death penalty is a state-sanctioned practice where an individual is executed for an offense punishable through such means. Death penalty essay is a common topic given to students where the essay writer argues this controversial issue and takes a stand. The death penalty essay intro consists of the opening sentence, the background information, and the thesis statement.

Writing a compelling introduction isn’t easy. But with the tips and examples in this guide, you’ll be able to write a captivating introduction.

What Is a Death Penalty Essay?

The death penalty is the practice of executing a person guilty of capital murder, a crime in which the loss of life is intentional. This method of punishment has been around for as long as human civilization.

The death penalty has been controversial for a long time, with people on both sides of the fence. Supporters claim it works to deter crime, but there is no evidence to prove it. Opposers claim it is cruel and is not the best way to serve justice. 

A death penalty essay argues for or against the death penalty. This essay topic is a typical assignment given to college students. Common death penalty essay topics are as follows:

• About the Death Penalty
• Does the Death Penalty effectively deter crime?
• The Death Penalty should not be legal
• The Death Penalty should be abolished.
• Death Penalty and Justice
• Pro-Death Penalty
• Is the Death Penalty Morally Right?
• Death Penalty is Immoral
• Religious Values and Death Penalty
• Ineffectiveness of Death Penalty
• Punishment and the Nature of the Crime
• The Death Penalty and Juveniles.
• Is the Death Penalty Effective?
• The Death Penalty is Politically Just
• The Death Penalty: Right or Wrong?
• Abolishment of the Death Penalty
• The Death Penalty and People’s Opinions
• Is Death Penalty Humane?

How to Write an Interesting Death Penalty Essay Intro

Like other essays, the death penalty essay intro comprises three parts. The hook, a strong opening sentence, grips the reader, sparks their curiosity, and compels them to read the rest of the piece.

Subsequent sentences provide background information on the topic and define the argument’s terms. The last part is the thesis statement, which summarizes the central focus of the essay.

1. the Opening Sentence/Hook

The hook is a statement that grips the reader’s attention and makes them want to read on . The hook should be an exciting statement that sparks the readers’ curiosity, and sets the tone for the essay. It should give an overview of the topic. You could begin with a thought-provoking question, an interesting quote, an exciting anecdote, or a shocking statistic or fact. 

2. Background Information

Provide more information about the subject you are discussing. Create context and give background information on the topic. It could be a social or historical context. Define key terms that the reader might find confusing and clearly but concisely state why the issue is important.

3. Thesis Statement

The thesis statement is the overarching idea – the central focus of the essay. It summarizes the idea that you’ll be explaining throughout the entirety of the piece. Once this statement has been established, you’ll smoothly transition into the main body of your essay. Make the thesis clear and concise. 

Death Penalty Essay Introduction Example

Does the death penalty deter crime, especially murder? The death penalty has been controversial for years. Over the years, public opinion about the death penalty seems to have changed. But there are still people who think it is a proper punishment. I have heard the phrase “An eye for an eye” most of my life. Most people firmly believe that if a criminal took someone’s life, their lives should be taken away too. But I don’t think that will discourage anyone from committing crimes. I believe that the criminal should be given a lighter punishment. 

The death penalty or capital punishment is the execution of a criminal by a government as punishment for a crime. In the United States, the death penalty is the most common form of sentence in murder cases.

A death penalty essay argues for or against the death penalty. The essay introduction begins with an attention-grabber , followed by background information on the topic and then the thesis statement.

Abir Ghenaiet

Abir is a data analyst and researcher. Among her interests are artificial intelligence, machine learning, and natural language processing. As a humanitarian and educator, she actively supports women in tech and promotes diversity.

Explore All Essay Intro Generator Articles

The different ways to start a comparative essay.

Some writers intend to compare two specific things or ideas through their articles. They write these essays to compare and…

• Essay Intro Generator

Know The Best Way to Start an Expository Essay

Are you into writing essays that tackle a still-unknown fact? Do you know how to write an expository essay? Before…

Writing an Opinion Essay? Read This First!

Students are required to express their opinions on a topic in an opinion essay. Pertinent illustrations and explanations support their…

Identifying the Best Transitions to Start an Essay

A typical academic assignment is the essay, which must meet certain requirements in order to be written properly. Even students…

How to Write Introductions for Synthesis Essays

One of the most exciting assignments you could have is writing a synthesis essay. For a college or university student,…

How to Write Introductions for Music Essays

Music is food for the soul, or so they say. A music essay analyzes or describes a piece of music,…

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Human Rights — Death Penalty

Argumentative Essays on Death Penalty

It's difficult to write about the complex and often controversial subject of the death penalty. Selecting an engaging and personally resonant essay topic is crucial for a successful academic endeavor. We emphasize the importance of creativity in this process and aims to make the information accessible to students of varying academic levels. Let's embark on this journey together, exploring topics that not only challenge but also expand our understanding and critical thinking skills.

Essay Topics by Type

Below, you'll find a curated list of essay topics categorized by type, each with a distinct focus ranging from technology and society to personal growth and academic interests.

Argumentative Essay Topics

• The Morality of the Death Penalty: Is it a justified form of punishment?
• Cost Implications: Comparing the economic impact of the death penalty versus life imprisonment.
• Effectiveness as a Deterrent: Does the death penalty truly deter crime?

Compare and Contrast Essay Topics

• Death Penalty Practices Worldwide: How different countries approach capital punishment.
• Historical vs. Modern Perspectives: The evolution of the death penalty in the legal system.

Descriptive Essay Topics

• A Day in the Life: Describing the process of a death penalty case from verdict to execution.
• Public Perception: How media representations influence views on the death penalty.

Persuasive Essay Topics

• Abolition Arguments: Persuading against the continuation of the death penalty in modern society.
• Rehabilitation over Retribution: The case for prioritizing rehabilitation for criminals.

Narrative Essay Topics

• Personal Testimony: Narratives from families affected by the death penalty.
• Life on Death Row: A day in the life of a death row inmate, based on real accounts and research.

Introduction Paragraphs

Each essay topic comes with a suggested introductory paragraph to kickstart your writing process.

The Morality of the Death Penalty

In the debate over the death penalty, the crux of the argument often revolves around its moral standing. This essay will explore the multifaceted dimensions of capital punishment, questioning its justification as a punitive measure. Thesis Statement: Despite its intention to serve justice, the death penalty raises significant ethical concerns, challenging the principles of human rights and dignity.

Death Penalty Practices Worldwide

Capital punishment varies significantly across different cultural and legal landscapes. This essay aims to compare and contrast the application of the death penalty in various countries, shedding light on the global diversity of justice. Thesis Statement: A comparative analysis reveals profound differences in ethical, legal, and procedural frameworks governing the death penalty, reflecting broader societal values and norms.

Conclusion Paragraphs

Concluding paragraphs are crafted to summarize the main points and reinforce the thesis, adding a final reflection or call to action.

This essay has traversed the ethical landscape surrounding the death penalty, examining its complex implications on society and the justice system. The evidence suggests that the moral costs of capital punishment far outweigh its purported benefits. Final Reflection: In the pursuit of a more humane and just society, abolishing the death penalty emerges as a necessary step forward.

Through a comparative lens, we have explored the diverse approaches to the death penalty, revealing a spectrum of global attitudes towards justice and punishment. These differences underscore the influence of cultural, legal, and ethical considerations in shaping capital punishment policies. Call to Action: It is imperative for nations to reevaluate their stance on the death penalty in light of international human rights standards.

The Death Penalty: Arguments and Alternative Solutions

Analysis of executions should be televised, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

The Death Penalty: a Critical Analysis of David Bruck's Arguments

Capital punishment: establish or demolish, the death penalty: pros and cons, why the death penalty should be abolished, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Why I Support The Death Penalty in Special Cases

Reasons why the death penalty is wrong, should the death penalty be abolished, why death penalty should be canceled, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Pro Death Penalty: Uncovering The Good Side in The Evil

Pro-death penalty arguments: a comprehensive analysis, the ethics of capital punishment: death is not a right decision, the death penalty as an effective punishment, abolishment of capital punishment, why capital punishment should be legalized, abolishing the death penalty: a persuasive call for justice, reasons why the death penalty should be abolished, analysis of the effect of death penalty on crime rates in iran, the reasons why i am against death penalty, revisiting the debate on capital punishment: an ielts perspective, against the death penalty: a persuasive argument for abolition, the legitimacy of the death penalty, people’s attitude to the death penalty, the death penalty issue in texas, the unethical nature of death penalty: an argumentative perspective, the public support for the death penalty in singapore, research paper on the drawbacks of death penalty, pro-death penalty arguments for serious crimes in south africa, death penalty: the answer to today's incarceration problems.

The death penalty, known as capital punishment, refers to the act of carrying out the prescribed execution of a convicted offender who has been sentenced to death by a court of law for committing a criminal offense.

The history of the death penalty stretches back thousands of years. Its origins can be traced to ancient civilizations such as Mesopotamia, where various forms of execution were practiced, including hanging, beheading, and stoning. Throughout history, the death penalty has been used by different societies as a means of punishment for a range of offenses. In medieval Europe, the death penalty became more prevalent, with common methods including burning at the stake, drawing and quartering, and hanging. The practice was often carried out publicly as a form of deterrence and to demonstrate the power of the ruling authority. Over time, there have been shifts in public opinion and legal systems regarding the death penalty. In the 18th century, the Enlightenment era brought forth ideas of human rights and the reformation of justice systems, leading to calls for the abolition of cruel and excessive punishments. In the modern era, many countries have abolished the death penalty, considering it a violation of human rights and the right to life. However, the death penalty remains in practice in several countries around the world, albeit with varying degrees of usage and controversy.

Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United States, Japan, Taiwan, China, India, North Korea, Singapore, Iraq, Vietnam, Yemen, Somalia, Bangladesh, South Sudan, etc.

Hanging, shooting, lethal injection, beheading, stoning, inert gas asphyxiation, electrocution and gas inhalation.

Furman v. Georgia: In 1972, this groundbreaking legal case had a profound impact on the death penalty in the United States. The Supreme Court's decision resulted in a temporary suspension of capital punishment across the nation. The ruling declared that the arbitrary application of the death penalty violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. Consequently, states were compelled to revise their death penalty laws in order to address concerns of arbitrariness and ensure a fairer application of the ultimate punishment. The Troy Davis case: Troy Davis, who was convicted of murder in Georgia in 1991, garnered international attention and raised substantial doubts about the fairness and accuracy of the death penalty. Despite maintaining his innocence until his execution in 2011, his case shed light on issues such as the reliability of eyewitness testimony, the potential for racial bias within the criminal justice system, and the inherent risk of wrongful convictions.

Public opinion on the death penalty is diverse and varies across different countries and cultures. However, there are several common trends and perspectives. Supporters of the death penalty argue that it serves as a deterrent to crime and provides justice for victims and their families. They believe that certain crimes warrant the ultimate punishment and that the death penalty acts as a form of retribution. On the other hand, opponents of the death penalty raise concerns about its morality, effectiveness, and potential for wrongful convictions. They argue that capital punishment violates the right to life, promotes violence, and is irreversible in cases of wrongful execution. Many argue that the justice system is fallible and prone to errors, raising questions about the reliability and fairness of capital punishment. Public opinion on the death penalty has been shifting in some countries, with a growing trend towards abolition. Factors such as evolving societal values, concerns about human rights, and the recognition of the potential for errors and biases within the justice system have contributed to changing perspectives.

1. Deterrence. 2. Retribution. 3. Justice for victims. 4. Cost-effectiveness. 5. Upholding societal values.

1. Irreversibility. 2. Human rights. 3. Ineffectiveness as a deterrent. 4. Racial and socioeconomic biases. 5. Moral and ethical considerations.

The topic of the death penalty is of paramount importance due to its profound implications on society, justice, and human rights. It raises fundamental questions about punishment, ethics, and the role of the state in administering justice. The death penalty sparks intense debates on multiple fronts, including its effectiveness as a deterrent, the potential for wrongful convictions, and the moral implications of state-sanctioned killing. Examining the death penalty forces us to confront inherent biases and flaws within the criminal justice system, such as racial and socioeconomic disparities in sentencing. It prompts discussions on the irreversibility of capital punishment and the risks of executing innocent individuals. Moreover, it demands an exploration of alternative approaches to punishment, rehabilitation, and the potential for reforming criminal justice systems.

The topic of the death penalty is highly relevant and worth exploring in an essay for students due to its interdisciplinary nature and profound societal impact. Writing an essay on this subject provides an opportunity for students to delve into complex ethical, legal, and social issues. Studying the death penalty encourages critical thinking and analysis of the justice system, including questions about fairness, human rights, and the potential for error. It prompts students to examine the moral implications of state-sanctioned killing and grapple with issues of punishment and rehabilitation. Furthermore, researching the death penalty enables students to explore the historical and cultural aspects of capital punishment, analyzing its evolution and variations across different societies. They can investigate case studies, legal precedents, and empirical evidence to evaluate the effectiveness, equity, and potential biases associated with the death penalty.

1. In 2020, Amnesty International reported that at least 483 executions were carried out in 18 countries worldwide. The top five executing countries were China, Iran, Egypt, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. 2. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, as of April 2021, 185 innocent individuals have been exonerated and released from death row in the United States since 1973. 3. The United States is among the few Western democracies that still retain the death penalty. However, its use has significantly declined over the years. In 2020, the country recorded the lowest number of executions (17) in nearly three decades.

