The Case Against The Death Penalty

Bring Back Capital Punishment Looking at society today, I often wonder what we the people can do differently to make our world a better place. There has been so much crime: drug trafficking, rape, burglaries, domestic violence, murders, and much more. Our justice system claims to be working but I beg to differ. Repercussions for criminal wrong doing are slim to none and can possibly be sending out the wrong message to the people in America. People would be more willing to commit a crime and take their slap on the wrist per se. What about capital punishment? Does it exist anymore? Capital punishment or the death penalty is where a person can be put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime that they have committed. Capital
punishment has been around as far back as the Ancient Laws of China. In 18th century B.C. the death penalty was set into place for twenty-five different crimes, but murder was not one of them. During this era of time many different techniques were used, including stoning, beheading, crucifixions, hanging, and throwing a criminal from a rock, to name a few. The first execution recorded on English American Colonies occurred in 1608 when George Kendall of Virginia was accused of plotting to betray the British against the Spanish. After the execution Virginia sought to soften their laws, thinking no one would settle there (Reggio). Looking at today 's society the justice system has softened the laws on punishment tremendously. Outrageous crimes that are being committed should have bizarre punishment as the death penalty. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) printed a recent article "The Case Against the Death Penalty" discussing their objections to capital punishment.
ACLU seems to think that the death penalty goes against the constitutional ban of cruel and unjust punishment and equal protection of the law. Fundamentals that go along with their objection to the death penalty are that it is an unfair and unjust system, innocent people can be put to death, and it 's a waste of taxpayer dollars (Bedeau). They also think it 's unfair that the state should give itself the right to decide whether or not a human being should be put to death. ACLU has plenty objections to the modern era death penalty. I agree with the ACLU and the Supreme Court in that there should be a rational, reviewable process for imposing the death sentence on a criminal; but I tend to disagree on their reasoning for stepping away from capital punishment and not enforcing it on our felony or repeat offenders
today. Living in modern times means novel ways of doing things. Of course, everyone has their prejudices, but since when does the color of your skin or the amount of money you have excuse you from a crime? If it has or does, then there is an injustice in the judicial system, not the death penalty. In addition, an innocent person being put to death is just absurd. There is way too much technology and DNA to produce evidence these days, so an innocent person should not be put to death. Also, the overuse of taxpayer dollars and resources is another hit on ACLU. If there is enough evidence to prove that the criminal at hand committed the crime, it should be treated as any other trial. Where does all the extra time come in? Furthermore, if it is too expensive to put someone to death using modern means such as electric chair, gas chamber, and lethal injection, let’s revert back to history and use some of their methods. All the time being taken to make excuses not to utilize the death penalty should be time taken to find better ways of implementing capital punishment back into the system. All of ACLU 's objections are excuses in dealing with capital punishment. The ACLU has pleaded that the death penalty won 't contribute anything to society. It will not do anything to protect citizens in the public against further crimes being committed. It is the job of our police enforcement to keep the streets clean and keep everything under control. Well, I agree to disagree on their objection because yes, it is the job of our police enforcement to reduce crime in the general population but the criminals that commit very serious crimes should be made an example. Maybe if the judicial system would become less lenient on crime, fewer people would want to commit violent acts against others. It can possibly act as a deterrent to a number of unlawful citizens, because crime is still being committed on a daily basis with police on the streets. In theory, there is a bigger problem than the death penalty being cruel and unjust.
In society, we have a problem a great deal superior than that which is people who like to go on shooting massacres. Recent examples include, the shooting at the Colorado movie theater and the Arizona shooting that left 5 dead and 19 injured including a governor. For instances like these, justice should be served by means of the death penalty. How many more shootings have to happen to open the justice system 's eyes? Those shooters in particular will rot in prison but until they do, they get a roof over their heads, 3 meals a day (which sometimes is more than most), and not to mention health care. Now that is an injustice to society. Let 's make a difference in the world and in our justice system by bringing forth justice for the victims and punishment to those that deserve
it.

Works Cited
Bedeau, Hugo. "The Case Against the Death Penalty: Capital Punishment."ACLU.org. N.p.,
1 Sept. 2011. Web 21 Oct 2012.
Reggio, Michael. "History of the Death Penalty." PBS.org. WGBH educational foundation., N.p. Web. 21 Oct 2012.