- Top Stories
- Pinoy Abroad
- Economy & Trade
- Banking & Finance
- Agri & Mining
- IT & Telecom
- Sports Plus
- One Championship
- TV & Movies
- Celebrity Profiles
- Music & Concerts
- Digital Media
- Culture & Media
- Health and Home
- Motoring Plus
- Commuter’s Corner
- Environment and Sustainability
- Malls & Bazaars
- Hobbies & Collections
- Travel Features
- Travel Reels
- Travel Logs
Arguments for restoring the death penalty
Early this month, the House Committee on Justice approved a draft law reinstating the death penalty for heinous crimes like drug offenses, treason, qualified piracy, qualified bribery, parricide, murder, infanticide, rape, serious illegal detention, robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons, arson, and plunder.
A vocal critic of the death penalty is the Commission on Human Rights, which insists that the Philippines is bound under an international protocol to perpetually abolish the death penalty in order to finally uphold the right to life. That protocol cited by the CHR is the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which purportedly binds signatory countries to do away with the death penalty. The protocol was signed in 2006 under the administration of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
According to the CHR, the restoration of the death penalty will violate constitutional provisions regarding respect for human rights and the dignity of every person. The CHR also claims that capital punishment by whatever method constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment, does not accord dignity to human beings, and has no place in a civilized society. In addition, the CHR says that there are no studies which prove that the death penalty deters crime.
For the CHR, effective law enforcement and an efficient criminal justice system are the best deterrents against crime. This proposal is echoed by local Catholic Church leaders.
The arguments raised by the CHR sound good, but they are devoid of legal substance. In fact, there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution which sustains the CHR’s position. A look at the pertinent provision of the Constitution will set the pace.
Section 19, Article III of the Charter states: “Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall the death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
It will be readily gleaned from the text of Section 19 that although the imposition of cruel, degrading, or inhuman punishment is explicitly prohibited, the same section allows Congress to impose the death penalty for heinous crimes. This clearly means that it was never the intention of the Constitution to consider the death penalty as a cruel, degrading, or inhuman punishment.
Every freshman law student knows that when a particular act is explicitly allowed by the Constitution, it is impossible for that act to be considered unconstitutional. Therefore, since the Constitution allows Congress to impose the death penalty for heinous crimes, the death penalty cannot be unconstitutional. It also means that the death penalty cannot be repugnant to any provision in the Constitution.
Thus, as far as the Constitution is concerned, the death penalty is not a cruel, degrading, or inhuman form of punishment, and the death penalty is not repugnant to any provision of the Constitution.
This effectively debunks the arguments of the CHR to the effect that the death penalty is an unconstitutional form of punishment, and that it violates provisions of the Constitution regarding human rights and dignity.
As for the argument that the death penalty has no place in a civilized society, suffice it to say that that’s a matter of opinion. The military establishment imposes the death penalty on erring soldiers. Does that make the military establishment uncivilized? Death sentences were carried out during the administrations of past presidents under the 1935 Constitution. Does that make those administrations uncivilized? On many occasions in the past, the Supreme Court upheld the death penalty imposed by lower courts on certain convicts. Does that make the justices of the high court uncivilized? Good grief!
Sure, the Philippines signed that protocol on the abolition of the death penalty, and the Constitution itself states that the Philippines adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land. That notwithstanding, it is a basic principle in constitutional law that an international protocol cannot prevail over a specific provision of the Constitution—like Section 19, Article III which allows the imposition of the death penalty. Moreover, adopting international law as part of Philippine law does not necessarily mean that international law automatically takes precedence over the Constitution.
The reason for the supremacy of the Constitution over an international protocol is obvious—the Constitution was ratified by the sovereign Filipino people; an international protocol signed by the Philippine government does have the same approval from the electorate.
While there may be no empirical data to show that the death penalty is an effective deterrent against crime, there is none to suggest that its abolition has reduced crime.
The proposition that effective law enforcement and an efficient criminal justice system are the best deterrents against crime is, at best, wishful thinking. Effective law enforcement only means that criminals will be caught and charged. On the other hand, an efficient criminal justice system only means crime will not go unpunished. Both do not necessarily assure that nobody will commit crime.