1. Donohue III, J. J., & Wolfers, J. (2009). Estimating the impact of the death penalty on murder. American Law and Economics Review, 11(2), 249-309. (https://academic.oup.com/aler/article-abstract/11/2/249/232287) 2. Goldberg, A. J., & Dershowitz, A. M. (1970). Declaring the death penalty unconstitutional. Harvard Law Review, 1773-1819. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/1339687) 3. Soss, J., Langbein, L., & Metelko, A. R. (2003). Why do white Americans support the death penalty?. The Journal of Politics, 65(2), 397-421. (https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-2-00006) 4. Banner, S. (2022). The death penalty. In The Death Penalty. Harvard University Press. (https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.4159/9780674020511/html) 5. Hoyle, C. (2008). Death Penalty. In Elgar Encyclopedia of Human Rights. Edward Elgar Publishing. (https://www.elgaronline.com/display/book/9781789903621/b-9781789903621.death.penalty.xml) 6. Radelet, M. L., & Borg, M. J. (2000). The changing nature of death penalty debates. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 43-61. (https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.43) 7. Vidmar, N., & Ellsworth, P. (1973). Public opinion and the death penalty. Stan. L. Rev., 26, 1245. (https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/stflr26&div=63&id=&page=) 8. Donohue, J. J., & Wolfers, J. (2006). Uses and abuses of empirical evidence in the death penalty debate. (https://www.nber.org/papers/w11982) 9. Ellsworth, P. C., & Gross, S. R. (1994). Hardening of the attitudes: Americans' views on the death penalty. Journal of social Issues, 50(2), 19-52. (https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb02409.x) 10. Wolfgang, M. E., & Riedel, M. (1973). Race, judicial discretion, and the death penalty. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 407(1), 119-133. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/000271627340700110)

Relevant topics

• Freedom of Speech
• Human Trafficking
• Gun Control
• Police Brutality
• Pro Life (Abortion)
• I Have a Dream
• Homelessness
• Animal Testing
• Gun Violence

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Dissertation
• PowerPoint Presentation
• Book Report/Review
• Research Proposal
• Math Problems
• Proofreading
• Movie Review
• Cover Letter Writing
• Personal Statement
• Nursing Paper
• Argumentative Essay
• Research Paper
• Discussion Board Post

Guide on Writing a Death Penalty Research Paper

Table of Contents

The death penalty is one of the most controversial topics. This topic raises a lot of questions in society and this fact makes it perfect for research. But, it can be a challenging task for students to create a good research paper on such a difficult topic. 

You may be confused about where to look for the information, what is the correct structure for the paper, and many other aspects. But don’t worry, we are ready to help you! In this guide, we will cover all aspects of writing a death penalty research paper . So, keep reading to learn how to craft a strong paper.

How to Start Working on a Research Paper on the Death Penalty

The work on the research paper always starts with an in-depth investigation of a chosen topic. Speaking of the death penalty research, you may have to go through tons of information before figuring out what you want to write about. It is an essential part of writing a strong death penalty research paper , so take enough time for it.

But you might be wondering where to look for credible information. And to ease your search, we compiled a list of the best sources to gather data about the death penalty.

• Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC). On the site of this organization, you will find a lot of information regarding capital punishment.
• The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UN Human Rights). This UN entity publishes various articles and reports concerning the question of the death penalty on its site.
• Articles and journals. There are a lot of death penalty research papers and other scholarly literature, that can be helpful. Just search a little in research databases and you will find a lot of credible information.

Choosing Topics for Research Papers Death Penalty

The death penalty is a wide topic, and to create a good research it is better to narrow down the topic to one specific aspect. Many students get stuck in this step, as choosing a narrow topic from the variety of available options can be difficult. But, the good news is this task will be much easier for you if you have conducted prior research.

The data you gathered during the prior research can help you to find a direction for your further investigation. All you need is to follow a few simple steps: 

• Look through the information you found and highlight several aspects that can be researched.
• Search a little for information on each of the chosen aspects to understand which one is most interesting for you.
• Write down a few questions related to the chosen aspect.
• Select a question that is current and engaging — it will be the final topic for your research.

For example, you can conduct research on the death penalty in a specific country. Or, investigate the death penalty in the context of race and religion. There are a lot of options, all you need to do is brainstorm your ideas and find the best one.

Outline for the Death Penalty Research Paper

After you choose your topic and gather enough data, you will have a better idea of what you need to present in your research paper. But, how to structure your paper correctly? It is an important question, as a good structure increases the readability of your work and guarantees a logical development of your points. 

And that’s why you need to create an outline before writing a research paper. An outline will map out the way you will present information, and help you to understand how to connect all parts and create a paragraph flow.

A death penalty research paper should have the same structure as any other research paper. Usually, there are several parts in the following order:

Introduction

• Main paragraphs
• References or Bibliography.

You can use these sections to create an outline. But, you should also take into account the guidelines provided by your professor, if any.

Take a look at each section and think about how you want to organize the information in them. Take some notes about what each section should include and in what order. A few words will be enough to get a better understanding of how to develop all your points throughout the paper.

How to Write a Death Penalty Research Paper

So, you researched your topic, created an outline, and now it’s time to write your paper. In this step, all you need to do is follow your outline and present your argumentation or evaluation of the chosen death penalty question. Sounds easy, but to create a great death penalty research paper , you need to know about some common requirements. Let’s learn more about them.

The introduction section helps you to catch the attention of the readers, provide them with some essential information, and give them a better idea of what issue you will discuss in your paper. This section usually includes 1-3 paragraphs, depending on the length of your paper. 

Here are the components of the death penalty research paper introduction:

• Attention grabber — a short and precise sentence to engage the audience.
• Background information — a few sentences to give your readers basic knowledge of the death penalty.
• The significance of research on capital punishment — explain why this topic needs to be addressed.
• Short literature review — a few sentences about previous research on the topic and existing points of view.
• Thesis statement — a sentence that conveys your position on the death penalty or a central idea of your research.
• An outline — a short explanation of what you want to cover in your paper.

The main body is the longest part of a death penalty research paper and the most important one. In this section, you need to describe your research and provide arguments and evidence that support your thesis statement. It is usually divided into several paragraphs to improve readability. To keep the logical flow, present the information in the next order:

• Methodology. Explain how you conducted research on the death penalty.
• Ideas, arguments, and evidence. Present each idea in a different paragraph.
• Final results. The logical solution from your research.

A good conclusion should wrap up everything you write in the main body paragraphs and reinforce your central message. To achieve this goal, you need to include the following components in your concluding paragraph:

• Reiterate your thesis statement.
• Summarize your argumentation, evaluation, or solutions (basically, the main points presented in the main body).
• Remind of the importance of researching the death penalty.

Useful Tips on Writing a Research Paper About Death Penalty

Crafting powerful academic papers requires good critical thinking, evaluation, and writing skills. All of these come with practice. But, you can greatly improve your paper just by following some simple yet effective tips.

There are some tricks and tips that professionals use when writing research papers. And they will definitely be helpful for you, especially for creating a paper on such a controversial topic as the death penalty. So, here are some recommendations from expert writers:

• Review some death penalty research papers before writing your own to find inspiration and understand how a good paper should be structured.
• Provide arguments based on official data and credible sources only to avoid bias.
• Use numerical statistics as evidence of your argumentation.
• When you cite other sources, make sure you use the correct citation style.
• Always proofread your work at least two times after you finish it.

Final Thoughts

We hope that our tips will help you to write a powerful death penalty research paper . Remember, that all you need is to choose a question that is interesting to you, conduct in-depth research, and follow our writing recommendations. And don’t be afraid to ask for professional writing help , if you need it!

How do you start a paper on the death penalty?

At the beginning of a death penalty research paper , you need to give the audience a better understanding of what capital punishment is, why it is important to research this topic, and what aspects you will cover in your paper. Provide some background information, a thesis statement, and an outline of your research.

How do you write a thesis statement for the death penalty?

To write a good thesis statement, you need to conduct in-depth research first and then decide what side you choose. State your personal position in a precise sentence to give the audience a clear idea of your point of view.

Is the death penalty a good research paper topic?

If you want to conduct research on a controversial and engaging topic, the death penalty is a good choice for you. There are a lot of aspects and questions you can choose as the main focus of your research. So, find a question regarding the death penalty that is interesting for you, and start your research.

7 Life Stories of People who Succeeded Without Relevant Education

Most Controversial Alcohol Research Paper Ideas

Writing an Essay on A Raisin in the Sun: Ideas & Tips for Students

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Criminal Justice

IResearchNet

Academic Writing Services

The death penalty: debate and procedures.

This article explores the multifaceted dimensions of the death penalty within the United States criminal justice process . The introduction provides a historical and contextual overview of the death penalty, emphasizing its significance in the criminal justice system. The debate surrounding the death penalty is examined through moral and ethical lenses, constitutional and legal challenges, and considerations of deterrence and efficacy. The subsequent section delves into the intricate procedures involved in the application of the death penalty, encompassing sentencing criteria, trial processes, execution methods, and avenues for appeals and clemency. Critiques and reform proposals constitute a critical examination of systemic flaws, injustices, and international perspectives on the death penalty. The article concludes by summarizing key points, discussing future implications, and providing recommendations for further research and policy considerations. Throughout, formal scientific language and adherence to APA style guidelines contribute to the scholarly rigor of this exploration into the contentious and complex realm of the death penalty.

Introduction

The death penalty, a topic of enduring controversy, serves as a focal point in the criminal justice system, reflecting societal values, legal principles, and moral considerations. Defined as the state-sanctioned execution of a person as a punishment for a crime, the death penalty has a rich historical context deeply rooted in diverse cultural and legal traditions. From ancient civilizations to modern nation-states, the practice has evolved, garnering both staunch proponents and vehement opponents. Its significance within the criminal justice system is multifaceted, extending beyond its punitive function to encompass issues of justice, human rights, and societal retribution. As we delve into the nuanced facets of the death penalty, this article aims to dissect its complexities, evaluating the various perspectives that have shaped its discourse.

The thesis of this article is to critically examine the death penalty in the United States, navigating through the intricate web of moral, legal, and societal considerations. We contend that a comprehensive understanding of the death penalty necessitates an exploration of its historical roots, ethical implications, and the evolving legal landscape. As we embark on this exploration, the central argument posits that the death penalty debate extends beyond mere policy discussions; it encapsulates profound questions about justice, human rights, and the efficacy of the criminal justice system. To support this thesis, the article will unfold in three main sections. First, we provide a nuanced analysis of the debate surrounding the death penalty, considering moral, ethical, constitutional, and legal dimensions. Following this, we delve into the procedural aspects of the death penalty in the United States, scrutinizing sentencing criteria, trial processes, execution methods, and avenues for appeals and clemency. Lastly, the article critically evaluates critiques and reform proposals, offering insights into systemic flaws, international perspectives, and potential alternatives. Through these sections, we aim to present a comprehensive examination of the death penalty, fostering informed discourse on its role and implications within the realm of criminal justice.

The Debate Surrounding the Death Penalty

The moral and ethical dimensions of the death penalty form a central battleground in the ongoing debate. Proponents argue that capital punishment serves as a just response to heinous crimes, offering retribution and closure to victims’ families. On the contrary, opponents question the morality of state-sanctioned killing, contending that it violates the fundamental principle that all life is sacrosanct. The examination of moral arguments extends beyond retribution, exploring concepts of forgiveness, redemption, and the possibility of rehabilitation. Furthermore, ethical considerations in the application of the death penalty delve into issues such as the potential for racial or socio-economic bias in sentencing, the humane treatment of individuals on death row, and the ethical responsibilities of a society that endorses capital punishment.

Constitutional implications play a pivotal role in the ongoing discourse surrounding the death penalty, particularly concerning the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Legal challenges often revolve around questions of fairness, arbitrariness, and the evolving standards of decency in society. This section explores the constitutional tensions inherent in the death penalty, evaluating how evolving societal norms intersect with the interpretation of the Eighth Amendment. Additionally, landmark legal cases have left an indelible mark on the death penalty debate, shaping the contours of its application and sparking discussions about due process, the role of mitigating factors, and the appropriate standards for determining intellectual disability and mental illness in capital cases.

The argument that the death penalty serves as a deterrent to crime is a cornerstone of its justification. Proponents assert that the severity of the punishment dissuades potential offenders, contributing to public safety. This section critically analyzes the deterrence argument, considering the complexities of cause-and-effect relationships in criminal behavior. Empirical evidence regarding the efficacy of the death penalty in preventing crime is scrutinized, with an exploration of statistical methodologies and their limitations. Counterarguments challenging the notion of deterrence are examined, highlighting studies suggesting that the death penalty may not provide a measurable deterrent effect and may even perpetuate a cycle of violence. This section aims to provide a nuanced understanding of the deterrence argument, acknowledging the intricacies involved in assessing its effectiveness within the broader landscape of criminal justice policy.

Death Penalty Procedures in the United States

The death penalty in the United States follows a complex sentencing and trial process that reflects the gravity of the punishment involved. Eligibility criteria for the death penalty vary across jurisdictions but often include factors such as the nature of the crime, the presence of aggravating circumstances, and sometimes the defendant’s criminal history. The phases of a death penalty trial are meticulously structured, involving jury selection, presentation of evidence, and legal arguments. The guilt phase determines the defendant’s culpability, while the penalty phase examines whether aggravating factors outweigh mitigating factors, ultimately deciding whether the death penalty is warranted. This section provides an in-depth examination of the criteria that render an individual eligible for the death penalty and the procedural intricacies of the trial phases, shedding light on the legal standards and challenges that characterize capital cases.

