Capital penalty and the decease punishment have been used throughout the universe for 1000s of old ages. During recent times it has become a much scrutinized subject of involvement here in the United States. Throughout recent history there have been many extremely publicised tests that have brought capital penalty and the decease punishment into the national limelight of the United States. Some of the most ill-famed tests covering with capital penalty were the Nuremberg tests of the 1940’s and the Rosenberg test and executing of the 1950’s. High profile instances such as these and many others have created a immense argument about the legality and morality of capital penalty and the decease punishment. There are many people at all degrees of society who strongly oppose the decease punishment stating that it is against human rights and is besides unfair. I believe that in the United States. the decease punishment is non merely and is non applied reasonably.
There are so many factors that need to be considered when seeking to happen out if the decease punishment is being applied reasonably. Should we see all the statistics from the 1950’s till present twenty-four hours? I believe that the statistics from the strong beliefs of the 1950’s and 1960’s would be genuinely different when compared to the strong beliefs from 2000 to present twenty-four hours. The ground for the complete difference is because of racial favoritism. Although racial favoritism is non as openly seeable as it one time was in the 1950’s. 1960’s. and even the 1970’s. racial favoritism still exists in the United States. The NY Times has many statistics that show the per centum of people who have been sentenced to decease. “In 173 instances between 1990 and 2010. the survey examined determinations affecting 7. 421 possible jurymans ( 82 % were white. and 16 % were black ) ” . ( NY Times. Feb 2012 ) . Looking at this statistic entirely. it shows a complete instability when jurymans are selected to hear a instance that involves the decease punishment. The per centum of white jurymans immensely outweighs the per centum of black jurymans. If the decease punishment is supposed to be decided reasonably and rightly. so the choice of white jurymans should ne’er be allowed to transcend the selected figure of jurymans of other races by more than 50 % . The fact that it does on a regular footing shows that the decease punishment is non applied reasonably or rightly.
Most people who support the decease punishment say that our justness system is perfect and does non necessitate any alterations. They support this statement by saying that it is better to hold a justness system that will convict a individual with a little border of mistake. instead than holding a system that does non penalize those who are guilty of serious offenses. Many of the people who commit serious offenses such as slaying are non guiltless. and most of the people who are convicted of these offenses are besides 100 % guilty. but some of these people are non guilty at all of any of the offenses that they are being accused of. Innocent people have been sentenced to decease by imbalanced juries who have found them guilty of flagitious offenses. Even after these instances have been appealed and reviewed by a justice. these guiltless people remain on decease row.
In some cases. jurisprudence pupils and even journalist have studied some of the instances of people being wrongly convicted of a offense and sentenced to the decease punishment. These people have been able to happen grounds that would turn over a opinion in some instances. but still the guiltless individual in the instance that is being studied remains on decease row. The tribunals are non look intoing these allegations of guiltless people being sentenced to decease when the inquiry of a person’s inexperienced persons is in inquiry. So this raises the inquiry once more. is the decease punishment being applied reasonably and rightly?
I think non. At times the lone clip these guiltless people get off of decease row is strictly by opportunity. The decease punishment in the United States will ne’er be applied reasonably or rightly because people who are convicted of slaying or any other flagitious offense are sentenced chiefly on how much money they make. how skilled there lawyer is. the race of their victim. and even where the offense took topographic point. African American’s are far more likely to be convicted and sentenced to the decease punishment than Caucasic American’s. particularly if the victim is Caucasic. The lone manner that the decease punishment can be applied reasonably or rightly is if everyone who has committed a flagitious offense is of the same societal category. same race. if every province in the United States has the decease punishment. and if a individual is genuinely convicted by a jury of their equals. intending same race. gender. and societal position. Sing how this is impossible. the decease punishment being applied reasonably and rightly is impossible.
Many people say that the United States should censor the decease punishment from our justness system. I believe that the decease punishment should be used meagerly and under the most utmost fortunes. There are many instances that have overpowering grounds against a individual who has committed a genuinely flagitious offense against another individual. Cases where a individual has murdered their married woman or kid. raped a individual. or committed an act of sexual assault against a individual and particularly a kid. the decease punishment should diffidently be on the tabular array and is warranted. In utmost instances such as these. the decease punishment should be considered. The badness of the offense and the grounds presented should be adequate to convict a individual of the offense and condemn them to decease. All flagitious offenses against kids should utilize the decease punishment as an option for penalty when a individual is tired and convicted of such a offense.
The job that is being found with convicting and condemning the people who commit these offenses is that the justness system has non ever applied the decease punishment every bit or reasonably. This fact is true because non all provinces support the decease punishment. If a individual commits these same offenses in the province of Texas or Maryland. they will be put to decease. but that is non true in all provinces. In order for the decease punishment to be applied reasonably and rightly. the same penalty for the same offense should be handed out no affair where the offense was committed. It is non ever the worst instances that get the decease punishment. For illustration. if there are multiple people involved in a homicide. the individual who is the quickest to do a trade with the prosecuting lawyer. bend state’s grounds. or give testimony against the others. are the 1s who get sentenced to twenty old ages in prison with the possibility of word. This happens even if the individual selling out everyone else was the originator of the whole offense.