Truth to tell, overpopulation contributes to criminality. A runaway increase in population translates to more unemployed people and, ultimately, to poverty. Desperation results, and desperation triggers crime because it is very difficult to be law-abiding when one is hungry and no meals are forthcoming.
Because the Philippines has a very serious population problem, the government is promoting a population control program. Unfortunately, the Roman Catholic Church is not helping out because it is against contraceptives.
The Church may not know it but by opposing population control, it tacitly condones criminality.
So much for the opposition to the death penalty.
- Commission on Human Rights
- death penalty
- House of Representatives
- human rights advocates
- Victor Avecilla
Putin’s top critic dies in prison, ex-saf chief guilty over purchase of pre-loved planes, sc rules, zubiri, romualdez end political bickering, agree to ‘work professionally’, watch | revilla says martin, migz bury the hatchet on jpe’s birthday, criminal raps filed vs m/t princess empress owners, others over mindoro oil spill, ash wednesday accident: 1 dead, dozens injured as bulacan church balcony collapses, popular articles, deped sets training program for matatag, senior citizens agency official suspended, gamedev summit, dpwh completes p29.4-m bridge in caloocan city’s barangay 176, award-winning pr, matibag promotes sampaguita industry in san pedro.
- Economy & Trade
- Banking & Finance
- Agri & Mining
- IT & Telecom
On the Road
- Monitoring Plus
- Commuter's Corner
- Malls & Bazaars
- Hobbies & Collections
- TV & Movies
- Music & Concerts
- Culture & Media
Home & Design
- Environment & Sustainability
- Users Agreement
© All Rights Reserved, Newspaper Theme.
- Special Pages
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. (2023, November 23). 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 , 23 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.
IvyPanda . (2023) 'Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty'. 23 November.
IvyPanda . 2023. "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." November 23, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.
1. IvyPanda . "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." November 23, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.
IvyPanda . "Argumentative Paper on the Pros of the Death Penalty." November 23, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/argumentative-paper-on-the-pros-of-the-death-penalty/.
- Should Trials Be Televised?
- Candid Camera: Should Trials Be Televised?
- Colin Kaepernick’s Protest: The Revolution Will Be Televised
- Argumentative Essay Writing
- The Cons of the Current Drugs Used for Lethal Injection
- Argumentative Essay: Uighur Genocide
- Should Animals be Used in Research: Argumentative Essay
- 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
essay scholarship high school
Pros and Cons of the Death Penalty: an Argumentative Essay
Executing a criminal who has committed a heinous crime is a way for society to find closure and justice. Some argue that the death penalty is a necessary punishment for murderers, as it serves as a deterrent and ensures that the perpetrator will never have the opportunity to harm others again. On the other hand, there are those who believe that capital punishment is a form of revenge and goes against human rights. This essay will present arguments for and against the death penalty, offering insight into both perspectives.
On the other hand, critics of the death penalty argue that there is no credible statistical evidence to support the claim that it serves as a deterrent. They believe that executing criminals is not the right thing to do, as it goes against the fundamental human rights. By taking the life of a convicted murderer, society stoops to the same level as the criminal, seeking revenge rather than justice. Furthermore, opponents of capital punishment argue that innocent people have been wrongfully executed in the past, and there is always a risk of executing an innocent person in the future.
An example that articulates the criticism towards the death penalty is the case of Willie Fagan. Fagan, who was 17 years old at the time of the crime, was sentenced to death row for a murder he allegedly committed. After spending three years on death row, it was discovered that Fagan was innocent and had been wrongfully convicted. This case highlights the flaws in the system and the risk of executing innocent individuals.
#1 Bestselling Book for Essay Writers
See Contents & Details
Pros and cons of the death penalty, pros of the death penalty.
- Deterrent: Supporters argue that the death penalty acts as a deterrent, preventing potential criminals from committing serious crimes like murder.
- Justice: Many people believe that executing someone who has taken the life of another is a just punishment and serves as a form of revenge for the victim and their family.
- Cost: Proponents cite the expenses involved in keeping criminals on death row, arguing that it is more cost-effective to carry out executions.
- Solid legal system: The death penalty requires multiple levels of review, ensuring that due process is followed and reducing the chances of an innocent person being wrongly convicted and executed.