The historical evolution of execution methods in the United States traces a path from traditional means, such as hanging and firing squads, to more modern practices like lethal injection, electrocution, gas chambers, and, in some cases, the use of the electric chair. The adoption and subsequent abandonment of different methods reflect societal attitudes towards cruelty and the evolving quest for more humane practices. Contemporary debates over execution methods revolve around concerns of botched executions, the availability of drugs for lethal injection, and the psychological toll on executioners. This section delves into the historical trajectory of execution methods, providing insights into the societal and legal shifts that have influenced their adoption and subsequent abandonment. Additionally, it explores ongoing debates surrounding the humaneness and efficacy of contemporary execution practices.

The death penalty process does not conclude with the trial and sentencing. Instead, it extends through a complex system of appeals, designed to ensure the thorough examination of legal and factual issues. The overview of the appeals process for death row inmates involves multiple levels, including direct appeals and post-conviction proceedings. This section analyzes the various grounds for appeal, emphasizing the significance of legal representation and the potential for errors in the judicial process. Simultaneously, the role of clemency and the executive branch emerges as a critical component of the death penalty process. Governors or the President may grant clemency, reducing a death sentence to life imprisonment or halting an execution. This aspect introduces a humanitarian element, as executive officials navigate the delicate balance between justice and mercy. The section explores the complexities of the appeals process, shedding light on its crucial role in safeguarding against miscarriages of justice, while also considering the nuanced dynamics of clemency within the death penalty landscape.

Critiques and Reform Proposals

The application of the death penalty in the United States is not immune to systemic flaws and injustices. This section critically examines key issues within the system, including disparities in legal representation, racial and socio-economic biases in sentencing, and the impact of prosecutorial misconduct. The disproportionate application of the death penalty raises concerns about the fairness and equity of its imposition. Additionally, cases of wrongful convictions underscore the fallibility of the justice system. Innocent individuals sentenced to death, only later to be exonerated, bring into stark relief the potential for irreversible errors. The exploration of systemic flaws and instances of injustice sheds light on the moral, legal, and ethical challenges embedded in the death penalty, fostering a critical understanding of its limitations and potential for miscarriages of justice.

A comparative analysis of the death penalty in global contexts reveals a diverse array of approaches and attitudes toward capital punishment. This section explores international perspectives on the death penalty, contrasting the prevalence and methods of execution in different countries. A consideration of global trends in the abolition or retention of the death penalty provides valuable insights into the broader context of the debate. Moreover, examining international opinions on capital punishment highlights the evolving consensus regarding the human rights implications of state-sanctioned executions. The insights gained from a global perspective contribute to a nuanced understanding of the United States’ position within the international community concerning the death penalty.

Given the complexities and critiques surrounding the death penalty, this section delves into proposed reforms aimed at addressing inherent issues within the system. The examination of proposed reforms includes considerations of improved legal representation for defendants, standardized sentencing procedures, and efforts to mitigate biases in the application of the death penalty. Moreover, exploring alternatives to the death penalty becomes integral to envisioning a criminal justice system that balances the imperative of public safety with humane and just practices. Alternatives may include life imprisonment without parole, restorative justice models, or enhanced support for rehabilitation programs. Evaluating the feasibility of these proposals requires a careful consideration of societal attitudes, legal frameworks, and the potential impact on crime rates. Through a thorough analysis of reform proposals and alternatives, this section contributes to the ongoing discourse on how the death penalty can be refined or replaced to align with evolving societal values and the principles of justice.

In conclusion, this comprehensive exploration of the death penalty within the United States has illuminated the intricate web of moral, ethical, legal, and procedural considerations that define its presence in the criminal justice system. From the historical roots and significance of the death penalty to the multifaceted debate surrounding its moral, ethical, and constitutional dimensions, this article has delved into the complexities that shape and challenge its application. Systemic flaws, instances of injustice, and international perspectives have been critically examined, providing a nuanced understanding of the strengths and shortcomings of the death penalty within a global context. The examination of reform proposals and alternatives underscores the imperative of continual evaluation and improvement within the criminal justice system.

Looking ahead, the death penalty debate is poised at a critical juncture, with evolving societal values, legal precedents, and international trends influencing its trajectory. The potential for future developments in the death penalty discourse suggests the need for ongoing research and policy considerations. As public attitudes shift and legal landscapes evolve, policymakers must remain attuned to the nuances of this debate. Recommendations for future research include a focus on the impact of evolving Eighth Amendment interpretations, an in-depth analysis of international abolitionist movements, and continued scrutiny of the systemic issues plaguing the application of the death penalty. Moreover, policy considerations should prioritize the implementation of reforms aimed at mitigating biases, ensuring due process, and exploring alternatives that align with principles of justice and humanity. The significance of this debate extends beyond its immediate implications for individuals sentenced to death; it resonates with broader questions about the role of punishment in society, the protection of human rights, and the ongoing quest for a criminal justice system that is both just and humane. As we navigate the future of the death penalty, it is incumbent upon scholars, policymakers, and the public to engage in informed, thoughtful, and ethical discussions that contribute to the continual evolution of our criminal justice system.

Bibliography

• Amnesty International. (2022). Death penalty. Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/death-penalty/
• Banner, S. (2002). The death penalty: An American history. Harvard University Press.
• Baumgartner, F. R., & De Boef, S. L. (1999). The racial geography of the federal death penalty. University of Illinois Law Review, 1121-1162.
• Bedau, H. A. (1997). The death penalty in America: Current controversies. Oxford University Press.
• Bedau, H. A. (2007). The case against the death penalty. American Civil Liberties Union.
• Bedau, H. A., & Cassell, P. G. (Eds.). (2004). Debating the death penalty: Should America have capital punishment? Oxford University Press.
• Bessler, J. D. (2013). Cruel and unusual: The American death penalty and the founders’ Eighth Amendment. Northeastern University Press.
• Bohm, R. M. (2011). DeathQuest: An introduction to the theory and practice of capital punishment in the United States. Routledge.
• Death Penalty Information Center. (2022). Facts about the death penalty. Retrieved from https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/documents/FactSheet.pdf
• Hood, R. (2007). The death penalty: A worldwide perspective. Oxford University Press.
• Jackson, J. M. (2005). Introduction: Due process in the post-Furman era. Ohio State Law Journal, 66, 1039-1054.
• Johnson, R. (2010). Long-term changes in attitudes toward the death penalty: Are the American public’s views moving in a libertarian direction? In The Future of America’s Death Penalty (pp. 47-74). University of Missouri Press.
• LaFollette, H. (Ed.). (2007). Ethics in practice: An anthology. Wiley-Blackwell.
• Oshinsky, D. M. (1997). Worse than slavery: Parchman Farm and the ordeal of Jim Crow justice. Free Press.
• Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996). Deterrence and the death penalty: The views of the experts. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 87(1), 1-16.
• Radelet, M. L., & Borg, M. J. (2000). The changing nature of death penalty debates. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 43-61.
• Sarat, A. (Ed.). (2001). The killing state: Capital punishment in law, politics, and culture. Oxford University Press.
• Steiker, C. S., & Steiker, J. M. (2010). The American death penalty and the (in) visibility of race. Law and Contemporary Problems, 73(1), 145-169.
• Streib, V. L. (2007). Death penalty for juveniles. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 14(1), 81-113.
• Zimring, F. E., & Hawkins, G. (1986). Capital punishment and the American agenda. Cambridge University Press.

Arguments for and Against the Death Penalty

Click the buttons below to view arguments and testimony on each topic.

The death penalty deters future murders.

Society has always used punishment to discourage would-be criminals from unlawful action. Since society has the highest interest in preventing murder, it should use the strongest punishment available to deter murder, and that is the death penalty. If murderers are sentenced to death and executed, potential murderers will think twice before killing for fear of losing their own life.

For years, criminologists analyzed murder rates to see if they fluctuated with the likelihood of convicted murderers being executed, but the results were inconclusive. Then in 1973 Isaac Ehrlich employed a new kind of analysis which produced results showing that for every inmate who was executed, 7 lives were spared because others were deterred from committing murder. Similar results have been produced by disciples of Ehrlich in follow-up studies.

Moreover, even if some studies regarding deterrence are inconclusive, that is only because the death penalty is rarely used and takes years before an execution is actually carried out. Punishments which are swift and sure are the best deterrent. The fact that some states or countries which do not use the death penalty have lower murder rates than jurisdictions which do is not evidence of the failure of deterrence. States with high murder rates would have even higher rates if they did not use the death penalty.

Ernest van den Haag, a Professor of Jurisprudence at Fordham University who has studied the question of deterrence closely, wrote: “Even though statistical demonstrations are not conclusive, and perhaps cannot be, capital punishment is likely to deter more than other punishments because people fear death more than anything else. They fear most death deliberately inflicted by law and scheduled by the courts. Whatever people fear most is likely to deter most. Hence, the threat of the death penalty may deter some murderers who otherwise might not have been deterred. And surely the death penalty is the only penalty that could deter prisoners already serving a life sentence and tempted to kill a guard, or offenders about to be arrested and facing a life sentence. Perhaps they will not be deterred. But they would certainly not be deterred by anything else. We owe all the protection we can give to law enforcers exposed to special risks.”

Finally, the death penalty certainly “deters” the murderer who is executed. Strictly speaking, this is a form of incapacitation, similar to the way a robber put in prison is prevented from robbing on the streets. Vicious murderers must be killed to prevent them from murdering again, either in prison, or in society if they should get out. Both as a deterrent and as a form of permanent incapacitation, the death penalty helps to prevent future crime.

Those who believe that deterrence justifies the execution of certain offenders bear the burden of proving that the death penalty is a deterrent. The overwhelming conclusion from years of deterrence studies is that the death penalty is, at best, no more of a deterrent than a sentence of life in prison. The Ehrlich studies have been widely discredited. In fact, some criminologists, such as William Bowers of Northeastern University, maintain that the death penalty has the opposite effect: that is, society is brutalized by the use of the death penalty, and this increases the likelihood of more murder. Even most supporters of the death penalty now place little or no weight on deterrence as a serious justification for its continued use.

States in the United States that do not employ the death penalty generally have lower murder rates than states that do. The same is true when the U.S. is compared to countries similar to it. The U.S., with the death penalty, has a higher murder rate than the countries of Europe or Canada, which do not use the death penalty.

The death penalty is not a deterrent because most people who commit murders either do not expect to be caught or do not carefully weigh the differences between a possible execution and life in prison before they act. Frequently, murders are committed in moments of passion or anger, or by criminals who are substance abusers and acted impulsively. As someone who presided over many of Texas’s executions, former Texas Attorney General Jim Mattox has remarked, “It is my own experience that those executed in Texas were not deterred by the existence of the death penalty law. I think in most cases you’ll find that the murder was committed under severe drug and alcohol abuse.”

There is no conclusive proof that the death penalty acts as a better deterrent than the threat of life imprisonment. A 2012 report released by the prestigious National Research Council of the National Academies and based on a review of more than three decades of research, concluded that studies claiming a deterrent effect on murder rates from the death penalty are fundamentally flawed. A survey of the former and present presidents of the country’s top academic criminological societies found that 84% of these experts rejected the notion that research had demonstrated any deterrent effect from the death penalty .

Once in prison, those serving life sentences often settle into a routine and are less of a threat to commit violence than other prisoners. Moreover, most states now have a sentence of life without parole. Prisoners who are given this sentence will never be released. Thus, the safety of society can be assured without using the death penalty.

Ernest van den Haag Professor of Jurisprudence and Public Policy, Fordham University. Excerpts from ” The Ultimate Punishment: A Defense,” (Harvard Law Review Association, 1986)

“Execution of those who have committed heinous murders may deter only one murder per year. If it does, it seems quite warranted. It is also the only fitting retribution for murder I can think of.”

“Most abolitionists acknowledge that they would continue to favor abolition even if the death penalty were shown to deter more murders than alternatives could deter. Abolitionists appear to value the life of a convicted murderer or, at least, his non-execution, more highly than they value the lives of the innocent victims who might be spared by deterring prospective murderers.

Deterrence is not altogether decisive for me either. I would favor retention of the death penalty as retribution even if it were shown that the threat of execution could not deter prospective murderers not already deterred by the threat of imprisonment. Still, I believe the death penalty, because of its finality, is more feared than imprisonment, and deters some prospective murderers not deterred by the thought of imprisonment. Sparing the lives of even a few prospective victims by deterring their murderers is more important than preserving the lives of convicted murderers because of the possibility, or even the probability, that executing them would not deter others. Whereas the life of the victims who might be saved are valuable, that of the murderer has only negative value, because of his crime. Surely the criminal law is meant to protect the lives of potential victims in preference to those of actual murderers.”

“We threaten punishments in order to deter crime. We impose them not only to make the threats credible but also as retribution (justice) for the crimes that were not deterred. Threats and punishments are necessary to deter and deterrence is a sufficient practical justification for them. Retribution is an independent moral justification. Although penalties can be unwise, repulsive, or inappropriate, and those punished can be pitiable, in a sense the infliction of legal punishment on a guilty person cannot be unjust. By committing the crime, the criminal volunteered to assume the risk of receiving a legal punishment that he could have avoided by not committing the crime. The punishment he suffers is the punishment he voluntarily risked suffering and, therefore, it is no more unjust to him than any other event for which one knowingly volunteers to assume the risk. Thus, the death penalty cannot be unjust to the guilty criminal.”

Full text can be found at PBS.org .

