Top Ten Facts

1. Pancuronium Bromide prevents execution members from knowing if the inmate is in pain, since he can't speak or move. Potassium Chloride is reported to cause excrutiating pain as it burns through the veins, so pain is almost eminent.

2. Currently there are no states with an integrated resorative justice program which would allow convicted murderers to pay for their own incarceration or even to make restitutions directly to the survivors of their victims.

3. As of 1992, 23 legally innocent people have been executed in this country (known today to be innocent)

4. The time on death row has increased to 51 months, while actually only 8.2 percent were actually executed.

5. In 1961 Jamse French strangled his cell mate in order to speed up his own execution along.

6. After the execution of John Spenlelink, homocides increased in Florida by 14 percent.

7. Surveys indicate that 84% of all homocides are motivated by the murderer's intent to exact retribution for some real or imagined offense committed by the victim.

8. In contrast to the United States, nations such as England, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Israel, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Costa Rica, and Ecuador do not possess the death penalty. Those who do possess the death penalty Russia, China, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Cube, Chile, and Saudi Arabia.

9. J.J. Johnson confessed on his deathbed that he killed Wesson, and in retribution the state gave Brown $2,492 in $25 monthly payments.

10. Twenty-two years after being jailed and put on death-row, Purvis was found to be innocent and given $5000 in retribution.

What the Experts Say

"Returning violence with violence only multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars." - Martin Luther King

"When we impose severe and excessive punishment, when we seek an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life, when we seek revenge on lawbreaking by some clumsy arithmetic we call justice, we become violent law abiders" - David A. Becker

"Murder is just a thing of itself, a rage, and rage is not reason, so why does it matter who? It vents rage". - Not necessarily an expert but the viewpoint of a murderer discussing his murders Gary Gilmore

"Opponents of the practice of capital punishment refer to the sanctity of all life and say that the violence of murder should not be met with a violent solution from society" - Unknown Speaker (Source 8)

"The Data present shows no correlation between capital punishment and murder rates" - From a source supporting Capital Punishment Mary E. Williams

"An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind" - Gandhi

"Some believed an eye for an eye justice was the Christian way; others recommended mercy, citing Christianity's tenets of forgiveness." - Source 10

"I don't believe really an eye for an eye is justice; I really don't. I never did." - Walter Hickock

Fourth Post

My second argument deals with the moral and political justification of capital punishment. Politically, capital punishment goes back and forth depending on the era. The main issues seem to be with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the eighth amendment, which prohibits any "cruel or unusual punishment" for criminals. However, there are also amendments such as the fourth and fifth amendment which state that punishment is viable for as long as there is a reasonable trial and a defense is presented to the criminal being charged. The opinion of the justice system relatively reflects that of the nation of that time. In 1972, there was a sense of peace throughout the nation, possibly a result of the recently ended Vietnam War, and so capital punishment was interpretted as unconstitutional. However, by 1976 many states had begun to reinstate capital punishment as a viable result of crime. This back and forth pattern still exists today, with many states possessing capital punishment as a possibility, but it is rarely used.

Is capital punishment a morale practice? No, it most certainly is not. The range from which the criminals are executed are from hanging, electrocution, a fire squad, to lethal injection and gas. While gassing is not very popular, injection has become the number one method for execution. It is known as the "triple cocktail" method, and it includes the use of three drugs. The first and second drug serve the purpose of putting the criminal to sleep and numbing them from pain while the third serves the purpose of actually killing the criminal. There have been cases where the unimagineable pain of having every vein leading to your heart disintegrate as the solution heads to your heart to your untimely end. The second dose numbs the body to such a degree that a person cannot know whether the criminal is feeling pain. The first dose has been known to not be able to knock out the person. Is this punishment not cruel to the criminal; having to survive a half hour of unimagineable pain and suffering while they could at least be using their life to serve the purpose of retributions for the victim and their family?

Third Post

Capital punishment is a practice that promotes violence. Capital punishment is a process in which the state receives "an eye for an eye" for a crime committed. Violent behavior also can be viewed as a disease. I personally disagree with this sentiment, but I do believe that Capital punishment is by no means the answer to the problem present. The idea of capital punishment also promotes the idea of "getting even" with the criminal. That mind set is shared with the criminal himself. A large percentage of all homicides are reported to have occurred as a result of the killer wanting to get even with his victim. Therefore, we are promoting a practice that we ourselves punish the criminals for following. As Gandhi used to state "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind". He is hailed today across the globe as one of the greatest philosophers in world history, yet we continue to ignore his teachings. Not only is the practice of capital punishment ineffective, it actually creates a negative impact upon killers. There are instances in which states with capital punishment had a steady crime rate, and in two specific cases an increasing one. In addition, at one point the Supreme Court actually stated that there is no evidence supporting the fact that capital punishment actually deters crime. There is, however, some hard evidence on the opposing side. So if capital punishment does not deter crime, then what is its purpose other than the original "eye for an eye" mentality?

Second Post

After researching the topic, it has become clear that the issue of capital punishment is one that has remained controversial throughout history. At different points in history, different interpretations and viewpoints were created by the Supreme Court and the general public of the United States. In 1972, for example, the United States decreed capital punishment unconstitutional because it at that time was considered to go against the eighth amendment of the Constitution. The Supreme Court four years later, however, changed their opinion on the matter and considered capital punishment to be constitutional. The Supreme Court's decisions seem to follow the general population's opinion.

In addition to the controversy surrounding the legality of capital punishment, there are different arguments within each side. On the pro side of capital punishment comes the question of how to perform such a task. Should the task be done by hanging, electrocution, or from the now more common form of injection. Out of the 38 states that now decree capital punishment justified, 37 use the "three-drug cocktail" form of execution. That now has become controversial because it may not be as painless a practice as we are led to believe. The second dose numbs the body to the point of which the person can no longer speak to state whether or not he or she is feeling pain. The third injection is known to cause excruciating pain as the potassium chloride passes through the veins and into the heart. On the other side comes the question of what alternative to take to the death penalty? Is life imprisonment actually a positive alternative?

The reason I chose capital punishment is because it is becoming an international issue. There apears to be a split opinion on the subject across the globe. It seems as though much of Europe and developed Asian countries believe that capital punishment is wrong. On the other side is the middle east, with countries such as Iraq, who we are at war with. Surprisingly, the United States currently is on the same side as Iraq on this issue, as we currently are pro-capital punishment. In much of our media the topic of capital punishment is also ever-present. From books such as Capote's In Cold Blood, which offers a more sympathetic view of criminals and causes an abhorrence to the death penalty, to television shows such as Dexter, in which the main character executes serial killers while trying to retain a normal life.

Overview

The topic I chose for my research paper is Capital Punishment. Capital Punishment is in actuality the death penalty. The contraversy surrounding this topic is obvious. Is it ever just to take someone's life? This question causes religious, political, and ethical views to clash. Subtopics surrounding this broad topic include alternatives, such as life imprisonmnent. In continuation of the life imprisonment, the question arises as to whether or not it is actually a just alternative to captial punishment. In Cold Blood will also become a topic of discussion, as to whether or not Perry and Dick should have recieved Capital Punishment. Another question that arises is whether or not capital punishment deters crime? Evidence exists on both sides of that argument.

Personally, I take the standing point that capital punishment is not a just practice. I also feel as though life imprisonment is a just alternative. However, there is a lot of evidence supporting both sides. I personally do not believe that it is ever just to take another human life. Laws should not be built to openly embrace the concept of vengence.