- Reaffirming societal values: Some argue that the death penalty reinforces the idea that certain actions, like murder, are unacceptable in society.
- Custom and tradition: In some countries, the death penalty has been a long-standing practice deeply rooted in historical, cultural, and religious customs.
Cons of the Death Penalty
- Inhumane punishment: Opponents argue that the death penalty violates the right to life and is a cruel and inhumane punishment.
- Potential for error: The justice system is not infallible, and there is always a risk of convicting and executing innocent individuals.
- Moral and ethical concerns: Many people question the morality of taking a life as a form of punishment, believing it goes against the principles of human rights.
- Ineffective deterrence: Critics argue that there is no conclusive evidence that the death penalty actually deters crime more effectively than other forms of punishment.
- Racial and socioeconomic disparities: Studies have shown that there are notable racial and socioeconomic disparities in the application of the death penalty, raising concerns about unfairness and injustice.
- Loss of potential: By executing someone, society loses the opportunity for rehabilitation and potential contributions that the individual might have made if given the chance.
It is important to approach the topic of the death penalty with an open mind, weighing the arguments from both sides. The question of whether to maintain or abolish the death penalty is a complex and contentious one, with strong opinions on either side. Society must evaluate the evidence, analyze the data, and engage in thoughtful discussions to determine the most just and ethical way forward.
An Argumentative Essay on Capital Punishment
On the other hand, opponents of the death penalty highlight the fact that it is an irreversible form of punishment that can lead to the execution of innocent individuals. They argue that no justice system is perfect, and there have been cases where innocent people have been sentenced to death. A famous example is the case of Willie Francis, a 17-year-old African American who was wrongly executed in 1947. The argument is further supported by the expense and time-consuming nature of capital punishment cases. According to a report by the Death Penalty Information Center, the cost of the death penalty trials and appeals is significantly higher compared to cases without the death penalty involved, leading to the criticism that this expense could be better used to support other projects, such as education and crime prevention.
It is crucial to approach the death penalty debate with an open mind, considering all the different perspectives and potential consequences. Ultimately, the goal should be to find the most just and humane way to maintain social order and protect the rights of all individuals.
The Controversial Debate Surrounding the Death Penalty
Advocates of the death penalty argue that it serves as a deterrent and prevents potential criminals from committing heinous crimes. They believe that executing criminals serves as a form of revenge for the victims and their families who have suffered at the hands of these individuals. They argue that it is just and fair to ensure that those who have taken innocent lives lose their own as punishment for their actions. Supporters of the death penalty cite examples of serial killers and other violent criminals who have been executed, suggesting that justice has been served.
On the other hand, opponents of capital punishment argue that it goes against the fundamental human rights and promotes a culture of violence. They state that the death penalty is an irreversible punishment, and there have been cases where innocent people have been wrongly sentenced to death. The work of researchers like Frank R. Baumgartner and colleagues at the University of North Carolina and Austin Sarat at Amherst College has shed light on the flaws and injustices in America’s capital punishment system. The case of Willie Thompson in Texas, for example, articulates the criticism of the death penalty and highlights the problems in the execution process.
It is important to consider the data and arguments presented by both sides when forming an opinion on the death penalty. While some argue that it provides closure and justice for society, others believe that it is a form of state-sanctioned murder. The current trend seems to be shifting towards a more nuanced view, with some countries and states abolishing or putting a moratorium on executions.
The debate surrounding the death penalty is a complex and multifaceted one, and the arguments on both sides can be compelling. It is crucial to take into account the potential for human error, the cost of executions, and the impact on society when discussing the effectiveness and morality of capital punishment. The execution of someone’s life is not something that can be taken lightly, and the decision to carry out the death penalty should be well-informed and based on credible evidence and solid reasoning.
Arguments in Favor of the Death Penalty
In a speech given at the Center for Death Penalty Litigation, Kristen M. Thompson stated, “An analysis of historical and current data shows that executions have indeed been a deterrent for some like-minded individuals.” This supports the argument that the death penalty is necessary to maintain order and safety in society.