Hugo Adam Bedau (deceased) Austin Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, Tufts University Excerpts from “The Case Against The Death Penalty” (Copyright 1997, American Civil Liberties Union)

“Persons who commit murder and other crimes of personal violence either may or may not premeditate their crimes.

When crime is planned, the criminal ordinarily concentrates on escaping detection, arrest, and conviction. The threat of even the severest punishment will not discourage those who expect to escape detection and arrest. It is impossible to imagine how the threat of any punishment could prevent a crime that is not premeditated….

Most capital crimes are committed in the heat of the moment. Most capital crimes are committed during moments of great emotional stress or under the influence of drugs or alcohol, when logical thinking has been suspended. In such cases, violence is inflicted by persons heedless of the consequences to themselves as well as to others….

If, however, severe punishment can deter crime, then long-term imprisonment is severe enough to deter any rational person from committing a violent crime.

The vast preponderance of the evidence shows that the death penalty is no more effective than imprisonment in deterring murder and that it may even be an incitement to criminal violence. Death-penalty states as a group do not have lower rates of criminal homicide than non-death-penalty states….

On-duty police officers do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide in abolitionist states than they do in death-penalty states. Between l973 and l984, for example, lethal assaults against police were not significantly more, or less, frequent in abolitionist states than in death-penalty states. There is ‘no support for the view that the death penalty provides a more effective deterrent to police homicides than alternative sanctions. Not for a single year was evidence found that police are safer in jurisdictions that provide for capital punishment.’ (Bailey and Peterson, Criminology (1987))

Prisoners and prison personnel do not suffer a higher rate of criminal assault and homicide from life-term prisoners in abolition states than they do in death-penalty states. Between 1992 and 1995, 176 inmates were murdered by other prisoners; the vast majority (84%) were killed in death penalty jurisdictions. During the same period about 2% of all assaults on prison staff were committed by inmates in abolition jurisdictions. Evidently, the threat of the death penalty ‘does not even exert an incremental deterrent effect over the threat of a lesser punishment in the abolitionist states.’ (Wolfson, in Bedau, ed., The Death Penalty in America, 3rd ed. (1982))

Actual experience thus establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the death penalty does not deter murder. No comparable body of evidence contradicts that conclusion.”

Click here for the full text from the ACLU website.

Retribution

A just society requires the taking of a life for a life.

When someone takes a life, the balance of justice is disturbed. Unless that balance is restored, society succumbs to a rule of violence. Only the taking of the murderer’s life restores the balance and allows society to show convincingly that murder is an intolerable crime which will be punished in kind.

Retribution has its basis in religious values, which have historically maintained that it is proper to take an “eye for an eye” and a life for a life.

Although the victim and the victim’s family cannot be restored to the status which preceded the murder, at least an execution brings closure to the murderer’s crime (and closure to the ordeal for the victim’s family) and ensures that the murderer will create no more victims.

For the most cruel and heinous crimes, the ones for which the death penalty is applied, offenders deserve the worst punishment under our system of law, and that is the death penalty. Any lesser punishment would undermine the value society places on protecting lives.

Robert Macy, District Attorney of Oklahoma City, described his concept of the need for retribution in one case: “In 1991, a young mother was rendered helpless and made to watch as her baby was executed. The mother was then mutilated and killed. The killer should not lie in some prison with three meals a day, clean sheets, cable TV, family visits and endless appeals. For justice to prevail, some killers just need to die.”

Retribution is another word for revenge. Although our first instinct may be to inflict immediate pain on someone who wrongs us, the standards of a mature society demand a more measured response.

The emotional impulse for revenge is not a sufficient justification for invoking a system of capital punishment, with all its accompanying problems and risks. Our laws and criminal justice system should lead us to higher principles that demonstrate a complete respect for life, even the life of a murderer. Encouraging our basest motives of revenge, which ends in another killing, extends the chain of violence. Allowing executions sanctions killing as a form of ‘pay-back.’

Many victims’ families denounce the use of the death penalty. Using an execution to try to right the wrong of their loss is an affront to them and only causes more pain. For example, Bud Welch’s daughter, Julie, was killed in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. Although his first reaction was to wish that those who committed this terrible crime be killed, he ultimately realized that such killing “is simply vengeance; and it was vengeance that killed Julie…. Vengeance is a strong and natural emotion. But it has no place in our justice system.”

The notion of an eye for an eye, or a life for a life, is a simplistic one which our society has never endorsed. We do not allow torturing the torturer, or raping the rapist. Taking the life of a murderer is a similarly disproportionate punishment, especially in light of the fact that the U.S. executes only a small percentage of those convicted of murder, and these defendants are typically not the worst offenders but merely the ones with the fewest resources to defend themselves.

Louis P. Pojman Author and Professor of Philosophy, U.S. Military Academy. Excerpt from “The Death Penalty: For and Against,” (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 1998)

“[Opponents of the capital punishment often put forth the following argument:] Perhaps the murderer deserves to die, but what authority does the state have to execute him or her? Both the Old and New Testament says, “’Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord” (Prov. 25:21 and Romans 12:19). You need special authority to justify taking the life of a human being.

The objector fails to note that the New Testament passage continues with a support of the right of the state to execute criminals in the name of God: “Let every person be subjected to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment…. If you do wrong, be afraid, for [the authority] does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13: 1-4). So, according to the Bible, the authority to punish, which presumably includes the death penalty, comes from God.

But we need not appeal to a religious justification for capital punishment. We can site the state’s role in dispensing justice. Just as the state has the authority (and duty) to act justly in allocating scarce resources, in meeting minimal needs of its (deserving) citizens, in defending its citizens from violence and crime, and in not waging unjust wars; so too does it have the authority, flowing from its mission to promote justice and the good of its people, to punish the criminal. If the criminal, as one who has forfeited a right to life, deserves to be executed, especially if it will likely deter would-be murderers, the state has a duty to execute those convicted of first-degree murder.”

National Council of Synagogues and the Bishops’ Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops Excerpts from “To End the Death Penalty: A Report of the National Jewish/Catholic Consultation” (December, 1999)

“Some would argue that the death penalty is needed as a means of retributive justice, to balance out the crime with the punishment. This reflects a natural concern of society, and especially of victims and their families. Yet we believe that we are called to seek a higher road even while punishing the guilty, for example through long and in some cases life-long incarceration, so that the healing of all can ultimately take place.

Some would argue that the death penalty will teach society at large the seriousness of crime. Yet we say that teaching people to respond to violence with violence will, again, only breed more violence.

The strongest argument of all [in favor of the death penalty] is the deep pain and grief of the families of victims, and their quite natural desire to see punishment meted out to those who have plunged them into such agony. Yet it is the clear teaching of our traditions that this pain and suffering cannot be healed simply through the retribution of capital punishment or by vengeance. It is a difficult and long process of healing which comes about through personal growth and God’s grace. We agree that much more must be done by the religious community and by society at large to solace and care for the grieving families of the victims of violent crime.

Recent statements of the Reform and Conservative movements in Judaism, and of the U.S. Catholic Conference sum up well the increasingly strong convictions shared by Jews and Catholics…:

‘Respect for all human life and opposition to the violence in our society are at the root of our long-standing opposition (as bishops) to the death penalty. We see the death penalty as perpetuating a cycle of violence and promoting a sense of vengeance in our culture. As we said in Confronting the Culture of Violence: ‘We cannot teach that killing is wrong by killing.’ We oppose capital punishment not just for what it does to those guilty of horrible crimes, but for what it does to all of us as a society. Increasing reliance on the death penalty diminishes all of us and is a sign of growing disrespect for human life. We cannot overcome crime by simply executing criminals, nor can we restore the lives of the innocent by ending the lives of those convicted of their murders. The death penalty offers the tragic illusion that we can defend life by taking life.’1

We affirm that we came to these conclusions because of our shared understanding of the sanctity of human life. We have committed ourselves to work together, and each within our own communities, toward ending the death penalty.” Endnote 1. Statement of the Administrative Committee of the United States Catholic Conference, March 24, 1999.

The risk of executing the innocent precludes the use of the death penalty.

The death penalty alone imposes an irrevocable sentence. Once an inmate is executed, nothing can be done to make amends if a mistake has been made. There is considerable evidence that many mistakes have been made in sentencing people to death. Since 1973, over 180 people have been released from death row after evidence of their innocence emerged. During the same period of time, over 1,500 people have been executed. Thus, for every 8.3 people executed, we have found one person on death row who never should have been convicted. These statistics represent an intolerable risk of executing the innocent. If an automobile manufacturer operated with similar failure rates, it would be run out of business.

Our capital punishment system is unreliable. A study by Columbia University Law School found that two thirds of all capital trials contained serious errors. When the cases were retried, over 80% of the defendants were not sentenced to death and 7% were completely acquitted.

Many of the releases of innocent defendants from death row came about as a result of factors outside of the justice system. Recently, journalism students in Illinois were assigned to investigate the case of a man who was scheduled to be executed, after the system of appeals had rejected his legal claims. The students discovered that one witness had lied at the original trial, and they were able to find another man, who confessed to the crime on videotape and was later convicted of the murder. The innocent man who was released was very fortunate, but he was spared because of the informal efforts of concerned citizens, not because of the justice system.

In other cases, DNA testing has exonerated death row inmates. Here, too, the justice system had concluded that these defendants were guilty and deserving of the death penalty. DNA testing became available only in the early 1990s, due to advancements in science. If this testing had not been discovered until ten years later, many of these inmates would have been executed. And if DNA testing had been applied to earlier cases where inmates were executed in the 1970s and 80s, the odds are high that it would have proven that some of them were innocent as well.

Society takes many risks in which innocent lives can be lost. We build bridges, knowing that statistically some workers will be killed during construction; we take great precautions to reduce the number of unintended fatalities. But wrongful executions are a preventable risk. By substituting a sentence of life without parole, we meet society’s needs of punishment and protection without running the risk of an erroneous and irrevocable punishment.

There is no proof that any innocent person has actually been executed since increased safeguards and appeals were added to our death penalty system in the 1970s. Even if such executions have occurred, they are very rare. Imprisoning innocent people is also wrong, but we cannot empty the prisons because of that minimal risk. If improvements are needed in the system of representation, or in the use of scientific evidence such as DNA testing, then those reforms should be instituted. However, the need for reform is not a reason to abolish the death penalty.

Besides, many of the claims of innocence by those who have been released from death row are actually based on legal technicalities. Just because someone’s conviction is overturned years later and the prosecutor decides not to retry him, does not mean he is actually innocent.

If it can be shown that someone is innocent, surely a governor would grant clemency and spare the person. Hypothetical claims of innocence are usually just delaying tactics to put off the execution as long as possible. Given our thorough system of appeals through numerous state and federal courts, the execution of an innocent individual today is almost impossible. Even the theoretical execution of an innocent person can be justified because the death penalty saves lives by deterring other killings.

Gerald Kogan, Former Florida Supreme Court Chief Justice Excerpts from a speech given in Orlando, Florida, October 23, 1999 “[T]here is no question in my mind, and I can tell you this having seen the dynamics of our criminal justice system over the many years that I have been associated with it, [as] prosecutor, defense attorney, trial judge and Supreme Court Justice, that convinces me that we certainly have, in the past, executed those people who either didn’t fit the criteria for execution in the State of Florida or who, in fact, were, factually, not guilty of the crime for which they have been executed.

“And you can make these statements when you understand the dynamics of the criminal justice system, when you understand how the State makes deals with more culpable defendants in a capital case, offers them light sentences in exchange for their testimony against another participant or, in some cases, in fact, gives them immunity from prosecution so that they can secure their testimony; the use of jailhouse confessions, like people who say, ‘I was in the cell with so-and-so and they confessed to me,’ or using those particular confessions, the validity of which there has been great doubt. And yet, you see the uneven application of the death penalty where, in many instances, those that are the most culpable escape death and those that are the least culpable are victims of the death penalty. These things begin to weigh very heavily upon you. And under our system, this is the system we have. And that is, we are human beings administering an imperfect system.”

“And how about those people who are still sitting on death row today, who may be factually innocent but cannot prove their particular case very simply because there is no DNA evidence in their case that can be used to exonerate them? Of course, in most cases, you’re not going to have that kind of DNA evidence, so there is no way and there is no hope for them to be saved from what may be one of the biggest mistakes that our society can make.”

The entire speech by Justice Kogan is available here.

Paul G. Cassell Associate Professor of Law, University of Utah, College of Law, and former law clerk to Chief Justice Warren E. Burger. Statement before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives, Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights Concerning Claims of Innocence in Capital Cases (July 23, 1993)

“Given the fallibility of human judgments, the possibility exists that the use of capital punishment may result in the execution of an innocent person. The Senate Judiciary Committee has previously found this risk to be ‘minimal,’ a view shared by numerous scholars. As Justice Powell has noted commenting on the numerous state capital cases that have come before the Supreme Court, the ‘unprecedented safeguards’ already inherent in capital sentencing statutes ‘ensure a degree of care in the imposition of the sentence of death that can only be described as unique.’”

“Our present system of capital punishment limits the ultimate penalty to certain specifically-defined crimes and even then, permit the penalty of death only when the jury finds that the aggravating circumstances in the case outweigh all mitigating circumstances. The system further provides judicial review of capital cases. Finally, before capital sentences are carried out, the governor or other executive official will review the sentence to insure that it is a just one, a determination that undoubtedly considers the evidence of the condemned defendant’s guilt. Once all of those decisionmakers have agreed that a death sentence is appropriate, innocent lives would be lost from failure to impose the sentence.”