I’m sure that everyone believes that a guilty individual should be punished. but it seems that the penalty for the same offense demands to be cosmopolitan. Many people feel outraged about a individual who is wrongly put to decease. but society feels more indignant about the decease of some people. non all people. A survey of a instance in North Carolina showed that where a juryman who supported the decease punishment could be swayed either for or against the decease punishment based on the circumstance or move entirely. race played an of import function. The North Carolina survey showed that African American people were 3. 5 times more likely to have the decease punishment. The survey besides found the attitude of the community to be different under different fortunes. When a offense by an African American was committed and a Caucasic victim is murdered. the community was outraged. and the prosecuting lawyer worked difficult to force for the decease punishment. When the offense was committed by an African American against another African American. the common sentiment from the community was. “It’s merely killing among black folks. ” ( Unah. 2001 ) .
These statistics show that the decease punishment is non applied reasonably or rightly. They besides show that favoritism is besides involved when using the decease punishment. The simple fact that a individual can perpetrate a slaying in one province that does non back up the decease punishment. their sentence could me lighter than if they committed the offense in a province that does back up the decease punishment. In a state where racism still exist and has non been to the full extinguished from our society. it is impossible for justness to be equal for all those convicted. particularly with those people of colour. Currently. decease row has a really disproportionately big population of African Americans. in comparing to the remainder of the prison population. Currently. African American’s merely do up approximately 12 % of the entire United States population. Harmonizing to a survey done by the Governor of Maryland. “between 1930 and 1976. 455 work forces were executed for colza. Of these work forces 405 of them or 90 % were African American” ( Smith. 2011 ) .
This does non demo equity or equality among those who are convicted of slaying. African Americans and Caucasians are both about equal when it comes to being victims in a offense. This is why the decease punishment will ne’er be applied rightly or reasonably. There are merely excessively many factors to be considered. “An probe done during capital entreaties have revealed knowing error by province agents. In one instance. the prosecution withheld grounds for 14 old ages that pointed to the defendant’s artlessness. ” ( Independent Weekly. 1996 ) . In order for the decease punishment to be applied reasonably and rightly across the board. constabulary and prosecuting officers should be required to portion all grounds. It should be against the jurisprudence for a prosecuting officer to try to convict person they themselves believe is guiltless. particularly if they are the 1s who hold all the keys to that person’s exoneration. If we do this we can cut down the figure of decease punishment sentences. go forthing it for merely the most utmost fortunes.
We besides need to specify what an utmost circumstance is where the decease punishment should be used. A jury should ne’er be a bulk of any one race of people. Imagine a Caucasic adult male convicted of slaying an African American adult male. and ten of the 12 jurymans are African American. We need to repair our justness system and have mandatory annual reappraisals of all instances that have the decease punishment as penalty. These instances need to be reviewed by a commission that their exclusive occupation is to reexamine these instances and happen all the necessary grounds and make up one’s mind if these instances are meriting of the decease punishment or non. Finally. we need to reexamine all the instances that are presently on decease row. We need to see if any of these instances have been either overlooked. weakly presented. or racially prejudices.
I believe that if a individual supports or is against the usage of the decease punishment. that they most likely believe that it should be used in the absolute worst instances of offenses committed. I besides believe that people think that if it is used so is should be used every bit across the board for the same discourtesy. and the province that the offense was committed and the race of the individual who committed the offense should non count. A individual should non be able to acquire life in individual for a slaying and person else gets the decease punishment for the same exact offense. However. there is overpowering grounds that supports the fact that this is non the instance and that the decease punishments use in the United States judicial system is broken and can non be applied reasonably or rightly.
Costantinou. M. . & A ; OF THE. E. S. ( 1999. May 04 ) . About 700 clasp candle flame vigil more death-penalty oppositions drawn by babbitt’s instance ; THE BABBITT EXECUTION. San Francisco Examiner. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //search. proquest. com/docview/270504363? accountid=32521 Independent Weekly. Dec 16. 1998. retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. indyweek. com/ Smith. P. ( 2011. Apr 18 ) . The decease punishment argument. New York Times Upfront. 143. 12-15. TE6-TE7. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //search. proquest. com/docview/862157379? accountid=32521 The New York Times. ( Feb 5. 2012 ) . Race and Death Penalty Juries. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. nytimes. com Unah. Isaac. Dr. ( April 16. 2001 ) . The Common Sense Foundation North Carolina Council of Churches Race and the Death Penalty in North Carolina. An Empirical Analysis: 1993-1997. Retrieved from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. deathpenaltyinfo. org/race-and-death-penalty-north-carolina.