Furthermore, opponents of the death penalty cite closure as a reason to support capital punishment. When a victim’s family sees justice being served, they may find solace and closure in knowing that the murderer has been held accountable for their actions. The death penalty provides a sense of closure and finality that other forms of punishment may not be able to achieve.
Moreover, the argument of injustice has been addressed by supporters of the death penalty. They believe that in most cases, the system works and innocent people are not wrongly executed. According to a project carried out by ProPublica, the rate of innocent people being executed is very low, at around 0.27%. This data shows that the justice system is effective in identifying the guilty and protecting the innocent.
In addition, the death penalty is seen as a way to ensure that the most heinous criminals receive the appropriate punishment for their crimes. Some individuals commit acts of such brutality and inhumanity that they deserve the ultimate penalty. For example, murderers who have killed multiple innocent people or those who have committed crimes against humanity cannot be allowed to live in society.
#2 Bestselling Book for Essay Writers
Arguments Against the Death Penalty
One of the main arguments against the death penalty is the statistical evidence that suggests it does not act as an effective deterrent against crime. Many opponents of capital punishment argue that there is no credible evidence to support the claim that executions reduce the number of murders. In fact, some studies have shown that states without the death penalty have lower murder rates than those that do. This raises the question of whether the death penalty serves as a meaningful deterrent to potential criminals.
Another argument against the death penalty is the cost and expenses associated with carrying out executions. Opponents argue that it is more expensive to execute a criminal than to keep them incarcerated for life. The lengthy appeal process, specialized legal representation, and other related expenses can be significant burdens on the court system and taxpayers.
The Inhumane Nature of the Death Penalty
The risk of wrongful executions.
A significant concern raised by opponents of the death penalty is the potential for executing innocent individuals. The criminal justice system is not infallible and has seen numerous cases of wrongful convictions. The possibility of someone being sentenced to death and ultimately killed for a crime they did not commit is a grave injustice. As Willie Thompson, a former death row inmate in Ohio, stated, “When you are executing someone for a crime that they didn’t do, you are doing the same thing that they did – taking an innocent life out.”
Moreover, the need for justice should not be equated with the desire for revenge. Supporters of the death penalty often argue that it provides closure to the families of murder victims. However, revenge should not be the primary goal of the justice system. Rather, it should aim to rehabilitate, protect society, and seek alternatives to violence and death as punishments for the most heinous crimes.
#3 Bestselling Book for Essay Writers
“There Is No Such Thing As Closure on Death Row”
Innocent or guilty, death row inmates are still human beings. They have families, emotions, and rights. Therefore, the act of executing someone should not be taken lightly. The current system has seen cases of innocent individuals being wrongly sentenced to death. This raises a serious question about the reliability and accuracy of the justice system. For example, Willie Darden, a man executed in Florida in 1988, was later found to be innocent based on new evidence.
The opinion of even the most like-minded individuals can differ when it comes to the death penalty. Even the superintendent of Colorado’s only maximum-security prison, who has witnessed multiple executions, opposes the death penalty. In a speech given at a university, he stated, “We know that it doesn’t work. It doesn’t deter crime. In fact, it perpetuates the cycle of violence.” This insight, coming from someone directly involved in the execution process, provides a unique analysis of the deterrent effect of the death penalty.
Furthermore, the statistical evidence does not support the argument that the death penalty is a deterrent. Numerous studies have shown no significant difference in murder rates between states that have the death penalty and those that do not. In fact, the states with the highest murder rates often have the death penalty in place. This raises the question of whether executions have any real impact on reducing violent crimes.
Moreover, the practices and methods used in carrying out executions have raised concerns about the infringement of human rights. The use of lethal injection, for example, has faced numerous controversies due to the potential for a painful and slow death. This goes against the principle of ensuring a humane punishment.
What is the death penalty?
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a legal process where a person is punished by execution for committing a serious crime.
What are the arguments for the death penalty?
Proponents of the death penalty argue that it serves as a deterrent to crime, provides closure to the victims’ families, and ensures justice for heinous crimes.
What are the arguments against the death penalty?
Opponents of the death penalty argue that it violates the right to life, is irreversible and can lead to the execution of innocent individuals, and that it is disproportionately applied to minorities and those with limited financial resources.