“Capital sentences, when carried out, save innocent lives by permanently incapacitating murderers. Some persons who commit capital homicide will slay other innocent persons if given the opportunity to do so. The death penalty is the most effective means of preventing such killers from repeating their crimes. The next most serious penalty, life imprisonment without possibility of parole, prevents murderers from committing some crimes but does not prevent them from murdering in prison.”

“The mistaken release of guilty murderers should be of far greater concern than the speculative and heretofore nonexistent risk of the mistaken execution of an innocent person.”

Full text can be found here.

Arbitrariness & Discrimination

The death penalty is applied unfairly and should not be used.

In practice, the death penalty does not single out the worst offenders. Rather, it selects an arbitrary group based on such irrational factors as the quality of the defense counsel, the county in which the crime was committed, or the race of the defendant or victim.

Almost all defendants facing the death penalty cannot afford their own attorney. Hence, they are dependent on the quality of the lawyers assigned by the state, many of whom lack experience in capital cases or are so underpaid that they fail to investigate the case properly. A poorly represented defendant is much more likely to be convicted and given a death sentence.

With respect to race, studies have repeatedly shown that a death sentence is far more likely where a white person is murdered than where a Black person is murdered. The death penalty is racially divisive because it appears to count white lives as more valuable than Black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 296 Black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 31 white defendants have been executed for the murder of a Black victim. Such racial disparities have existed over the history of the death penalty and appear to be largely intractable.

It is arbitrary when someone in one county or state receives the death penalty, but someone who commits a comparable crime in another county or state is given a life sentence. Prosecutors have enormous discretion about when to seek the death penalty and when to settle for a plea bargain. Often those who can only afford a minimal defense are selected for the death penalty. Until race and other arbitrary factors, like economics and geography, can be eliminated as a determinant of who lives and who dies, the death penalty must not be used.

Discretion has always been an essential part of our system of justice. No one expects the prosecutor to pursue every possible offense or punishment, nor do we expect the same sentence to be imposed just because two crimes appear similar. Each crime is unique, both because the circumstances of each victim are different and because each defendant is different. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a mandatory death penalty which applied to everyone convicted of first degree murder would be unconstitutional. Hence, we must give prosecutors and juries some discretion.

In fact, more white people are executed in this country than black people. And even if blacks are disproportionately represented on death row, proportionately blacks commit more murders than whites. Moreover, the Supreme Court has rejected the use of statistical studies which claim racial bias as the sole reason for overturning a death sentence.

Even if the death penalty punishes some while sparing others, it does not follow that everyone should be spared. The guilty should still be punished appropriately, even if some do escape proper punishment unfairly. The death penalty should apply to killers of black people as well as to killers of whites. High paid, skillful lawyers should not be able to get some defendants off on technicalities. The existence of some systemic problems is no reason to abandon the whole death penalty system.

Reverend Jesse L. Jackson, Sr. President and Chief Executive Officer, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, Inc. Excerpt from “Legal Lynching: Racism, Injustice & the Death Penalty,” (Marlowe & Company, 1996)

“Who receives the death penalty has less to do with the violence of the crime than with the color of the criminal’s skin, or more often, the color of the victim’s skin. Murder — always tragic — seems to be a more heinous and despicable crime in some states than in others. Women who kill and who are killed are judged by different standards than are men who are murderers and victims.

The death penalty is essentially an arbitrary punishment. There are no objective rules or guidelines for when a prosecutor should seek the death penalty, when a jury should recommend it, and when a judge should give it. This lack of objective, measurable standards ensures that the application of the death penalty will be discriminatory against racial, gender, and ethnic groups.

The majority of Americans who support the death penalty believe, or wish to believe, that legitimate factors such as the violence and cruelty with which the crime was committed, a defendant’s culpability or history of violence, and the number of victims involved determine who is sentenced to life in prison and who receives the ultimate punishment. The numbers, however, tell a different story. They confirm the terrible truth that bias and discrimination warp our nation’s judicial system at the very time it matters most — in matters of life and death. The factors that determine who will live and who will die — race, sex, and geography — are the very same ones that blind justice was meant to ignore. This prejudicial distribution should be a moral outrage to every American.”

Justice Lewis Powell United States Supreme Court Justice excerpts from McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987) (footnotes and citations omitted)

(Mr. McCleskey, a black man, was convicted and sentenced to death in 1978 for killing a white police officer while robbing a store. Mr. McCleskey appealed his conviction and death sentence, claiming racial discrimination in the application of Georgia’s death penalty. He presented statistical analysis showing a pattern of sentencing disparities based primarily on the race of the victim. The analysis indicated that black defendants who killed white victims had the greatest likelihood of receiving the death penalty. Writing the majority opinion for the Supreme Court, Justice Powell held that statistical studies on race by themselves were an insufficient basis for overturning the death penalty.)

“[T]he claim that [t]his sentence rests on the irrelevant factor of race easily could be extended to apply to claims based on unexplained discrepancies that correlate to membership in other minority groups, and even to gender. Similarly, since [this] claim relates to the race of his victim, other claims could apply with equally logical force to statistical disparities that correlate with the race or sex of other actors in the criminal justice system, such as defense attorneys or judges. Also, there is no logical reason that such a claim need be limited to racial or sexual bias. If arbitrary and capricious punishment is the touchstone under the Eighth Amendment, such a claim could — at least in theory — be based upon any arbitrary variable, such as the defendant’s facial characteristics, or the physical attractiveness of the defendant or the victim, that some statistical study indicates may be influential in jury decision making. As these examples illustrate, there is no limiting principle to the type of challenge brought by McCleskey. The Constitution does not require that a State eliminate any demonstrable disparity that correlates with a potentially irrelevant factor in order to operate a criminal justice system that includes capital punishment. As we have stated specifically in the context of capital punishment, the Constitution does not ‘plac[e] totally unrealistic conditions on its use.’ (Gregg v. Georgia)”

The entire decision can be found here.

5 Death Penalty Essays Everyone Should Know

Capital punishment is an ancient practice. It’s one that human rights defenders strongly oppose and consider as inhumane and cruel. In 2019, Amnesty International reported the lowest number of executions in about a decade. Most executions occurred in China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Egypt . The United States is the only developed western country still using capital punishment. What does this say about the US? Here are five essays about the death penalty everyone should read:

“When We Kill”

By: Nicholas Kristof | From: The New York Times 2019

In this excellent essay, Pulitizer-winner Nicholas Kristof explains how he first became interested in the death penalty. He failed to write about a man on death row in Texas. The man, Cameron Todd Willingham, was executed in 2004. Later evidence showed that the crime he supposedly committed – lighting his house on fire and killing his three kids – was more likely an accident. In “When We Kill,” Kristof puts preconceived notions about the death penalty under the microscope. These include opinions such as only guilty people are executed, that those guilty people “deserve” to die, and the death penalty deters crime and saves money. Based on his investigations, Kristof concludes that they are all wrong.

Nicholas Kristof has been a Times columnist since 2001. He’s the winner of two Pulitizer Prices for his coverage of China and the Darfur genocide.

“An Inhumane Way of Death”

By: Willie Jasper Darden, Jr.

Willie Jasper Darden, Jr. was on death row for 14 years. In his essay, he opens with the line, “Ironically, there is probably more hope on death row than would be found in most other places.” He states that everyone is capable of murder, questioning if people who support capital punishment are just as guilty as the people they execute. Darden goes on to say that if every murderer was executed, there would be 20,000 killed per day. Instead, a person is put on death row for something like flawed wording in an appeal. Darden feels like he was picked at random, like someone who gets a terminal illness. This essay is important to read as it gives readers a deeper, more personal insight into death row.

Willie Jasper Darden, Jr. was sentenced to death in 1974 for murder. During his time on death row, he advocated for his innocence and pointed out problems with his trial, such as the jury pool that excluded black people. Despite worldwide support for Darden from public figures like the Pope, Darden was executed in 1988.

“We Need To Talk About An Injustice”

By: Bryan Stevenson | From: TED 2012

This piece is a transcript of Bryan Stevenson’s 2012 TED talk, but we feel it’s important to include because of Stevenson’s contributions to criminal justice. In the talk, Stevenson discusses the death penalty at several points. He points out that for years, we’ve been taught to ask the question, “Do people deserve to die for their crimes?” Stevenson brings up another question we should ask: “Do we deserve to kill?” He also describes the American death penalty system as defined by “error.” Somehow, society has been able to disconnect itself from this problem even as minorities are disproportionately executed in a country with a history of slavery.

Bryan Stevenson is a lawyer, founder of the Equal Justice Initiative, and author. He’s argued in courts, including the Supreme Court, on behalf of the poor, minorities, and children. A film based on his book Just Mercy was released in 2019 starring Michael B. Jordan and Jamie Foxx.

“I Know What It’s Like To Carry Out Executions”

By: S. Frank Thompson | From: The Atlantic 2019

In the death penalty debate, we often hear from the family of the victims and sometimes from those on death row. What about those responsible for facilitating an execution? In this opinion piece, a former superintendent from the Oregon State Penitentiary outlines his background. He carried out the only two executions in Oregon in the past 55 years, describing it as having a “profound and traumatic effect” on him. In his decades working as a correctional officer, he concluded that the death penalty is not working . The United States should not enact federal capital punishment.

Frank Thompson served as the superintendent of OSP from 1994-1998. Before that, he served in the military and law enforcement. When he first started at OSP, he supported the death penalty. He changed his mind when he observed the protocols firsthand and then had to conduct an execution.

“There Is No Such Thing As Closure on Death Row”

By: Paul Brown | From: The Marshall Project 2019

This essay is from Paul Brown, a death row inmate in Raleigh, North Carolina. He recalls the moment of his sentencing in a cold courtroom in August. The prosecutor used the term “closure” when justifying a death sentence. Who is this closure for? Brown theorizes that the prosecutors are getting closure as they end another case, but even then, the cases are just a way to further their careers. Is it for victims’ families? Brown is doubtful, as the death sentence is pursued even when the families don’t support it. There is no closure for Brown or his family as they wait for his execution. Vivid and deeply-personal, this essay is a must-read for anyone who wonders what it’s like inside the mind of a death row inmate.

Paul Brown has been on death row since 2000 for a double murder. He is a contributing writer to Prison Writers and shares essays on topics such as his childhood, his life as a prisoner, and more.

You may also like

16 Inspiring Civil Rights Leaders You Should Know

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Housing Rights

15 Examples of Gender Inequality in Everyday Life

11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger 

15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai

12 Ways Poverty Affects Society

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

Social Change 101: Meaning, Examples, Learning Opportunities

Rosa Parks: Biography, Quotes, Impact

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Finding Sources for Death Penalty Research

Barry Winiker/photolibrary/Getty Images

• Writing Research Papers
• Writing Essays
• English Grammar
• M.Ed., Education Administration, University of Georgia
• B.A., History, Armstrong State University

One of the most popular topics for an argument essay is the death penalty . When researching a topic for an argumentative essay , accuracy is important, which means the quality of your sources is important.

If you're writing a paper about the death penalty, you can start with this list of sources, which provide arguments for all sides of the topic.

Amnesty International Site

Amnesty International views the death penalty as "the ultimate, irreversible denial of human rights." This website provides a gold mine of statistics and the latest breaking news on the subject.

Mental Illness on Death Row

Death Penalty Focus is an organization that aims to bring about the abolition of capital punishment and is a great resource for information. You will find evidence that many of the people executed over the past decades are affected by a form of mental illness or disability.

Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty

This extensive article provides an overview of arguments for and against the death penalty and offers a history of notable events that have shaped the discourse for activists and proponents.

Pro-Death Penalty Links

This page comes from ProDeathPenalty and contains a state-by-state guide to capital punishment resources. You'll also find a list of papers written by students on topics related to capital punishment. 

• 100 Persuasive Speech Topics for Students
• Capital Punishment: Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty
• Pros & Cons of the Death Penalty
• 5 Arguments in Favor of the Death Penalty
• Ethos, Logos, Pathos for Persuasion
• History of Capital Punishment in Canada
• Preparing an Argument Essay: Exploring Both Sides of an Issue
• Recent Legal History of the Death Penalty in America
• Tips on How to Write an Argumentative Essay
• The Death Penalty in the United States
• New Challenges to the Death Penalty
• 50 Argumentative Essay Topics
• Furman v. Georgia: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact
• "The Penalty of Death" by H.L. Mencken
• The Best Interactive Debate Websites for Students and Teachers
• Coker v. Georgia: Supreme Court Case, Arguments, Impact

Rethinking Justice: why the Death Penalty should be Abolished

This essay about the reasons to abolish the death penalty discusses the ethical, practical, and financial implications of capital punishment. It argues that the irreversible nature of the death penalty, coupled with the risk of executing innocent people, raises serious moral concerns. The essay also points out the lack of evidence supporting the death penalty as a crime deterrent and highlights the biases in its application, which disproportionately affect minorities and those of lower socio-economic status. Additionally, it notes the higher costs of death penalty cases compared to life imprisonment. Finally, the essay emphasizes a shift in global norms, with a growing number of countries abolishing the death penalty in favor of more humane approaches to justice. This reflects a broader move toward upholding human rights and fostering a fair and equitable justice system.

How it works

The death penalty has always been a hot-button issue, sparking debates that cut deep into our moral and ethical fibers. But as society evolves, so too should our justice system. There are several powerful, human-centered reasons why the death penalty feels like an outdated relic in today’s legal landscape.

Let’s start with the moral quandary it presents. Taking a life, under any circumstance, raises a multitude of ethical questions. One of the most troubling aspects of capital punishment is the chilling possibility of executing an innocent person.

Since 1973, over 185 individuals on death row in the United States were exonerated. This isn’t just a statistic; it’s a glaring reminder of how irreversible and final the death penalty is. Mistakes in other areas of justice can often be rectified, but there is no undoing an execution.

Then there’s the argument about whether the death penalty actually deters crime. The evidence here is shaky at best. Numerous studies have shown that harsh penalties like execution do not effectively prevent crime more than life imprisonment. If deterrence is the goal, the death penalty misses the mark, which begs the question: why keep it?

Bias in the death penalty’s application adds another layer of concern. The system shows troubling disparities, particularly with racial biases and socioeconomic status influencing outcomes. Defendants accused of killing white victims are disproportionately sentenced to death, which speaks volumes about the prejudices skulking through the corridors of our courts. This isn’t just unfair; it’s a fundamentally flawed system that perpetuates inequality.

Financially, the death penalty doesn’t make much sense either. It’s far more expensive to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. This is due to the lengthy and complex legal process required in capital cases, designed to minimize errors. Every dollar spent here is a dollar that could be used more effectively elsewhere within the criminal justice system.

Globally, the trend is also moving away from capital punishment, with over two-thirds of countries having abolished it in law or in practice. This global shift isn’t just about being progressive; it’s about adhering to international human rights standards that recognize the death penalty as a violation of the right to life.

In the end, abolishing the death penalty isn’t just about eliminating a punishment option. It’s about building a justice system that reflects our values of fairness, redemption, and humanity. It’s about acknowledging that the state shouldn’t sanction the irreversible act of taking a life. Moving away from the death penalty would signal a commitment to these values and contribute to a more equitable society.

So, as we ponder the path forward, let’s consider a justice system that upholds life and offers chances for redemption. That’s the kind of progress that aligns with our collective growth as a compassionate society.

Cite this page

Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished. (2024, May 12). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/

"Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished." PapersOwl.com , 12 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/ [Accessed: 15 May. 2024]

"Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished." PapersOwl.com, May 12, 2024. Accessed May 15, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/

"Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished," PapersOwl.com , 12-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/. [Accessed: 15-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Rethinking Justice: Why the Death Penalty Should Be Abolished . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/rethinking-justice-why-the-death-penalty-should-be-abolished/ [Accessed: 15-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty

Introduction, a case for the death penalty, works cited.

The survival of any civilization hinges on the establishment of laws and codes of conduct and the subsequent obeying of the same by the society’s members. Due to the fact that not all members of the society are going to follow the law on their own accord, forms of punishment for wrongs done may be used both for retribution and deterrence purposes. In the United States, capital punishment has been used as the most harsh form of retribution for the society’s most vicious offences.

However, not all people believe that the death sentence is justifiable notwithstanding the brutality of the crime that a person may have perpetrated. This paper argues that the death penalty is not only necessary but also the most efficient means for deterring future offenders. The paper will reinforce this proposition by delving into the merits of the death penalty.

An article on “Public Support for the Death Penalty” indicates that the support for capital punishment has risen over the years with 77% of Americans supporting capital punishment. While this statistics do not in any way offer justification for the death penalty, they do show that many Americans are of the opinion that the death penalty is a just retribution for the evils perpetrated by the accused.

In most of the states, capital punishment is only issued when the accused party is convicted of crimes such as first degree murder or treason. Capital punishment therefore affords the federal state with a means of dispensing justice. The public and the parties affected by the accused actions can therefore find some solace in the fact justice has been served.

The most desirable function of punishments should be to act as a deterrence to would be criminals. In an ideal environment, punishments should never have to be executed but their mere presence should cause all to abide to the rules and regulations in place therefore peacefully coexist. Capital punishment presents the highest level of deterrence since death is indeed the ultimate punishment. This is especially so in cases where the criminal feels immune to the other forms of punishment such as restriction on freedom of movement or even hard labor.

“Televised Executions” indicates that executions, in this case televised ones, serviced an important social purpose of deterrence as the public is afforded a glimpse as to the fate that awaits those who engage in despicable acts thus making would be future offenders think twice about the results of their acts.

According to “Update: Death Penalty”, one of the most unique attributes of capital punishment is that it irrevocably protects the society from repeat offenders. This is an especially significant point since convicts have been known to reenter society either as a result of parole or more dramatic happenings such as jail breaks.

The death penalty ensures that some of the society’s most vicious criminals; murderers, arsons, etc. are rid off the society for good. The society can therefore continue without fear of there undesirable elements every coming back and causing chaos.

From an economic point on view, the cost of maintaining prisoners in the correctional facilities is fairly expensive. Opponents of the death penalty propose that in its place, life imprisonment without parole should be implemented. What this boils down to is that the prisoner will have to be maintained in the penitentiary for his entire life. This is a very costly affair and the brunt of it is bore by the taxpayer.

Capital punishment as executed by methods such as the lethal injection is not only radically cheaper but it also spares the state of the resources it would have utilized to ensure that the prisoner is maintained for a lifetime. While most of the opponents of the death penalty point to its execution being inhumane and hence torturous to the victim, a report on “lethal injection” indicates that not only is the lethal injection method (which is greatly favored by most states) almost entirely painless but the method presents a great advancement from past methods such as hanging and the use of the gas chamber. As such, capital punishment provides a cheap and human and relatively human method of dealing with criminals.

This paper has argued that the death penalty possess numerous advantages that make it a necessary tool in the justice system. It has been articulated that through the death penalty, retribution is served and the society is purged off its most vicious criminals. In addition to this, capital punishment presents the strongest form of deterrence to would be offenders as an example is made of those who have already been convicted.

While some people do contend that the death penalty should never be imposed on anyone, regardless of their crimes, it can be authoritatively stated from the above discussions that capital punishment does serve a significant role in the society and as such, it’s use should be perpetuated albeit with a lot of caution so as to avoid subjecting innocent parties to this ultimate form of punishment.

“Lethal Injection.” Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 19 Oct. 2007. Web.

“Public Support for the Death Penalty Remains Strong (sidebar).” Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 29 Dec. 1995. Web.

“Televised Executions.” Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 11 May 2001. Web.

“Update: Death Penalty.” Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 1 Apr. 2004. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, May 9). Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/

"Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." IvyPanda , 9 May 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty'. 9 May.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." May 9, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.

1. IvyPanda . "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." May 9, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." May 9, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.

• Aspects of the Writing an Argumentative Essay
• Death Penalty: James a Inciardi Perspective
• An Argumentative Essay: How to Write
• Democratic and Undemocratic Elements of the Constitution
• State and local public policies
• How Did It Feel Being a Governor?
• The Conflict Between Armenia and Azerbaijan
• The Articles of Confederation. Nullification and Secession

Thesis Statement For Death Penalty

TITLE: Rejecting Death Penalty Thesis Statement: Death Penalty should not be implemented here in the Philippines, because this is not a proper way to punish having death penalty for any person made crime. Problem: Should we legalize Death Penalty here in the Philippines. I. Introduction: Description of Death Penalty II. Body Main Idea (1): Crimes Punishable Death Penalty 1.1 Murder 1.2 Rape Main Idea (2): President view death Penalty 2.1 Improve economy 2.2 No person will kill Main Idea (3): Rejecting Death Penalty 3.1 Jails will be use 3.2 Shall not Kill Introduction: Death penalty if there’s an efficient administration of justice in the country. The re-imposition of the death penalty in the country had been the main argument …show more content…

This is not a proper way to punish any person. The proper way to punish any person is to put inside the jail in no particular way to take them away. The death penalty is one of the most hotly debated subjects in our society. Controversy surroundings the issue is emotional with proponents for and against the death penalty arguing their position by using appeals to emotion appeals to pity and use of expert opinion. Death penalty has been controversial issue, for many years. It was established centuries ago and has been accepted by our society. It was put into place to punish those who had committed an offences against laws of the institution was in the place at the time. Recommendation: The death penalty. Some people for me feel that it is a good punishment for some people deserve it an some people feel that the death penalty is taking away somebody’s life which is God’s job. Death penalty is justified death penalty is also known as a capital punishment or death execution, it is a way to give a person death for his/her crime . However, there are more and more people who think death penalty is justified have some points. Death penalty has been as high as eighty

Capital Punishment Essay

Death penalty is not an acceptable way of punish a murder in this century, it is a cruel and ineffective way of punishing. It should never be considered part of the criminal justice system because it goes against human moral.

The Death Penalty Is Cruel

The death penalty is a cruel, ineffective and a morally confusing method used to punish a criminal. For many years the death sentence has been a controversial topic. Many agree that it is wrong and unconstitutional, however, others disagree and say that it is well deserved and that one who kills should, themselves, be killed as well. I stand firm in my belief, opposing the death sentence, for many reasons and research and studies done also support my idea.

Thesis Statement For Capital Punishment Essay

The death penalty, the execution of culprits by the state for grievous killings, is the main adequate type of discipline for such conduct. In spite of the fact of those whom oppose of the death penalty accept this to be unethical and non-profitable, supporters of the death penalty have ended up being this to be a financially savvy, and morally rectify obstruction of future killings.

Essay on Death Penalty

People opposed to the death penalty also point to the fact that over half of the countries in the world have abolished the death penalty, including all other major industrialized, democratic nations. In the five countries with the highest homicide rates that do not impose the death penalty, the murder rate is 21.6 murders per 100,000 people. In the five countries with the highest homicide rates that do impose the death penalty, the murder rate is 41.6 murders per 100,000 people ("Deterrence"). Furthermore, the United States has the highest crime and murder rates of any of the other major democratic nations, all of which have abandoned the death penalty. In 1965, Great Britain called for a five-year suspension on executions following a recent decline in the imposition of the death penalty and growing anti-death penalty sentiments in the country. In 1969, the government abolished the death penalty altogether because there had been no surge in homicides or crime (Flanders 45). Death penalty opponents feel that these statistics lend credibility to the argument that the death penalty does not cause a decrease in homicides and in some instances may even lead to an increase in murders. Another valid point that death penalty opponents use is that the judicial system is not flawless, and that in the United

Capital Punishment : The Death Penalty

Capital punishment, otherwise known as the death penalty, is a controversial subject which has been argued for decades due to the ethical decisions involved. People believe the death penalty is the right thing to do and that it is the perfect example of ‘justice’ while others believe that it is immoral and overly expensive. The death penalty is not a logical sentence for criminals, it doesn’t give them the right type of justice and it is immoral.

Capital Punishment on Trial Essay

• 2 Works Cited

(Lamar 34). Many in fovor of the death penalty feel that if a sentence of death is handed

Persuasive Essay On Abolish The Death Penalty

The death penalty is one of the greatest controversial punishments in the world. There are numerous people who agree with this practice and plenty more who do not agree and believe we should be done with it all together. Some important credential people who give compelling arguments for abolishing the death penalty is Diann Rust-Tierney and Barry Scheck, whereas; the people against abolishing it is Robert Blecker and Kent Scheidegger.

The Death Penalty And Mental Illness

The death penalty is a controversial issue that faces the United States legal system. Some people take the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, literally. Some Americans feel that if someone commits a heinous crime, then the convicted should be put to death. Other people feel that when someone does something wrong, that person deserves to be rehabilitated. This becomes a problem because it is difficult to determine who deserves rehabilitation and who deserves

Paula Rodriguez Jimenez. Sociology 207. Professor James

People that support the death penalty argued that death penalty is righteously justified when enforced in murder especially with disturbing elements such as for multiple murder, child murder, serial killing, torture murder, mass murder, terrorism, massacre or genocide. It is said that the death penalty for murder is and should be "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth".

Abolishing The Death Penalty In The United States

The death penalty had consistently been one of the United States’ most divided and controversial issues since the the sixteen hundreds. In 2015, twenty-eight people were executed in the United States. The use of the death penalty should be abolished. The death penalty in the United States is too expensive, inconsistent in rulings, and its popularity has declined in recent years. The death penalty is too final of a punishment for the United States to be using.

Death Penalty: Most Controversial Issue In The United States Today

The death penalty is one of the most controversial issues in the United States today. The debate of a life for life is one that has many dimensions and points of views. However, the acceptance of the death penalty is affected by many factors morality, deterrence, retribution, mistakes, cost, race, an income. More specifically the discussion will be based on these three reasons to support the death penalty; the matters of retribution, deterrence and morality.