Is the death penalty effective as a deterrent?
The effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent is a matter of debate. Some studies suggest a correlation between the use of capital punishment and lower crime rates, while others argue that other factors contribute more significantly to crime prevention.
Is the death penalty morally justified?
The moral justification of the death penalty is a highly subjective and contentious issue. Supporters argue that it is justified in cases of heinous crimes, while opponents believe that it violates the inherent value of human life and that rehabilitation and restorative justice should be prioritized.
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a government-sanctioned practice where a person found guilty of a serious crime is sentenced to death.
By Alex Koliada, PhD
Alex Koliada, PhD, is a well-known doctor. He is famous for studying aging, genetics, and other medical conditions. He works at the Institute of Food Biotechnology and Genomics. His scientific research has been published in the most reputable international magazines. Alex holds a BA in English and Comparative Literature from the University of Southern California , and a TEFL certification from The Boston Language Institute.
Home / Essay Samples / Social Issues / Human Rights / Death Penalty
Argumentative Essay on Death Penalty
Social Issues , Law, Crime & Punishment
Human Rights , Crime Prevention & Criminal Justice , Judiciary
Death Penalty , Punishment , Types of Human Rights
- Words: 1992 (4 pages)
Please note! This essay has been submitted by a student.
Table of Contents
Introduction, historical background of death penalty, the death penalty today, arguments for the death penalty, death penalty as a deterrence, arguments against the death penalty, the need to abolish the capital penalty.
- Death Penalty Curriculum “A just society requires the death penalty for the taking of a life: Agree”, Michigan State University http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/node/10
- Death Penalty Information Center, “Discussion of Recent Deterrence Studies”, Berkeley Electronic Press http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/discussion-recent-deterrence-studies
- Death Penalty Information Center, “Discussion of Recent Deterrence Studies”, Ohio State Journal http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/discussion-recent-deterrence-studies
- George E. Pataki, “Death penalty is a deterrent”, USA Today http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/Articles/Pataki.htm
- Unknown Author, “RALPH BAZE AND THOMAS C. BOWLING, Petitionersv. JOHN D. REES, COMMISSIONER, KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL”. United States Supreme Court. 2008, 1
Get quality help now
Proficient in: Human Rights , Crime Prevention & Criminal Justice , Judiciary
+ 75 relevant experts are online
More Death Penalty Related Essays
I am strongly opposed to the death penalty for many reasons.First and foremost it is simply a barbaric, archaic and Draconian method of punishment. It is the ultimate removal of the universal right to life. It is murder, pure ...
How many of us know that till today 56 countries follows death penalty and 106 countries abolished death penalty from their law. Many people say that death penalty has lots of advantages, whereas others dispute that it has ...
The death penalty has been used for years as a way to punish the guilty. The death penalty used to be an effective way of reducing crime. Over the years the death penalty has cost our Justice system millions. Besides the cost, ...
Just in case you want to commit a serious crime, will you hesitate if you know you will be executed if you get caught? Your answers might depend on your own situation and it will vary from person to person. However, whether the ...
The prison system fails to achieve the core purposes of sentencing and punishment as it focuses solely on the punishment of offenders and not their rehabilitation and the recovery of victims. As a result, alternative options ...
Digital piracy is a serious issue that harms both producers and consumers. Digital piracy is the act of obtaining an illegal and unapproved copy of digital content from a third party not authorized to distribute the content. ...
The argument Gary Soto was exemplifying throughout his narrative, “Looking for Work”, was one of social injustice while longing for social and racial equality. The cultural purpose of this literary piece is profound yet often ...
Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment hangs on a delicate balance between realism and psychology. On one hand is the sense of disconnection to reality evident in the novel’s protagonist Raskolnikov; on the other is the ‘realistic’ ...
“If you're going to do something wrong, do it big, because the punishment is the same either way.” (Jayne Mansfield) If all felonies were to have a preset punishment, wouldn’t this be the mindset of all criminals? For the ...
This feature is still in progress, but don't worry – you can place an order for an essay with our expert writers
Choose your writer among 300 professionals!
You cannot copy content from our website. If you need this sample, insert an email and we'll deliver it to you.
Please, provide real email address.
This email is exists.