The Death Penalty In The United States

The use of the death penalty is controversy. Some oppose it for political reasons, others say religious, while others see the practice as inhuman and barbaric. Most recent trends in the world is to go

The Death Penalty: United States Justice System

The death penalty or also known as capital punishment, is the most extreme punishment that the government can enforce on you. The death penalty is a punishment of execution, which has been used in 34 states and used by the federal government for punishing federal crimes. Any criminal who dreadfully violates the law hopes he does not run the chance of being executed. Most of the time people die from the death penalty by lethal injections but some have been killed from electrocution, the gas chamber, being hung and killed by the firing squad. On average 36 people are killed by the death penalty per year and a total of 1394 since 1976 to this day. The death penalty should be implemented into all states justice systems. The death penalty gives

Life Imprisonment Is Better Than Death Penalty

Death penalty is an ancient punishment since time immemorial. It has been used as a way of resolving blood feds and it is more of a thing of the past. The modern contemporary society must adapt a more human procedure to punish those accused of doing wrong. However, it is important to note that there are a minimum number of offenses that an

How Is The Death Penalty An Effective Method Of Punishment

An issue that has continually created tension in today's society is whether the death penalty serves as a justified and valid form of punishment. Whenever the word "death penalty" comes up, extremists from both sides start yelling out their arguments. One side says deterrence, the other side says there's a potential of executing an innocent man; one says justice, retribution, and punishment; the other side says execution is murder. Crime is an evident part of society, and everyone is aware that something must be done about it. Most people know the threat of crime to their lives, but the question lies in the methods and action in which it should be dealt with. In several parts of

Related Topics

• Capital punishment

Argumentative, Exploratory, or Rhetorical Analysis Essays on “Death Penalty”

• 6 July 2023
• 17 min read

Learning institutions require students to present outstanding essays on specific topics. In particular, the topic “Death Penalty” is an example of such a theme that learners may encounter during the writing process. Also, students may opt to use this topic when writing argumentative, exploratory, and rhetorical analysis essays. Basically, the three essay types follow a unique format that enhances the need to communicate with readers effectively. Despite the difference in formats, authors should use outlines before writing their essays. In this case, the process helps to organize ideas in a logical manner that enhances the communication of the intended message. Then, other important activities that one should consider are proofreading a paper and following a sandwich rule when writing body paragraphs. In turn, these activities help one to improve the quality of writing an essay on “Death Penalty.” Hence, students need to learn how to write an argumentative essay on “Death Penalty” or basic principles of using exploratory or rhetorical analysis formats for such a paper with examples to follow.

General Guidelines of Writing an Essay on “Death Penalty” for Argumentative, Exploratory, and Rhetorical Analysis Formats

Students must complete different types of essays during their studies. Basically, some of the common types of scholarly papers include argumentative, exploratory, and rhetorical analysis essays, which rely on varying rules irrespective of their topics. In this case, one can write about the topic “Death Penalty” in different ways based on the essay’s type. Moreover, learners must understand the necessary rules, formats, and structures for each essay type to prepare a paper that meets the necessary academic standards. In turn, the topic “Death Penalty” requires one to give an evaluation of the existing facts and provide compelling arguments that allow target readers to develop a better understanding. Hence, authors should write argumentative, exploratory, and rhetorical analysis papers by following specific rules. 

How to Write a “Death Penalty” Essay in Argumentative, Exploratory, and Rhetorical Analysis Formats

An essay on the topic “Death Penalty” should appear different when it is written as argumentative, explanatory, or rhetorical analysis formats. Basically, each of these essay types has different expectations and grading standards that learners must observe at all times. In turn, failing to meet specific requirements may lead to low grades for essays on “Death Penalty”. Hence, specific factors that one should observe when preparing an academic paper on “Death Penalty” are:

1. How to Write an Argumentative Essay on “Death Penalty”

One should rely on extensive research when writing an argumentative essay on the topic “Death Penalty.” For instance, argumentative essays require students to give different perspectives on an issue. In this case, learners must rely on extensive research to understand their topics and present viable arguments. Also, this approach enables writers to make claims that support a thesis statement , counterarguments that oppose the central claim, and refutations. In turn, this strategy allows an argumentative essay on “Death Penalty” to meet the necessary criteria for convincing readers to accept a particular perspective. Then, quality argumentative papers must contain clear and logical transitions between body paragraphs. In particular, authors must ensure that an essay on “Death Penalty” contains a unique flow of ideas between the introduction, body, and conclusion. In turn, transitions act as words that ensure a logical progression of thoughts in a paragraph.

2. How to Write an Exploratory Essay on “Death Penalty”

An exploratory essay on “Death Penalty” allows writers to find out about a problem and develop preliminary conclusions on potential solutions. Basically, quality exploratory essays represent the author’s perspective of the writing and thinking process. In this case, an exploratory essay on “Death Penalty” describes “when,” “how,” and “why” a writer complete specific types of research. Besides, a persuasive paper should identify the problem and possible causes and solutions that readers may establish. In turn, prudent writers give a reflection of how credible sources analyzed helped them to develop different thoughts about a study problem. Also, suitable reflections may indicate how writers fell short of expectations that led to new research directions.

3. How to Write a Rhetorical Analysis Essay on “Death Penalty”

Rhetorical analysis papers on “Death Penalty” allow authors to show how a topic appeals to readers. In this case, a suitable paper must show how a topic appeals to logic, emotions, and credibility. Also, writers must present information that influences the reader’s thoughts. Then, learners must examine their topics in greater detail and prove their perspectives by using rhetorical devices . Besides, a rhetorical analysis essay on “Death Penalty” analyzes a specific source and examines its effectiveness in communicating the intended message.

Structure for Argumentative, Exploratory, and Rhetorical Analysis Essays on “Death Penalty”

Writers have to follow a specific essay structure when preparing an essay on “Death Penalty.” In this case, argumentative, explanatory, and rhetorical analysis formats follow different structures. Hence, an essay outline for these formats are:

Outline Sample Template for Writing an Argumentative Essay on “Death Penalty”

A student must follow a well-organized outline for writing an argumentative essay on “Death Penalty” to score higher grades.

I. Introduction

A. A catchphrase that makes the opening paragraph interesting. Basically, the first sentence must draw readers into an argumentative essay. B. A few sentences that provide background information of an argument being discussed. C. A thesis statement that presents the main claim for an essay.

II. Body Paragraphs

A. Background Paragraph

• This paragraph should lay the foundation for providing the intended argument.
• One should include a summary of the topic, definition of terms, and an explanation of leading theories.

B. Supporting Paragraph – This paragraph should support an argumentative thesis statement. One should include:

• A topic sentence that responds to a central claim made in the introduction paragraph.
• Evidence that supports this central claim. In practice, the evidence may contain reasons, examples, facts, statistics, and quotations. Also, writers should provide an in-text citation to support the evidence presented.
• Students must include an accurate explanation of the evidence. In particular, suitable explanations explain how the audience should read and interpret the evidence provided in the text. Besides, the opinion-based explanation provided should prove the writer’s point.
• This body paragraph should end with a concluding sentence that reasserts a topic sentence provided.

C. Opposing Paragraph – It is a counterargument paragraph that anticipates the reader’s opposition. Basically, authors should sound objective and reasonable when writing this paragraph. Hence, some of the elements that one should include are:

• A topic sentence should state a possible counterargument that readers might pose against a thesis statement.
• Writers need to include objective evidence to support counterarguments.
• Explanations should provide reasonable and justifiable explanations that may help to understand this counterargument.
• This body paragraph should end with a sentence that reasserts a counterargument.

D. Refutation Paragraph – This paragraph reveals the weakness of a counterargument. Hence, some of the factors that one should consider when refuting a counterargument are:

• A topic sentence states the weakness of a counterargument.
• The evidence presented should prove why this counterargument appears weak.
• Explanations should prove why a central argument holds when compared to a counterclaim.
• A concluding sentence reasserts the essay’s central argument.

III. Conclusion

The conclusion usually sums up the main points discussed in an argumentative essay on “Death Penalty.” Hence, some of the points that one should consider are:

• One should restate the paper’s overall claim and relevant supporting evidence.
• The conclusion should reflect a thoughtful and analytical understanding of a topic.
• The conclusion should not contain new evidence.

Important Points to Note

Students should not limit an argumentative essay on “Death Penalty” to five paragraphs only. For instance, a thesis statement should guide the length of an argumentative essay that one must write. In this case, a good essay on “Death Penalty” may have several supporting and counterargument paragraphs. Moreover, the primary goal is to provide an exhaustive explanation of the main topic. In some instances, one may combine the introduction and background information paragraph. Besides, writers may decide to combine a counterargument and a refutation into one paragraph.

Outline Sample Template for Writing an Exploratory Essay on “Death Penalty”

A. The introduction should set the context for readers to understand the main topic. In this case, students should begin writing an exploratory essay on “Death Penalty” with a paragraph that gives the general background information. Besides, one should set up the ideas discussed throughout a paper.

B. The introduction should reveal the importance of a topic under evaluation. Basically, the presented details should motivate the audience to read further. In this case, writers should ensure that the introduction creates unique interests in reading a paper.

C. The introduction of an exploratory essay on “Death Penalty” should state the question or topic of exploration. For instance, one should use one or several sentences that give more information about intended goals. In turn, readers should also find out “why” and “how” authors intend to explore it.

A. The body section should have different paragraphs that focus on supporting the central claim of an argument. 

B. Each paragraph should give a detailed explanation of a source used. In this case, writers should include the source’s information and explain why it sounds essential.

C. Each body paragraph should give the writer’s reflection on a source and its information. 

A. The conclusion should give a general overview of the concepts discussed.

B. Students should provide information that ties up loose ends. In this case, one should restate the main question and emphasize important points left out in body paragraphs.

Important Points

Learners should vary the body paragraph’s structure to enhance the communication of the main ideas. For instance, writers should intend to communicate the main message instead of following the structure discussed previously strictly.

Outline Sample Template for Writing a Rhetorical Analysis Essay on “Death Penalty”

A. Learners should identify an author of a source under analysis. For example, students should use a positive phrase to establish the author’s reliability and expert. Then, other essential details include the source’s title and a suitable rhetorical verb. Moreover, some of the unique verbs include “assert,” “argue,” “suggest,” “imply,” and “claim.” Finally, the first sentence should end with a “that” clause, which asserts its thesis statement. 

B. Writers should explain how an author develops or supports a thesis. Basically, this explanation should follow a chronological order to enhance the essay’s quality.

C. Students should include a statement that shows the author’s purpose, followed by an “in order” phrase.

D. Scholars should describe the apparent relationship that the source’s author establishes with targeted readers.

E. The last sentence in the introduction contains the writer’s central claim or thesis statement.

A. Topic sentence – The first sentence in a paragraph contains claims about strategies that address its purpose or prompt.

B. Specific examples and supporting idea – Students provide explicit textual support that supports their claims. Also, writers should discuss their examples thoroughly while providing supporting details. 

C. Discussion – Learners should discuss how provided examples support the central idea.

D. Concluding sentence – Students need to end each paragraph with a statement that sums up a single paragraph and connects an example to the introduction’s claim. 

A. Restating a thesis statement – Scholars must restate a thesis statement and dig deeper into the text’s overall intended meaning. Basically, this approach must help scholars to develop a deeper understanding than they establish in the opening paragraph.

B. Reflection – Learners should reflect on examples and main ideas discussed in the essay’s body. In turn, this aspect should state the meaning of the primary persuasive strategies utilized in the source analyzed.

C. Effectiveness – Writers should state if persuasive strategies used effectively communicated the intended message.

D. Closing thoughts – Students should include final remarks that show the primary purpose of a source under analysis.

Additional Points

Learners should ensure that rhetorical analysis papers show the source’s effectiveness in explaining the main argument. In this case, one should provide a seamless transition of ideas presented in a rhetorical analysis essay on “Death Penalty.” Also, topic sentences in second and subsequent body paragraphs should contain a transitioning statement. In turn, this method helps to communicate the intended message without creating avoidable obstructions to readers.

Strategies on How to Improve an Essay on “Death Penalty”

Students focus on achieving better grades in their studies. For instance, scholars must ensure that their argumentative, exploratory, or rhetorical analysis essays on “Death Penalty” meet the necessary quality and set requirements. However, many learners fail to achieve this objective due to various flaws. Therefore, some of the strategies that writers should use to improve the overall quality of their essays are:

Step 1: Proofreading

Learners must proofread their works to ensure that such papers meet the necessary quality. Basically, the primary purpose of proofreading an essay is to remove spelling mistakes, typos, and grammatical errors that may affect the essay’s readability levels. Then, prudent students request their peers to read through their works to provide suitable critiques. In turn, this strategy allows authors to identify all the writing mechanisms that may distort the intended meaning. Besides, writers should make the necessary corrections and revisions to ensure that their essays on “Death Penalty” meet the necessary quality.

Step 2: Use of Terminologies

Students should use specific terms effectively when writing argumentative, exploratory, and rhetorical analysis essays on the topic “Death Penalty.” In most cases, effective use of the necessary terms enhances one’s ability to communicate the intended message with clarity. Hence, some of the terms that one should consider when preparing an essay on “Death Penalty” are:

• Analyze – One should use this term when referring to the process of breaking an issue into fundamental parts using the supporting arguments. Also, this term applies when scholars refer to the evidence provided to support or oppose the main claim.
• Assess – The term “assess” refers to the process of evaluating the extent that something remains valid. In this case, one should persuade readers by providing relevant citations from reliable sources . Besides, suitable assessments must end with a clear statement that shows how one agrees or opposes the original claim.
• Clarify – Students should use the term “clarify” when making a concept clearer. For instance, the term “clarify” alludes to the process of explaining a complicated process, concept, theory, or connection between two variables or factors. In turn, failing to establish necessary explanations may lower one’s ability to communicate the intended message.
• Elaborate – The term “elaborate” refers to the process of providing more details or information.
• Evaluate – The term “evaluate” refers to the process of appraising a statement to establish the intended meaning. 

Step 3: Making an Outline Before Writing

Learners should create an outline before writing the actual essay. Unfortunately, many students make mistakes by writing their essays without planning or organizing ideas first. Basically, such mistakes lead to weaker essays on “Death Penalty” that fail to achieve a seamless flow of the main ideas. In this case, an outline helps authors to organize all the relevant ideas in chronological order. Then, prudent scholars must create an outline and make necessary revisions to ensure that they capture all the essential ideas. In turn, the process of revising an essay outline should involve the addition of more substantial evidence, removal of weaker sources, and inclusion of more explicit concepts that relate to the topic on “Death Penalty.”  

Step 4: Following a Sandwich Rule

All body paragraphs of argumentative, exploratory, or rhetorical analysis essays on “Death Penalty” must follow a sandwich rule. For example, one should provide a topic sentence, evidence, relevant explanation, and concluding sentences in each paragraph. Firstly, a topic sentence should connect to a thesis statement presented in the introduction. Then, students should use relevant and robust evidence to support topic sentences. In this case, some of the acceptable forms of evidence include examples, illustrations, and opinions. Besides, one should cite any evidence to enhance the essay’s credibility levels. After that, suitable explanations enable readers to develop a better understanding of connections between the topic sentences and supporting evidence. Finally, the last sentence in a paragraph should sum up all the ideas presented in the section.

Example of an Argumentative Essay on “Death Penalty”

I. introduction sample for an argumentative essay on “death penalty”.

The death penalty remains a contested topic among scholars in the twenty-first century. Basically, legal experts give moral justification that supports the existence of the death penalty. However, people who advocate for human rights maintain that the death penalty lacks moral justification. Although scholars disagree on the death penalty’s legality, the current justice system provides the necessary protocols to avoid the convicted criminals’ inexcusable execution.

II. Examples of Body Paragraphs in an Argumentative Essay on “Death Penalty”

A. argument.

The justice system of the United States provides the necessary protocols to ensure that the death penalty promotes justice. For example, the criminal justice system requires judges to sentence convicts found guilty of first-degree murder into a death sentence (Garrett & Kovarsky, 2018). In this case, the ruling in first-degree murder relies on objective evidence and a justifiable prosecution process. Besides, the convicted individual receives an opportunity to appeal. Hence, people charged with first-degree murder receive a death penalty after going through a fair legal process.

B. Counterargument

On the other hand, some people state that the death penalty does not meet moral justification. Basically, contenders maintain that executing a first-degree murderer fails to give him a chance to change (Brown, 2020). Also, the death penalty violates the convict’s fundamental right to life. However, such claims fail to consider that people charged for first-degree murder violated their fundamental rights. In turn, sentencing such people to death eliminates possible threats to public lives.

III. Conclusion Sample for an Argumentative Essay on “Death Penalty”

Though scholars disagree on the legality of the death penalty, criminal justice provides the convicts with a chance to receive a fair hearing. In this case, the current justice system provides the necessary protocols to avoid inexcusable execution. Thus, the counterargument presented fails to consider that first-degree murderers violate other people’s fundamental right to life. 

Defining Features

The second paragraph in the essay above contains the main claim. However, the third paragraph contains a counterargument and the necessary refutations. Finally, the conclusion sums up the main points presented in an argumentative essay on “Death Penalty.” In turn, this paper is only an example and does not force to consider any position.

Example of an Exploratory Essay on “Death Penalty”

I. introduction sample for an exploratory essay on “death penalty”.

Many scholars disagree on the most effective strategies that the criminal justice system should use to promote justice for first-degree murder victims. Different knowledge levels and personal interests influence such disagreements. Findings from recent research by Garrett and Kovarsky prove that creating awareness about capital punishment can reduce disagreements on the death penalty’s effectiveness.

II. Example of a Body Paragraph in an Exploratory Essay on “Death Penalty”

The book “The Death Penalty” shows that disagreements about the death penalty’s legality and effectiveness arise due to various ignorance levels. For example, non-lawyer fails to access legal documents about capital punishments (Garrett & Kovarsky, 2018). In turn, this problem leads to higher ignorance levels, where scholars with inadequate knowledge in legal matters oppose the death penalty’s effectiveness. Therefore, the government can deal with such challenges by creating awareness about capital punishment and its purpose in the twenty-first century.

III. Conclusion Sample for an Exploratory Essay on “Death Penalty”

Though many experts oppose the legality and effectiveness of the death penalty, ignorance in legal matters remains the primary cause. In this case, non-lawyer scholars tend to oppose the application of the death penalty in promoting justice. Thus, creating public awareness can lead to a sustainable solution to the problem.  

This example of writing an exploratory essay on “Death Penalty” consists of three paragraphs. However, the length of such a paper may be higher by considering the necessary points needed to be discussed in a paper. Hence, writers may use as many paragraphs as they need to explore their topics.

Example of a Rhetorical Analysis Essay on “Death Penalty”

I. introduction sample for a rhetorical analysis essay on “death penalty”.

The book “The Death Penalty,” authored by Garrett and Kovarsky, provides suitable explanations on the death penalty’s effectiveness to promote justice. In particular, the authors use logos and pathos appeals to provide suitable explanations. Because Garrett and Kovarsky present details that appeal to readers’ reasoning and emotional senses, they justify the legality of using the death penalty for first-degree murders. 

II. Example of a Body Paragraph in a Rhetorical Analysis Essay on “Death Penalty”

Garrett and Kovarsky rely on pathos and logos appeals to justify applying the United States’ death sentence. According to Garrett and Kovarsky (2018), criminal justice requires first-degree murders to receive a death penalty sentence for violating the victim’s right to life. Basically, this statement appeals to the reader’s emotions because it brings into context the rights of the people killed in cold blood. In turn, Garrett and Kovarsky (2018) maintain that people convicted with the death penalty receive an opportunity to make their appeals before execution. Moreover, such claims appeal to the reader’s logic because all criminals have a chance to express themselves and seek intervention when they feel that the court violated their rights. Hence, Garrett and Kovarsky rely on healthy emotional and logical appeals to justify using the death penalty.

III. Conclusion Sample for a Rhetorical Analysis Essay on “Death Penalty”

Though many thinkers disagree on the death penalty’s effectiveness, Garrett and Kovarsky use strong emotional and logical appeals to prove otherwise. In turn, these two authors present details that appeal to readers’ rational and emotional senses to justify the legitimacy of using the death penalty for first-degree murders. As a result, the strategy motivates people to change their attitude toward the topic.

The second paragraph shows the use of pathos and logos in the source identified. For instance, this body paragraph provides an accurate explanation of how two authors used rhetorical aspects to communicate the main idea. Besides, the section relies on sensible evidence. In turn, the number of body paragraphs can be more than one, and it depends on the writer’s needs.

Summing Up on Writing Argumentative, Exploratory, or Rhetorical Analysis Essays on “Death Penalty”

The topic “Death Penalty” obliges one to give an evaluation of the existing facts and provide convincing opinions that allow target readers to develop a better comprehension. In this case, one may opt to write argumentative, exploratory, and rhetorical analysis essays on the topic “Death Penalty.” However, each of these types of essays follows different guidelines. Hence, some of the points that one should remember are:

• Argumentative essays on “Death Penalty” must present viable claims, counterarguments, and relevant refutations.
• Exploratory essays on “Death Penalty” must identify an existing problem and propose a viable solution.
• Rhetorical analysis essays on “Death Penalty” must reveal the use of pathos, logos, and ethos.  

To Learn More, Read Relevant Articles

How to Write an Essay on Why Do You Want to Be a Nurse

• 20 October 2020

How to Write a Thesis Acknowledgement With Tips and Examples

• 18 October 2020

Zimbabwe’s likely to abolish the death penalty: how it got here and what it means for the continent

Director and Professor of International Human Rights Law, Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria

Disclosure statement

Frans Viljoen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Pretoria provides funding as a partner of The Conversation AFRICA.

View all partners

Zimbabwe is likely to abolish capital punishment, following a cabinet decision on 7 February 2024 . However, its parliament still has to endorse the move and pass the necessary law enabling the change. The question is when this will happen, especially since it appears that it would require a constitutional amendment.

When this happens, Zimbabwe will not only draw a line under a long-standing colonial legal import, but also bolster continental and regional trends towards abolition. It will also provide certainty to – and spare the lives of – the 62 prisoners currently on death row.

The change was initiated by a member of the main opposition party, Citizens Coalition for Change, MP Edwin Mushoriwa, through a private member’s bill. This rarely used process was introduced before the National Assembly in November 2023 . According to prescribed procedure, the National Assembly had to approve the official tabling of the bill before it could be gazetted for formal consideration . Now that the executive has signalled its backing, it is all but assured that the Zanu-PF-dominated parliament will formally adopt the bill.

The cabinet decision to abolish the death penalty should not come as a great surprise. Zimbabwe has been a de facto abolitionist state for almost two decades. Although its law still allows for the death penalty, it last executed a prisoner in 2005 .

My academic work is concerned with human rights at the domestic and regional level in Africa. In my view, the trend towards abolition of the death penalty in Africa is one of the hopeful indicators of human rights consolidation.

Public opinion

Legal reform on the death penalty often pits legislatures against public opinion. It is not entirely clear what the Zimbabwean general public’s views on the issue are. In its statement , the cabinet said grassroots consultations were conducted in 30 districts. But it does not say what the outcomes of these consultations were.

A 2018 survey found 61% of Zimbabweans supported retention of the death penalty . However, a 2020 survey of Zimbabwean opinion leaders showed strong support for abolition .

Read more: Kenyan prisoners on death row weren’t deterred by the threat of the death penalty: new research findings

It is probably Zanu-PF’s fear of a popular push back that has stifled action towards abolition. Doing it via a private member’s bill insulates the ruling party from any potential popular backlash, to some extent. It is no coincidence that the 2023 abolition of the death penalty for ordinary crimes in Ghana also came via a private member’s bill .

While some opposition is to be expected, indications are that the general Zimbabwean public will take the government’s lead on this .

It is significant that the 2018 study also found that 80% of those favouring retention indicated that if the death penalty were to be abolished, they would accept it as government policy. The reasons for this level of support for abolition lie in the country’s “pre-colonial” culture and colonial history, as I explain below.

Presidential support

It is surprising that the latest decision did not come earlier . President Emmerson Mnangagwa is well known to be an opponent of the death sentence . He was sentenced to death in 1965 for sabotage by the white minority Rhodesian regime. His sentence was reduced to 10 years’ imprisonment, thanks to his youthful age of 22 .

Soon after he took office, in 2018, Mnangagwa commuted to life imprisonment the sentences of inmates detained for longer than 10 years . In 2016, as vice president, he had publicly declared the death penalty an archaic imposition of British colonialism that is at odds with the values of pre-colonial Shona societies .

In Shona cosmology, murder is understood as affecting the whole community. It calls for a restorative – rather than a retributive – approach. Payment of reparations to the deceased’s family averts the wrath of an “avenging spirit” ( kuripa ngozi ).

Colonial relic

Colonialism left its imprints on Zimbabwe’s criminal justice system. One was the introduction of capital punishment for common law offences such as murder. Abuses during the era of white rule negatively influenced popular attitudes towards the death penalty.

Especially following the unilateral declaration of independence in 1965 by the Rhodesian regime of Prime Minister Ian Smith , it was used as a tool for repression and subjugation . During the liberation struggle against the Rhodesian regime, the offence of “petrol bombing”, for example, carried a mandatory death sentence.

Read more: Malawi abolishes death penalty: what it means for southern Africa

The multiparty agreement that brought about changes to the 2013 constitution reflected the national consensus based on historical misgivings about the death penalty. Article 48 of the constitution, which deals with the right to life, allows that “a law may permit the death penalty”, but limits its application to cases of “aggravated murder”. It further excludes from a possible death sentence all female offenders, offenders over 70 years, and those who were younger than 21 when they committed relevant offences.

It seems inescapable that the complete eradication of the death penalty would require that article 48 be scrapped. Because this provision is part of the bill of rights, its amendment requires a two-thirds majority in parliament, and majority support in a referendum (article 138 of the 2013 constitution ).

Regional and continental significance

Zimbabwe’s abolition of capital punishment will buttress an African and southern African trend towards abolition. Half of Africa’s countries have abolished the death penalty .

Half of the 16 Southern African Development Community (SADC) states have formally abolished it .

In addition, 16 African states are abolitionist in practice. Among these are six SADC states: Comoros (last execution in 1997), DRC (2003), Eswatini (1983), Lesotho (1995), Malawi (1992), and Tanzania (1994).

Should Zimbabwe join the list of abolitionist states, a tipping point could be reached. Its scrapping the penalty for all crimes may inspire these states that are abolitionist in practice, but not in law, to follow suit.

Read more: 12 years without an execution: Is Zimbabwe ready to abolish the death penalty?

A turn towards abolition is also what African Union human rights bodies require. While the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights does not deal with the death penalty, its monitoring body, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights , has adopted a number of resolutions urging African states to observe a moratorium on the death penalty . It also called on these states to take steps towards abolishing the death penalty, and to support an African treaty on the abolition of the death penalty in Africa .

The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights declared the mandatory imposition of the death sentence a violation of the African Charter. It also found that hanging as a means of execution violates the charter, but fell short of outlawing all forms of capital punishment .

However, an abolitionist practice can easily be undone, as shown by the decision of the Democratic Republic of Congo in March 2024 to lift a 21-year moratorium on the execution of the death penalty .

Looking forward

Prisoners sentenced to death are exposed to the agony of living in uncertainty about their fate for prolonged periods. In 1993, the Zimbabwe Supreme Court found that excessive delay in executing the death penalty, combined with deplorable conditions of detention, violated the constitutional guarantee against torture and cruel and inhumane punishment .

Abolishing the death penalty in its totality will place Zimbabwe on the right side of history, at a time when it is looking forward to its readmission to the Commonwealth .

• Social justice
• Human rights
• Restorative justice
• Colonialism
• Death penalty
• Capital punishment
• Emmerson Mnangagwa

Want to write?

Write an article and join a growing community of more than 183,500 academics and researchers from 4,958 institutions.

Register now